Survivor: Irish priest committed abuse, destroyed family

Orginally posted on

From Drew Griffin, CNN Special Investigations Unit

Brookfield, Connecticut (CNN) — Ireland, one of the world’s most Catholic countries, has been reeling from the revelation that Catholic leaders there covered up child abuse, including sexual abuse, by priests for decades.

But not all of the victims were Irish.

The Emerald Isle exported many priests over the years. And that’s how one of Ireland’s most prolific, known child abusers ended up in Rhode Island in the late 1960s.

Helen McGonigle was 6 when, she says, the Rev. Brendan Smyth fondled, raped and sodomized her.

She says she remembers him, dressed in white priest’s robes, at the back sliding glass door of her bedroom.

“All I wanted to do was to escape, to fly away. There were little cubbies in my room — a twin bed with a headboard that had little cubbies,” she remembers. “I just wanted to be tiny enough to hide in those little cubbies so he couldn’t see me.”

McGonigle, now a 48-year-old lawyer in Connecticut, says Smyth abused her, her sister and even her mother over a period of two years.

She believes the abuse drove her mother mad and drove her sister to suicide.

“My mom’s breakdown was caused by this. There’s no question,” she said.

Her mother was found hysterical, half-naked, on her front lawn, screaming, “The pope owes me,” McGonigle remembered.

She was acting “like she was a rape trauma victim,” the lawyer said.

“I believe Smyth attacked her. I believe that’s what caused her breakdown,” she said.

“You have to understand my mom was also a devout Catholic. Her brother was a seminarian. So for the same person to be on the front lawn saying, ‘The pope owes me,’ she was really mad,” McGonigle said.

Brendan Smyth was ultimately convicted of dozens of counts of child abuse in the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland. He died in prison in 1997.

But his victims on two continents, like Helen McGonigle, are living reminders of the crimes of this pedophile priest at the center of a sex scandal in the Irish Catholic church.

By the time he reached Helen McGonigle and her family, this Irish priest had already abused dozens.

Records dating back to the 1950s show Smyth was moved from parish to parish: Ireland to Scotland to Wales to Northern Ireland to Rhode Island, back to Ireland, then to East Greenwich, Rhode Island, and Langdon, North Dakota — each time under a cloud of suspicion, or worse, after a family came forward to report the priest was an abuser.

Helen McGonigle says Smyth tended to abuse children in the same family.

“That seems to be a common pattern,” she said.

But McGonigle was never able to get her sister to tell her about abuse by Smyth.

“She couldn’t handle it. … I think she was asked by my mother not to say anything,” she said. “I mean, this is something that she probably swore to my mom that she would never bring up.”

Helen’s sister, Kathleen, took her own life in 2005.

McGonigle is now suing the Catholic Diocese of Providence, Rhode Island. The church is already paying for her therapy.

She says six others from her parish have come forward to say they, too, were abused by Smyth, including one of her childhood friends, a neighbor.

What she wants most of all from the church, she says, is an apology for destroying her family — and an acknowledgment that the church knowingly placed a pedophile into her parish. So far, she says, she has received neither.

The Diocese of Providence has refused to comment, citing two pending lawsuits involving abuse allegations against Smyth.

Smyth’s superior in Ireland admitted that the diocese where the priest was sent in the United States was not told of his history of abuse.

Smyth was finally arrested in 1994. He was sent to an Irish prison, where he died of a heart attack.


Germany’s Catholic sex abuse scandal reaches Pope Benedict

Originally posted on

A CATHOLIC MASS ISN’T normally a debating society, but sometimes enough is simply enough. At Sunday mass at the parish church in the Bavarian town of Bad Tölz, a pastor’s unspeakable past finally caught up with him. It was revealed last Friday that sixty-two year-old Pastor Peter H., who had been providing pastoral care at the church for the past two years, had been tried and convicted of sexual abuse in 1986. Not only had this conviction been kept secret, but the priest’s superior at one time – Joseph Ratzinger, the former Archbishop of Munich who is today better known as Pope Benedict XVI – had knowingly moved this known pedophile from parish to parish. He was finally sent to Bad Tölz in 2008 under the condition that he engage in no “children’s, youth, or altar boy work.” However, he did end up conducting two children’s services at the church and also took part in youth retreats.

As far as anyone knows, Peter H. did “nothing, absolutely nothing” wrong during his previous twenty-one year tenure in the town of Garching, nor is anything known about any inappropriate activities in Bad Tölz. Even so, Peter H.’s colleague, Pastor Rupert Frania, told the Süddeutsche Zeitung, “I would like to have known about this earlier.”

At yesterday’s mass, Pastor Frania substituted for Peter H. and began a homily regarding his friend’s case. But as soon as he cited the example of the Prodigal Son and the need for forgiveness, the congregation rebelled. A young couple that was scheduled to be married by the disgraced priest got restless. It appears that they had just learned about the priest’s past from the media. “I can’t listen to this anymore!” the man shouted. “You can’t keep changing the subject!” According to the Süddeutsche, some of the mass goers applauded, others told him to shut up. A debate ensued. For several minutes the congregation discussed the case, and continued after the mass was over. Peter H. has been suspended, effective immediately. His supervisor has submitted his resignation.

The newspaper recently discovered that in 1980 Bishop Ratzinger approved the transfer of the pedophile priest to Bavaria to work in a new parish. The man had gotten an eleven year-old boy drunk and forced him to fellate him. Once in Bavaria he was once more caught in the act and put on trial. Peter H. was sentenced to eighteen months in prison and fined €4,000. In 1982, Ratzinger moved to Rome to become head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and essentially washed his hands of the matter.

This revelation is only the latest in an avalanche of appalling – and frankly mind-boggling – news for the Catholic Church in Germany and the rest of Europe. Ever since reports emerged of systematic sexual abuse at Berlin’s elite Canisius-Kolleg high school last January, stories of rape and fellatio perpetrated by Catholic priests in church-run institutions throughout the country have been bombarding the newspapers on a daily basis. It seems as if anyone who had ever been sodomized by a priest in the past fifty years has suddenly found his voice, making the Holy Catholic Church in this country appear like little more than a stiff-lipped pedophile ring.

But as usual in these cases, the cover-up is even worse than the crime, and for the first time the Pope himself has been implicated. The Church is closing ranks. Today, Archbishop Rino Fisichellal, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, told the Corriere della Serra that “any attempt to draw the Pope and the entire Church into the abuse scandal is an act of violence and a sign of incivility. Benedict’s story, his life and his writings, speak for themselves.”

The pontiff is remaining silent on the charges against him, and this is probably a wise choice under the circumstances. There’s no knowing how much longer this crisis will last… and where it will stop. Just yesterday, new accusations were levelled at the management of the celebrated Regensburger Domspatzen boys’ choir, where it was reported that the endemic physical and sexual abuse the choirboys suffered there did not terminate in the 1960s, as previously believed, but continued at least until 1992. And who was the choir’s “extremely choleric and hot-tempered” director in those years? None other than Georg Ratzinger, the Pope’s elder brother.

Ang mga Daan na Linalakaran ng mga Bulaang Propeta – Filipino Section

Ang mga Daan na Linalakaran ng mga Bulaang Propeta

By Christiandefenders

Ang isa sa mga maling paratang na ipinupukol ng paring ito sa Ang Dating Daan ay isang paratang na matagal nang ginagamit ng mga nakasagupa ni kapatid na Eli Soriano sa kaniyang mga pangangaral. Ito ay una niyang narinig kay Bert Balinton na isang Sabadista sa programa ni Don Manalo Favis na “This is Manolo and His GENIUS Family” kung saan sari-saring  mga grupo ng pananampalataya ang iniimbitahan ng mayari ng progrma sa radyo upang magtalakayan ukol sa iba’t-ibang mga isyu ng pananampalataya. Kagaya ni Bert Balinton, ang talatang ginagamit ni Abraham Arganisoa ay ang sinabi ni Eliphaz na Temanita sa Job 22:15.

(Job 22:15)

Iyo bang pagpapatuluyan ang dating daan, na nilakaran ng mga masamang tao?

Nang kaniyang mabasa ang nasabing talata, ay kaagad na niyang ipinahayag at pinatutunayan nang pukpukan na ang “Ang Dating Daan” nga ay linakaran ng masama. Ito nga ba ay tama? Kung ating babasahin ang buong kapitulo mula sa Job 22:1-30, malinaw na ang kausap ni Eliphaz sa talata ay ang matuwid na tao na si Job. Pinararatangan ni Eliphaz na Temanita si Job ng isang masamang bagay.

Upang mapatunayan natin na ang sinasabing ito ni Eliphaz na Temanita ay hindi katiwa-tiwala, ang ating unang nararapat na alamin at lutasin ay kung ang lahat ng mga bagay na nakasulat sa Bibliya ay mapagbabatayan sa pananampalataya. Kaagad nating tuklasin kung sinu-sino ba ang mga  nagsasalita sa Bibliya. Taliwas sa paniniwala ng marami, ang bibliya po ay hindi natin masasabing buong-buo na salita ng Dios sapagkat sa bibliya, ay mayroong iba’t ibang persona na nagsasalita.

May salita si Satanas…

( Job 1:7 )

… Nang magkagayo’y sumagot si Satanas sa Panginoon, at nagsabi, Sa pagpaparoo’t parito sa lupa, at sa pagmamanhik manaog doon.

May salita ng isang taong hindi sumasampalataya…

( Juan 20:25 )

… Malibang aking makita sa kaniyang mga kamay ang butas ng mga pako, at maisuot ko ang aking daliri sa butas ng mga pako, at maisuot ko ang aking kamay sa kaniyang tagiliran, ay hindi ako sasampalataya.

May salita ng asno…

( Bilang 22:28-30)

At ibinuka ng Panginoon ang bibig ng asno, at nagsabi kay Balaam, Ano ang ginawa ko sa iyo, na ako’y pinalo mo nitong makaitlo? At sinabi ni Balaam sa asno, Sapagka’t tinuya mo ako: mayroon sana ako sa aking kamay na isang tabak, pinatay disin kita ngayon. At sinabi ng asno kay Balaam, Di ba ako’y iyong asno na iyong sinakyan sa buong buhay mo hanggang sa araw na ito? gumawa ba kaya ako kailan man ng ganito sa iyo? At kaniyang sinabi, Hindi.

Sa bibliya ay may iba’t-ibang persona ang nagsasalita. Mahalagang malaman natin kung sino ang nagsasalita sa mga talatang ating nababasa bago natin ito paniwalaan upang maiwasan natin ang mga pagkakamali. Maaaring ang nakasulat sa talatang ating nababasa ay salita na pala ni Satanas o salita ng kaaway ng Dios subalit hindi pa natin alam kung kaya’t tayo ay maaaring maligaw. Kinakailangan nating maging matalino sa pagbabasa ng mga bagay na nasusulat sa banal na aklat.

Ano bang mga bagay na nasusulat sa banal na kasulatan ang nararapat nating pagbatayan?

( 2 Timoteo 3:16)

Ang lahat ng mga kasulatan na kinasihan ng Dios ay mapapakinabangan din naman sa pagtuturo, sa pagsansala, sa pagsaway, sa ikatututo na nasa katuwiran:

Malinaw ang nakasaad sa talatang ating nakita. Ang nararapat nating pagbatayan sa pagtuturo ng mga katuwirang nararapat matutunan ng isang Cristiano ay ang mga kasulatan na kinasihan ng Dios. Hindi natin nararapat pagbatayan yung mga kasulatan na kinasihan ng salita ni Satanas, hindi rin natin pagbabatayan ang mga kasulatan na kinasihan ng isang taong hindi sumasampalataya sa Dios. Napakadiretso ng tagubilin ng Apostol na Si Pablo sa mga Cristiano na ang mga kasulatan na mapapakinabangan sa pagtuturo, sa pagsansala at sa pagsaway ay yung mga kasulatan na may kasi ng Dios.

Kaya hindi tayo nararapat magpaligaw. Hindi po lahat ng mga bagay na mababasa natin sa banal na kasulatan ay nararapat nating gamitin at paniwalaan.

Suriin ngayon natin ang salitang binitawan ni Eliphaz na Temanita sa Job 22:15.

(Job 22:15)

Iyo bang pagpapatuluyan ang dating daan, na nilakaran ng mga masamang tao?

Ito po ay paratang ni Eliphaz kay Job. Pinaparatangan niya si Job bilang isang masamang tao na lumalakad sa dating daan. Pinalilitaw rin ni Eliphaz na Temanita na ang dating daan raw ay nilakaran ng mga masamang tao at kabilang na sa mga lumalakad ay si Job.  Sa punto pa lang na pinaniniwalaan ni Eliphaz na si Job ay isang masamang tao ay siguradong mayroon na siyang kasalungat na salitang kinasihan ng Dios sapagkat ang Dios mismo ang nagsabi na si Job ay isang matuwid na tao.

( Job 1:8 )

At sinabi ng Panginoon kay Satanas, Iyo bang pinansin ang aking lingkod na si Job? sapagka’t walang gaya niya sa lupa, na sakdal at matuwid na lalake, na natatakot sa Dios at humihiwalay sa kasamaan.

Kung tatanggapin at ipipilit ni Abraham Arganiosa na ang nakasaad sa Job 22:15 na salita ni Eliphaz na Temanita ay totoo, tiyak na naniniwala rin siya na si Job ay isang masamang tao batay sa talata. Kung magkagayon ay sinasalungat na niya kaagad ang sinabi ng Dios na si Job ay isang matuwid na tao dahil sa kaniyang labis na paniniwala sa nakasaad sa talata, kasabay rin niyang pinaniniwalaan ang pagiging masamang tao ni Job. Ito po ay mali. Kung tayo po ay papipiliin, nararapat nating paniwalaan ang salita ng Dios kaysa sa salita ng isang taong sumasalungat sa Dios.

Ang pinakamabigat na batayan upang ating mapatunayan na ang salitang ito ni Eliphaz na Temanita ay ang mismong sinabi rin ng Dios.

( Job 42:7 )

At nangyari, na pagkatapos na masalita ng Panginoon ang mga salitang ito kay Job, sinabi ng Panginoon kay Eliphaz na Temanita, Ang aking poot ay nagaalab laban sa iyo, at laban sa iyong dalawang kaibigan: sapagka’t hindi kayo nangagsalita tungkol sa akin ng bagay na matuwid, na gaya ng ginawa ng aking lingkod na si Job.

Kung ating babasahin ang lahat ng nakasulat sa pakikipagusap ni Job sa kaniyang mga kaibigan kabilang na si Eliphaz na Temanita, mapapansin natin na nagbigay sila ng mga maling paratang sa matuwid na tao na si Job. Kabilang na sa mga paratang na kanilang binitawan  ay ang nasusulat sa Job 22:15 kung saan pinaparatangan ni Eliphaz si Job na isang masamang tao na lumalakad sa dating daan. Napatunyan na natin batay sa mismong salita ng Dios na ang mga paratang na ito ay mali at hindi matuwid.

Ang katunayan, mismong ang Dios ang nagpapayo sa mga tao na lumakad sa dating daan.

( Jeremias 6:16)

Ganito ang sabi ng Panginoon, Magsitayo kayo sa mga daan at magsitingin kayo, at ipagtanong ninyo ang mga dating landas, kung saan nandoon ang mabuting daan; at magsilakad kayo roon, at kayo’y mangakakasumpong ng kapahingahan sa inyong mga kaluluwa:…

Ito naman ang pamimilosopo na ginagawa ni Abraham Arganiosa. Ang sabi niya, ang nakasulat daw sa opisyal na salin ay mga dating landas na nasa “plural form”  at hindi dating daan. Nakakalungkot isipin na ang isang bicolano na taga-Sorsogon ay hindi nauunawaan nang buo ang salitang Tagalog na “landas” na katumbas ng salitang “daan” kung ating titingnan sa diksyunaryong Pilipino.

landas, daan, dáanan, bakás: n. path.
Originally published in 1915. Tagalog: landas, daan, daanan, bakas

Sa salitang tagalog, ang “landas” ay katumbas ng salitang “daan”. Subalit ang talatang ito ay isa lamang salin mula sa orihinal na wikang Hebreo. Kung titingnan naman natin ang salitang ginamit sa wikang Hebreo, ang salitang ginamit ay…

Original Word: נָתִיב
Transliteration: nathiyb
Phonetic Spelling: (naw-theeb’)
Short Definition: path


nâthîyb  nethîybâh  nethibâh
naw-theeb’, neth-ee-baw’, neth-ee-baw’ נתבה    נתיבה    נתיב

pathway, traveller, way

Ang isa pang pagliligaw na ginagawa ni Abraham Arganiosa ay ang kaniyang pagsasabing ito raw ay nasa “plural form” kaya’t ito ay maling gamitin upang tumukoy sa “ang dating daan” na nasa “singular”.  Isa pang nakakalungkot isipin na ang isang pari na nagsasabing siya ay isang “educator” ay mukhang hindi naiintindihan na kapag ang isang salita ay sinabing may “plural” ay siguradong may “singular” yun. Ang katunayan, sa nasabing talata ay iisa lang naman ang tinutukoy na “Mabuting Daan” na nasa “singular form” kung kaya’t hindi rin maaaring tutulan na ang dating daan ang pinalalakaran sa mga tao upang magbalik sa Dios.

Ano ang dahilan kung kaya’t nararapat lumakad ang tao sa dating daan?

( Isaias 56:10-11 )

Ang kaniyang mga bantay ay mga bulag, silang lahat ay walang kaalaman; silang lahat ay mga piping aso, sila’y hindi makatahol; mapanaginipin, mapaghiga, maibigin sa pagidlip.

Oo, ang mga aso ay matatakaw, sila’y kailan man ay walang kabusugan; at ang mga ito ay mga pastor na hindi nangakakaunawa: sila’y nagsilikong lahat sa kanilang sariling daan na mula sa lahat ng dako, bawa’t isa’y sa kaniyang pakinabang.

Kaya pinalalakad ang tao sa dating daan dahil may mga pastor na gumawa at lumiko sa sarili nilang mga daan na ang layon ay ang kumita ng pera. Sila ang mga tinutukoy na mga asong matatakaw dahil lumiko sila sa mga sarili nlang daan dahil sa mapapakinabang. Lapat na lapat yan sa mga paring katoliko dahil ang mga aral sa kanila ay pinababayaran. Ito naman ay sinaksihan ng isang bayaning Pilipino sa katauhan ni Gat Jose Rizal sa kaniyang sulat sa mga kadalagahan ng Malolos.

Ang isang tagubilin ni Cristo sa mga mangangaral sa kanilang pangangaral ay ang hindi pagtanggap ng bayad na nauukol sa aral. Ito ay ating mababasa sa Mateo 10:7-8.

( Mateo 10:7-8)

At samantalang kayo’y nangaglalakad, ay magsipangaral kayo, na mangagsabi, Ang kaharian ng langit ay malapit na. Mangagpagaling kayo ng mga may sakit, mangagpabangon kayo ng mga patay, mangaglinis kayo ng mga ketong, mangagpalabas kayo ng mga demonio: tinanggap ninyong walang bayad, ay ibigay ninyong walang bayad.

Kapansin-pansin na sa iglesia Katolika na kinabibilangan ng paring si Abraham  Arganiosa, karamihan ng mga aral ay pinababayaran. Ang binyag sa bata ay kanilang pinababayaran sa mga magulang at mga ninong. Ang kasal ng mag-asawa ay kanila rin pinababayaran sa mga taong ikakasal. Kung mapaniginipan ng isang katoliko ang kaniyang mahal sa buhay na naghihirap sa purgatoryo, kinakailangan rin niyang magbayad sa misa upang mahango ang kaluluwa at hindi na maghirap ayon sa kanilang paniniwala. Ang misa sa kanila ay nahahati pa sa tatlong klase; “first class”, “second class” at “third class” kung saan magkakaiba ang ginagawa at kasangkapang ginagamit at presyo ng misa. Ganyan po ang klase ng relihyon na kinamulatan ng maraming mga Pilipino sa panahon nating ito. Ang tirik ng kandila at maging ang tugtog ng kampana ay pinababayaran magmula sa binyag hanggang sa kumpil at maging sa misa sa patay, lahat po ay pinababayaran. Natutupad po sa mga paring katoliko ang isa pang hula sa bibliya.

(Micas 3:11)

Ang mga pangulo niya’y nagsisihatol dahil sa suhol, at ang mga saserdote, niya’y nangagtuturo dahil sa upa, at ang mga propeta niya’y nanganghuhula dahil sa salapi: gayon ma’y sila’y sasandal sa Panginoon, at mangagsasabi, Hindi baga ang Panginoon ay nasa gitna natin? walang kasamaang darating sa akin.

Ang dahilan po ng pangangaral nila ay upang magkaroon ng maraming salapi at payamanin ang kanilang iglesiang kinaaniban. Wala naman ibang trabaho ang karamihan sa mga paring katoliko maliban ang kanilang pagiging mangangaral na umaasa sa abuloy ng mga taong niloloko at hinuhuthutan nila ng pera. Yan naman ay pinatotohanan ng isang manunulat sa isang pahayagang Pilipino na ipinamamahagi sa bansang Hapon.

“Ang Simbahan, kung tutuusin lamang ang yaman nito: mga malalawak at piling-piling mga lupain na kinamkam ng mga Prayleng Kastila sa panahon ng kanilang pananakop sa bansa, mga naglalakihang paaralan (tulad ng UST, La Salle at Ateneo), bilyon bilyong investments at deposito sa mga malalaking bangko (napabalita ang bilyong deposito nito sa Bank of Philippines Islands), balor o halaga ng mga yamang nasa loob ng mga simbahan at katedral, salaping donasyon sa simbahan taon-taon ng PCSO at Pagcor (mga ahensiya ng pamahalaan) sa mga proyektong pangkawang-gawa, ay isa sa mga pinakamayamang institusyon, kundi man pinakamayaman, sa buong Pilipinas sa ngayon.

Ang buong Kaparian, ang lahat buhat sa mga Kardinal, Obispo at Pari, ay di nagbabayad ng buwis (tulad ng real property tax) o dili kaya’y tumutubos ng sedula buhat sa pamahalaan. Ang kinikita nito buhat sa mga negosyo kung saan nakalagak ang bilyon bilyon nitong kayamanan, ay libre rin sa buwis. Ilang bahagdan ng nasabing salapi ay ipinadadala sa Roma, sa pangangailangan ng Santo Papa at ng mga alipores nito, na siya namang ginagawang puhunan o investment ni Financial Minister ng Batikano upang lalo pa itong palaguin at padamihin.”

Yan ang dahilan ng pagyaman ng simbahang katoliko. Yumayaman sila dahil sa kanilang negosyong relihiyon. Hindi na tayo nagtataka kung bakit si Abe Arganiosa ay kumikintab dahil sa katabaan dahil nakasaad rin yan sa banal na kasulatan.

( Jeremias 5:28 )

Sila’y nagsisitaba, sila’y makintab: oo, sila’y nagsisihigit sa mga paggawa ng kasamaan; hindi nila ipinakikipaglaban ang usap, ang usap ng ulila, upang sila’y guminhawa; at ang matuwid ng mapagkailangan ay hindi hinahatulan.

Ang hangad ng mga paring kagaya ni Abraham Arganiosa ay pakinabang at salaping nanggaling sa mga katolikong kanilang mga niloloko. Ganyan ang daan ng mga bulaang propeta! Silang lahat ay nagsiliko dahil sa pakinabang!

( Isaias 56:11 )

Oo, ang mga aso ay matatakaw, sila’y kailan man ay walang kabusugan; at ang mga ito ay mga pastor na hindi nangakakaunawa: sila’y nagsilikong lahat sa kanilang sariling daan na mula sa lahat ng dako, bawa’t isa’y sa kaniyang pakinabang.

Napatunayan na ngayon natin na ang dating daan ang siyang daan na nararapat lakaran ng mga nais maglingkod sa Dios dahil sa mga likong daan na dinadaanan ng mga bulaang propeta partikular na ng mga paring katolikong kagaya ni Abe Arganiosa.  Nais ng Dios na bumalik ang mga tao dun sa dating daan na nararapat nilang lakaran at hindi sa mga daan na kanilang linikuan na makapagpapahamak. Ang salita ni Eliphaz sa Job 22:15 ay hindi nararapat pagbatayan sa pananampalataya sapagkat hindi ito kinasihan ng Dios.

The Hypocrisy of The Catholic Church is Reflected on Alistair

by Christiandefenders

One of the things that deceitful preachers possess since the time of the first century Christians is “hypocrisy”. The Lord Jesus Christ exposed the hypocrisy of the Pharisees of his time which can be read in the entire 23rd Chapter of Matthew. This is ultimately the reason why he was crucified on the cross. On several accounts, the Pharisees criticized the Lord Jesus Christ for performing a miracle on a Sabbath. However, Jesus pointed out that it is better to do good on a Sabbath than to do evil, exposing the hypocrisy of his critics.

(Mark 3:1-6)

And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand. And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him. And he saith unto the man which had the withered hand, Stand forth. And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace. And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other. And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.

(Luke 13:14-17)

And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the sabbath day. The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering? And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day? And when he had said these things, all his adversaries were ashamed: and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by him.
Alistair, a member of a false religion that flourish in many parts of the world and eventually became powerful accused us of attempting to kill him while he was the one who demanded death to his so-called infidels.

The funny thing about this HYPOCRITE is that he also attempts to taunt us to have him killed.

We don’t even have any record of murdering anyone which is totally different from the delusion of this homophobic bigot. On the contrary, we can easily point out to the inquisition and the crusades which are exercises performed by the Catholic Church to murder thousands of people in the history of man.

These are the people foretold by the Lord Jesus Christ who have the courage to kill in the name of religion. They thought that killing people is one of their duties for doing service to the Almighty.

(John 16:2)

They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

To make his delusions worst for his hypocrisy, he even cited a false claim of another false religion (INC) to point out that we have poisoned someone. That is an accusation that he would need to prove because we have medical records to show that Bro. Romy Español died of stroke and not because of food poisoning contrary to the LIE that Alistair stated on the Catholic Priest’s trash blog. However, since he is the accuser, I would need to require him to present his evidence first because in a country where the law of presumption of innocence is observed, the burden of proof is on him. Otherwise, the party being prosecuted remains innocent of the crime.

Bro. Romy Español is a former minister of INC who by careful examination was led to believe that everything that he was made to preach as a minister before, are all lies. This compelled him to join MCGI and expose the false doctrines of his former religion himself.

We remain to be a group who doesn’t have any record of murder in the history of mankind.

(2 Cor. 7:2)

Receive us; we have wronged no man, we have corrupted no man, we have defrauded no man.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church will be a hypocrite to say that they have not wronged anyone. They will also be a hypocrite to say that they have not defraud anyone. That hypocrisy was exposed when the Pope in Rome himself acknowledge their iniquities in a public confession wherein he admits that the Catholic Church murdered 300,000 people in the Inquisition.

Their hypocrisy is also obvious when they themselves have an article on one of their official websites describing the purpose of the Crusades.

“The idea of the crusade corresponds to a political conception which was realized in Christendom only from the eleventh to the fifteenth century; this supposes a union of all peoples and sovereigns under the direction of the popes. All crusades were announced by preaching. After pronouncing a solemn vow, each warrior received a cross from the hands of the pope or his legates, and was thenceforth considered a soldier of the Church. Crusaders were also granted indulgences and temporal privileges, such as exemption from civil jurisdiction, inviolability of persons or lands, etc. Of all these wars undertaken in the name of Christendom, the most important were the Eastern Crusades, which are the only ones treated in this article. “

Such acts is not suppose to be done by a church or an organization proclaiming to be Christian. Christians were commanded to love their enemies and do them good. You are not suppose to kill your enemy because of the fact that the primary doctrine of Christianity is Love.

(Matthew 7:38-48)

Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

It is quite obvious that the Catholic Church’s hypocrisy is reflected on the person of Alistair. The evidence that we have shows that he is accusing us of murder while his church has a lot of record of murders in the history of mankind.

Although Alistair has provided us his whereabouts, it is never our intention to kill anyone because we are Christians commanded by God to love our enemies.

A Response to the Ignorant Accusation of Abe Arganiosa of Changing Names and Establishing a Church

On Abe Arganiosa’s recent article entitled,  “BY WHAT AUTHORITY DID THE ANG DATING DAAN NAMED THEIR CHURCH – CHURCH OF GOD INTERNATIONAL?”, the priest has falsely accused us of changing the name of our organization and establishing our own church. Let me examine the flaws of his argument and prove that his accusation is just a hearsay and does not have any solid ground for a rational person to believe the things that he is saying on his blog. Our goal is to resolve the issues and prove that we did not establish our church and we did change the name of our organization.

Evidently, one of the doctrines that our organization follows that also be read on our website under Church General Declaration and Doctrines on section 4  says.

We believe that the Gentile nations including the Philippines, are partakers of the promise, the ETERNAL LIFE, through belief in Christ Jesus and the Gospel and are not authorized by God TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN CHURCH, but are mere members associated with the same body or Church written in the Gospel by accepting and executing the doctrines written by the Apostles ( Ephe. 3:6; Col. 1:18; I John 2:25; 1:3-4; I Cor. 12:27; Psalm 127:1; I Tim. 3:15 ).

It was clearly stated that we are not authorized by God to establish our own church. It is very illogical to accuse us of establishing our own church while we believe that it is not necessary for us to do that. What we just have to do is to associate ourselves and become members of the same body or Church written in the Gospel.

(Ephesians 3:6) New American Standard Bible

to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel,

The body that was stated on the verse refers to the church.

(Colossians 1:18)

And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

As I have stated above, we are not authorized to establish our own church. What we have to do is to become members of the Church which was  established by God. How are we going to do that?

(1 Juan 1:3)

That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

The primary reason why the Apostles declared the word of God to the Christians and put it into writing is for them to have fellowship with the Apostles. We associate ourselves with the Church of God by accepting and executing the doctrines written by the Apostles. Although the Catholic Church may claim that there religion has existed for 2000 years, if they are not truly following what was declared by the apostles, they are not in any way in fellowship with them.

Another thing that we are going to address is the accusation that we are changing our names because they can see several names filed in the Securities and Exchange Commission which refers to our organization. That is another example of an ignorant accusation because filing different names in SEC of an organization does not necessarily follow that we are changing our names. There is no prohibition in SEC of filing different names which refers only to a single entity.

Base on the scriptures, the Church of God was also known by different names. Some of the names that can be read in the bible related to the Church of God are; church of the saints (1 Corinthians 14:33), church of the gentiles (Romans 16:4), church of Christ (Romans 16:16), church of God (1 Thes. 2:14). Let us consider that the writer of the epistles where these verses can be found is Saint Paul. It doesn’t mean that Paul keeps on changing the name of the Church because the church in reality are called by different names.

The question which Abe Arganiosa and his minions are trying to magnify is… Why do we use the word “International” on one of our names? This will require a very logical explanation of verses that I am going to show to our readers.

Remember that when the Apostle Paul wrote to the Christians in Corinth, he addressed them as the “Church of God in Corinth”(1 Corinthians 1:2); when Paul wrote to the Christians in Thessalonia, he addressed them as the church of the Thessalonians (2 Thes. 1:1). The place connected to the name “Church of God” depends upon the location of Christians. Fortunately, Christians were also scattered abroad.

(James 1:1)

James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

In order to best describe the location of Christians in the present, we prefer to use the word “International” which means that Christians are located internationally.

In summary, we have proven that the basis for an organization to be associated with the Church established by God in the bible, is by following  and executing the doctrines and tenets being declared by the Apostles. To claim that your group is existing for 2000 years is not enough to conclude that you are truly associated with the Apostles. We have also clarified that there are really different names which refers to the Church of God but it doesn’t follow that the Church of God is changing its name.  Lastly, we understand that the location of Christians was use in the bible with the way the Apostles addressed them in their letters. Since Christians today are scattered in different countries internationally, it is best to use the word “International” to address them in today’s era.

God Bless You!

The Advantage of Being Biblical: (Part 1) Response against Immanuel Cruz’ Attacks

By Heaven’s Knight

Filipinos are known for their hospitality. Most of them, if you visit their home, have the unusual desire to please their guest. Though their food is inadequate for the rest of their family, guests are automatically invited for their meal. Most Filipinos also prepare the best room and bed for their visitors and they even provide clothes and other amenities for their guests. They are warm and generous in entertaining visitors. They love to have fun and most have sense of humor; they love to joke even surrounded by worst conditions. They want their visitors to feel comfortable with their family.

This good trait of Filipinos, sometimes, is used by opportunists as a gateway to instill their hidden motives. These deceivers want to gain for their self-interest out of others unawareness. They are like the werewolf of the known children’s story, Little Red Riding Hood, who wants to take advantage of the girl’s innocence. Though, funny to say, it’s just a fairy tale, werewolves in our time are reality. Especially in the religious world, it is very rampant. Jesus Christ, as early as 30 A.D., already warned us of these wolves disguise in white robes. (Matthew 7:15)

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Beware of false prophets! Jesus Christ said. Hospitality is good but being watchful and being aware is very important. Very important here must be taken to mean of high regard, for not paying attention to it will mean life and death. By life and death we mean not only the physical life and death here on earth, but that also involves eternal life and second death, Biblically speaking. So, we need to examine our faith, we need not to be like Little Red Riding Hood, we are not children anymore. Awareness could be one of the most effective weapons we need so not to be deceived by these wolves, by these false prophets.

Let us be Biblical dear readers!

It was prophesied in the Bible that false prophets will gone out of this world. Even during the time of Apostle John, as early as before the dawn of the first century, they already sprouted like mushrooms. (1 John 4:1)

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

These false prophets will privily bring in destructible heresies, or false teachings. (2 Peter 2:1)

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Therefore, it is wise not to easily accept belief, or if we already have our belief, it is also wise to check if we have the fullness of truth in our faith. (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22)

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

Abstain from all appearance of evil.

When it comes to faith, examining the fullness of its truth is inevitable. There could also be a basis or instrument to get the precision of the faith we believe. In carpentry, a skilled carpenter does not only rely on estimation but he uses tools such as metric ruler, level and others to get and to give the exact measurement needed for his work. An orchestra, to achieve the harmonious music they want to blend, uses piece to serve as its guide aside from its conductor. Without them, musicians could not be organized in performing their work. So, a right basis is very important in every aspect of our life — more so in religion.

If we want to ask something about law, we seek answers from book of law. Same as if we want to gain knowledge about medicines, we prefer reading book of medicines. And if we want to learn Christian faith and doctrines, it is better to read the Bible as a basis. According to Apostle St. Paul, all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. (2 Timothy 3:16).

That is the reason why from the start of our discussion with other detractors, your servant  was already basing answers from scriptures. If we are to discover the certainty of the church where we belong, it is wise to consult Biblical passages; the true church was explained therein. If a faith is not Biblical, what does Apostle Paul said regarding this?

(1 Corinthians 4:6)

And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

If we want to be consistent with apostles’ teachings, we must not therefore exceed from what was written. St. Paul wants us to have faith in what was written and those can be profitable also as a basis of faith. St. Paul also warned Christian that if ever they will encounter preachers that will bring them other doctrines, they must reject them. (Galatians 1:8, 6)

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

As early as St. Paul’s time, there are preachers who instill false doctrines not written in the Bible, doctrines different from what apostles taught. And that was when they are still alive, how much more in our time?

Beliefs not supported by scriptures, beliefs based on human philosophies, beliefs that were only man-made such as dogmas, tenets, tradition, etc. will turn worshiping to nothing. (Mark 7:7-8)

Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Therefore, it is wise to be Biblical to have a reliable Christian faith. If a faith is not Biblical, there could be a risk holding that faith for God’s word was written in the Bible.

The proposition and the counterproposition

It was almost two months since we invited Mr. Abe Arganiosa, a Catholic priest, to confront Bro. Eli Soriano. The priest chose to  spread rumors via internet against Bro. Eli Soriano. Bro. Eli, the presiding minister of Members, Church of God International (MCGI), is known as a debater who already faced different preachers, pastors and ministers.

Whenever someone is challenging Bro. Eli in a debate, he is willing to defend his faith, even if it seems no way to have a discussion. Distance, time and even threats are not hindrance to Bro. Eli in engaging debates;  he is using the advantage of available technologies.

Sadly, those weeks that had past was used by Mr. Abe Arganiosa in making excuses and trash talking just to evade from a formal confrontation. Though, he already promised to initiate a negotiation with Bro. Eli, that promise until now remains a promise.


Now, Mr. Arganiosa’s minions are busy attacking MCGI’s doctrine but they have failed to establish their faith. One of this is Parabanog, he has tacitly proposed that the Catholic Church’s name is Biblical. We, then presented rebuttals against his proposition and tacitly made counterproposition — the name Church of God is the name taught by apostles,  not the Catholic Apostolic Roman Church (CARC).

Parabanog has failed to make a rebuttal against our counterproposition but other rebuked for his place – Beltran, another Arganiosa’s minion. Like Mr. Arganiosa, Beltran is fond of using trash talking and he has also failed to prove that the name CARC is Biblical.

Suddenly, someone seems wanting to grab the limelight from Arganiosa’s minion – Immanuel Cruz, a Catholic. He made the third rebuttal on the issue about church’s name. We asked Manny courtesy to his co-believer if he wants to answer questions directed to Beltran and answer it himself, instead. But he didn’t ask any permission either to Parabanog or Beltran. We don’t even have idea if Manny wants to replace Mr. Arganiosa in confronting Bro. Eli. But Manny may back up the priest if he wants to confront Bro. Eli.

The problem with Manny, it seems he hasn’t review first the flow of the discussions. He must review first our discussions against Parabanog and Beltran. He engaged in a dispute that doesn’t belong to him. That will remind us of this verse. (Proverbs 26:17)

He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

The proof of that let us read his careless remarks regarding my assertion.

Manny said: Indeed, we must not exceed what the apostles taught us! St. Paul used the phrase ‘church of God’ eleven times, as you claimed. Then you concluded that this is the “official name” of the Church of Jesus. Obviously you did not notice it, but your conclusion is not merited by the premise that you laid. In those verses, Paul did not say that “church of God” is an official name! (It’s not even capitalised! Didn’t you see it?)

Sadly, that isn’t how I laid my arguments but Manny had his own version of concluding it. I presented eleven verses containing the words “Church of God” or “church of God” to show that it is Biblical. To prove that, I even entitled my articles: “Is the Name Catholic Apostolic Roman Church Biblical?” I think he hadn’t notice it from the start. That is the problem of someone who doesn’t know how to ask courtesy for engaging in a fight not belonging to him.

Manny can again check how I presented it by reviewing my article so that he can be more careful.

Rebuttal against Rebuttal

We are talking about Biblical issues that require Biblical proofs. Is the Catholic Apostolic Roman Church Biblical or not? If not, why do Catholics use it as their official name? Where did they get their basis? What basis should we use to prove the truthfulness of the Catholic Church’s name? History? History of whom? If that could be the basis, history itself can also prove the edacity of the Catholic Church.

Link: The Roman Catholic Church Is Not The True Church Of God

Thus, the common denominator to be used in discussing Christian faith is the Bible. Proving a Christian faith outside the Bible is like a boxer fighting outside the ring. We are proud we have Manny Pacquiao who knows this rule in boxing, but it’s a shame we have Manny Cruz who doesn’t know the rule of spiritual warfare and courtesy.

But let’s go to his allegations. Manny believes that the official name of the church is not an issue to the apostles; he doesn’t believe that the term “Church of God” is an official name.

Manny said: Indeed, we must not exceed what the apostles taught us! St. Paul used the phrase ‘church of God’ eleven times, as you claimed. Then you concluded that this is the “official name” of the Church of Jesus. Obviously you did not notice it, but your conclusion is not merited by the premise that you laid. In those verses, Paul did not say that “church of God” is an official name! (It’s not even capitalised! Didn’t you see it?)

He said St. Paul didn’t mention that the name “church of God” is an official name in the verses I laid (he even asserted that it was not even capitalized). This argumentum ad ignorantium or argument to ignorance, where he assumes something is false simply because it hasn’t proven yet or, better say, he is not aware of my explanation, neither prove his stand nor refute mine.

He believes that the church during St. Paul’s time has no official name. We, then, asked proof of his accusation but he just went on an escape, not an answer.

Manny said: Your question is really asking this, “can you PROVE in the Bible that the Church has NO offical name?”

Well, from the scientific point of view, the question is grossly WRONG! It should never be asked in the first place…

It is not true that my question is grossly wrong. Why? I’m in a position to ask: where can you read that apostles said there is no official name for the church? That is because I already presented arguments, and even affirmative questions, to build my prima facie case.

Manny even accused me of violating some scientific principles.

Manny said: Well, from the scientific point of view, the question is grossly WRONG! It should never be asked in the first place. Because it VIOLATES a basic scientific principle: You do not prove that something does not exist. In other words, you cannot prove the negative. Proof is always aimed at the positive, the negative statement comes only at the end, as a result perhaps or a conclusion of the positive process of PROVING (the existence of something).

It seems that Manny forgot some rules in argumentation. Burden of proof can sometimes be shifted; for example, in some forms of debate, the proponent can shift the burden of proof to the opponent by presenting a prima facie case that would, in the absence of refutation, be sufficient to affirm the proposition. Still, the higher burden of proof generally rests with the proponent, which means that only the opposition is in a position to make an accusation of argumentum ad ignorantiam with respect to proving the proposition.

We have built our prima facie case in our first and second topic, sadly, Manny didn’t get the point. Whenever he says there is no official name for the church, he is now making accusations. Burden of proof was now then shifted in his position. Hence, burden of rebuttal.

(Reference: The Art of Argumentation and Debate by Francisco M. Africa, The Burden of Proof and the Counterproposition, page 21)

Official name of the church from the highest authority

Catholic authorities believe that the name of their church didn’t come from Jesus. It can be read in their publication Ang Iglesia ni Kristo at Iba’t Ibang Sektang Protestante, written by F. Juan Trinidad, S. J., page 25.


(Translation: The name “Catholic Apostolic Roman Church” didn’t come from Jesus. But as the English saying goes: “A rose by any other name will be sweet still.”)

The basis of their belief regarding their church’s name is an English saying. It is very clear that it is neither Biblical nor it was taught by Christ. That could be true for the New Testament was already finished more than 1700 years, or Christ already ascended to heavens almost 1840 years before the name CARC was only made official and accepted. It was not God who made CARC  an official name but bishops of Vatican.


Why then we believe that the name Church of God is the official name, not CARC? We believe that it is official on the basis that no teachings came from God that is unofficial. (Psalms 119:160)

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.

We also believe the name “Church of God” is official; by “official” I mean of or relating to an office or a post of authority.  Regarding church’ name, “Church of God” is a name acknowledged and used by authorities such as St. Paul. In this case, unofficial is the antonym, and variously may mean informal, unrecognized, or unfamiliar to authorities, or unacknowledged. That rightly fits to CARC.

I certainly believe that God is the highest authority to follow. Primacy is owned by God, not of Rome. (1 Chronicles 29:11)

Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all.

Whatever God says, we respect it believing it carries authority. (Luke 1:37 ASV)

For no word from God shall be void of power.

For this reason, God’s words are official and authorized. No man can supersede it.

St. Paul wrote teachings under the commandment of the highest authority, not under any Pope in Rome. (1 Corinthians 14:37)

If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

It can be read in the scriptures, including St. Paul’s writings, the term Church of God. Apostles’ writings were written under the commandment of the highest authority; therefore, the term Church of God was written upon following the highest authority making it official.

In this way, it is safe to believe that the term Church of God is the official name of the church, not Catholic Apostolic Roman Church. We use the definite article “the” not to omit other names used by apostles; but to omit names not known to apostles like the one being proposed in 1870.

It is not our problem if Manny believes that apostles were not called officials or, we should say, persons of authority.

Manny said: Well, this adds to the many careless remarks from you. The apostles were never called “officials” or “authority of the Bible.”

He may not call them officials but indeed, they are persons of authority. Our Lord Jesus Christ told apostles that those who don’t listen to them will also mean not listening to the highest authority. (Luke 10:16)

He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

The fallacies of Manny Cruz

Manny may assert his argumentum ad ignorantium saying there is no official name because Paul didn’t say it. We must not then accept his refutations for he also didn’t say that it is his official answer. It is a waste of time arguing against someone who doesn’t have official belief. He has no official belief because he didn’t say it. That is if we will follow Manny’s argument.

St. Paul didn’t even say it is commanded not to use prohibited drugs. Does it follow, believing Manny’s argument, such drugs are allowed? He may not read it but with God’s help we can prove it Biblically that it is prohibited to use marijuana, shabu etc.

Manny also believes that it is not an official name for it was not capitalized.

Manny said: Paul did not say that “church of God” is an official name! (It’s not even capitalised! Didn’t you see it?) No, Paul never said it.

Sorry to say, this assertion could not be convincing. For one thing, the word God has a capital letter, it is a proper name. How about the name Church of God in the Bible? Is it true that it is not a proper, official or technical name for it was not been capitalized as it was written in the Bible? This is in the presumption that the term Church of God is an official name if it is capitalized.

Let us then follow Manny’s assertion. Let us read versions of Bible that most Catholics use – the Bibliyang Katoliko. (II Corinthians 1:1)

Si Pablo na apostol ni Cristo Jesus sa kalooban ng Diyos, at ang kapatid na si Timoteo, Sa Iglesia ng Dios na nasa Corinto at sa lahat ng banal na nasa buong Acaya.

Let us also read in the Spanish Bible, a version of a Bible that most Catholics use.

Spanish Bible (Las Sagradas Escrituras Version)

The Acts 20:28

Por tanto mirad por vosotros y por todo el rebaño en que el Espíritu Santo os ha puesto por obispos, para apacentar la Iglesia de Dios, la cual ganó por su sangre.

(I Corinthians 1:2)

a la Iglesia de Dios que está en Corinto, santificados en Cristo Jesús, llamados a ser santos, y a todos los que invocan el Nombre del Señor nuestro, Jesús, el Cristo, en cualquier lugar, Señor de ellos y nuestro;

(I Corinthians 10:32)

Sed sin ofensa ni a judíos, ni a gentiles, ni a la Iglesia de Dios;

(I Corinthians 11:22)

A la verdad, ¿no tenéis casas en que comáis y bebáis? ¿O menospreciáis la Iglesia de Dios, y avergonzáis a los que no tienen? ¿Qué os diré? ¿Os alabaré? En esto no os alabo.

(I Corinthians 15:9)

Porque yo soy el más pequeño de los apóstoles, que no soy digno de ser llamado apóstol, porque perseguí la Iglesia de Dios.

(II Corinthians 1:1)

Pablo, apóstol de Jesús, el Cristo, por la voluntad de Dios, y el hermano Timoteo, a la Iglesia de Dios que está en Corinto, juntamente con todos los santos que están por toda la Acaya:

(Galatians 1:13)

Porque ya habéis oído acerca de mi conducta en otro tiempo en el judaísmo, que perseguía sobremanera la Iglesia de Dios, y la destruía;

(I Thessalonians 2:14)

Porque vosotros, hermanos, habéis sido imitadores en Cristo Jesús de las Iglesias de Dios que están en Judea; que habéis padecido también vosotros las mismas cosas de los de vuestra propia nación, como también ellos de los judíos;

(I Timothy 3:5)

( porque el que no sabe gobernar su casa, ¿cómo cuidará de la Iglesia de Dios?);

We can notice from these verses of a Bible commonly used by most Catholics, the term Iglesia de Dios (Church of God) was capitalized. But Manny, a Catholic, says it was not even capitalized. Of course, we don’t need to mention him that he should wear a pair of reading glasses and read Catholic Bibles.

More so, we hadn’t included yet versions of Bible such as Magandang Balita Biblia, Tagalog, German, Dutch, French, Indonesian etc. for it will only become lengthy.

Anyway, we don’t blame him for he really cannot prove that apostles believe the church has no official name. That belief doesn’t exist in the Bible. It is just our opponent’s belief, not of apostles. He believes of something that doesn’t exist. Thus, like his saying “You do not prove that something does not exist.”

We can also say “You cannot prove Biblically a belief that is not written in the Bible.”

We have to this point been discussed the advantage of being Biblical and having Biblical awareness for there are false prophets gone out of this world. We also emphasized that the name Catholic Apostolic Roman Church is not Biblical. It did not come from God, it is a man-made belief. Rather, what was familiar to apostles is the term Church of God. But next we need to consider the question, why do we use the term Members, Church of God International? Is it Biblical? Is it foreign to apostles like the term CARC?

(To be continued…)

A Critique For Abe Arganiosa’s Justification of His Insolent Accusation Against Bro. Eli Soriano

by Christiandefenders

Acts of insolence are very rampant on the Internet thess days. Unfortunately, I have seen someone who was regarded as God’s preacher by blind followers doing such. According to, ” insolence is the trait of being rude and impertinent; inclined to take liberties.” Although the Catholic Priest, Abe Arganiosa still claims that he is decent, any person who knows how to discern a decent person from what is not will disagree by just reading his articles.

I just remembered a question asked by the Apostle Paul to a sorcerer named Elymas which can be read in the Book of Acts 13:10 “And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?.” If I were to answer the question of the Apostle Paul, there are really people like the Catholic Priest Abe Arganiosa who will not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord. The articles he has written on his blog is a clear manifestation on how the devil has a great influence in his manner of reasoning. I am going to dissect the contents on his article in order to prove how deluded his thinking is.

Abe Arganiosa says:

Here is my latest response to the Ang Dating Daan [ADD] apologists who keep on posting here links to their Blogs, inviting me to read their claims. Well, I have no time for that. I leave that apostolate to our lay Catholic Apologists but once they come here, I will response to them point by point.

Was there something on my comment inviting him to read our blogs as he claims? There was clearly none. In fact, he even quoted what I’ve stated.

Christiandefenders says,

It’s alright if you don’t care to visit our blogs. Former Catholics like us will continue to defend our new found faith. The Catholic Priest has repeatedly said that Bro. Eli Soriano is a Rapist without carefully examining if that is true or not. Was he able to witness the incident? Was he even raped in order to cry for justice?
That is a very weak argument for those people who knows that Bro. Eli is just a victim of false information circulating on the perverted minds of bigots who doesn’t know how to defend their faith properly.

We shall continue this discussion on the Internet as we deem appropriate.

Any person who knows basic English understands that we have clearly stated that  it doesn’t really matter to us if Abe Arganiosa visits our blog or not. There was not invitation for him whatsoever on my comment. Why did this Catholic Priest say that we are inviting him? The first paragraph on his article is already delusional. This faulty reasoning manifests his incredible manner of writing. The next part of his first paragraph may shock experienced computer Internet users.

Abe Arganiosa says,

Since this exchange was uprooted from original post where the comments were posted I answered in capital letters to contrast my response with the one from ADD. It is not intented to shout whatsoever.
Here is one of the latest exchange with them:

For people who are already familiar with the way Abe Arganiosa write his replies, everyone can attest that this Priest is really fond of using Capital Letters on his articles and comments each time he bursts with emotions. This was also noticed by another blogger who is in no manner a fan of ADD, Pinoy Reformista.

Pinoy Reformista wrote,

(*Mapapansin na ang mga titik ay naka-Uppercase, na nagpapahiwatig na ang manunulat ay nangungusap nang pasigaw). Sa tingin niyo po ba ay maka-Cristiano ang uri ng pakikipagtalakayan (apologetics) ni Ginoong Abe?

Translation: (*It is noticeable that the letters used were in Uppercase, which signifies that the writer is speaking in a manner of shouting). Do you thing that this is a Christian act of discussion (apologetics) of Mr. Abe?

Even an Email etiquette tip attests to what Pinoy Reformista said.

Email Etiquette Tip – DON’T SHOUT!

If you USE ALL CAPS in your email or message board posts, you will immediately make yourself seem inexperienced or ignorant. Most experienced computer users consider the use of all capital letters to be the Internet equivalent of shouting.

For those of us who spend a lot of time hanging out in cyberspace, messages written in all capital letters are reminiscent of trying to hold a conversation in which one person is shouting every word while others are speaking at a normal volume.

Now that I have proven how faulty his reasoning is for using ALL CAPS on his reply, let us see how stupid his statements are.

Abe Arganiosa says,


I beg to disagree with what was said by this Celibate Monster. Upon carefully listening and examining everything that Bro. Eli preaches, it was beyond a shadow of a doubt that everything is base on the Bible. On the other hand, everything that I’ve learned from the Catholic Church are purely base on man made traditions. The Bible prohibits the use of the title “Father” to a preacher of God contrary to what Catholic Priests do; The Bible prohibits the use of graven images on acts of worship which the Catholics are guilty of no matter how hard they try to justify it; The Bible prohibits vain and repetitious prayers which Catholics are fond of doing whenever they recite the Rosary. I cannot be a part of a Church who plotted murders of people in the Inquisition and the Crusades. How can a Church like that claim to be Christian when its acts are none Christian at all? Sadly, this Church who claims to have given the Bible to the world is the one teaching doctrines and doing deeds contrary to the Bible.

Abe Arganiosa says,


What difference does a homosexual rape makes compared to a heterosexual rape? They are both classified as sin base on the bible. The gravity of both offense are just the same. However, the blind eyes coupled with a lying heart of this homophobic moron fails to see the fact that those complaints are just baseless and nonsense accusations. Another odd thing about him is when he said that Bro. Eli is guilty although Bro. Eli was just simply being accused. There is no such thing as presumption of guilt in the law followed in our country. What was clearly stated on the constitution is the presumption of innocence whereas the government would need to prove the guilt of an accused person before declaring him guilty.

presumption of innocence. a fundamental protection for a person accused of a crime, which requires the prosecution to prove its case against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.

Remember that we’re in the Philippines wherein we uphold the presumption of innocence instead of the presumption of guilt.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved (Sec. 14(2), Art. III, 1987 Constitution; Sec. 1(a), Rules of Court). Unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt, he is entitled to an acquittal (Sec. 2, Rule 133, Rules of Court; United States vs. sicor, 1 Phil. 304; People vs. Corachea, 91 SCRA 422).

“It is better to acquit a man on reasonable doubt, even though he may in reality be guilty, than to confine in the penitentiary for the rest of his natural life a person who may be innocent.”(People vs. Manoji, 68 Phil. 471)

Accusation is not synonymous with guilt. The prosecution must overthrow the presumption of innocence with proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. To meet this standard, there is need for the most careful scrutiny of the testimony of the State; both oral and documentary, independently of whatever defense is offered by the accused, Only if the judge below and the appellate tribunal could arrive at a conclusion that the crime had been committed precisely by the person on trial under such exacting test should the sentence be one of conviction (People vs. Dramaya, 42 SCRA 60).

The reason why I am compelled to quote from the Philippine Constitution is because this Priest seems to act as a lawyer who doesn’t even know what he is saying.

Abe Arganiosa says,


An accused does not necessarily need to appear in court immediately in order to prove his innocence.The case should be reviewed by a public prosecutor which is part of the process that happened to the case of Bro. Eli Soriano.

When the prosecutor saw that the case is a result of a rift ongoing between INC and ADD, and the complainant is indisputably ill-motivated, he decided to dismiss the case.

In order to provide more information on this article, regarding the rape case which is repeatedly stated by the deluded Abe Arganiosa, let me quote some paragraphs from the blog

The Justice

On October 5, 2005, Otto Macabulos, Asst. Provincial Prosecutor addressed an information to Jesus Manarang, Provincial Prosecutor, Province of Pampanga, that Mr. Soriano is presently facing two counts of rape (no bail recommended) that he filed pending preliminary investigation with the Prosecutor’s office in San Fernando. The information said Veridiano claimed that he was sexually abused on May 17, 2000 at around 1:30 in the afternoon and on June 8, 2001 around 3:00 in the afternoon. The information further said it was physically impossible for the accused suspect (Soriano) to carry out the alleged crimes as there are documents for him of his whereabouts.

The hard evidences given for the rape charge (Ra 8353), page 5 Resolution said: 1) On May 17, 2000 at around 1:30 in the afternoon, Soriano went to the Biological Health Center in Malate, Manila to undergo chelation therapy. It took him about 3 hours and on the basis of records, the respondent was treated at the clinic. After the chelation therapy, he went directly to Lipa city, Batangas for a Bible Exposition which started at 7pm to 11pm. Soriano never left the stage all throughout the event.

Both Dr. Jean Marzan and Dr. Frederick D. Franciso of the Biological Center attested that on such date and at that time, and on the basis of their records, the respondent was treated at the clinic.

The information further said that on June 8, 2001, that Veridiano said he was raped for the second instance at about 3 o’clock in the afternoon, Soriano together with Rico Fernandez at 11:30 in the morning went to the Office of one Ma. Evangeline Veliora in a bank located in Bambang, Manila. They then proceeded to meet a certain Aida Briones, an accountant recommended by Veloira as regards the loan they were applying for. Fernandez, Veliora, and Briones each had written an affidavit to affirm that Soriano was with them that day. These affidavits were notarized by Bernardo Cuaresma on October 21, 2005.”

It is clear that evidences and testimonies were already presented for the dismissal of the case. There is no rational argument to insist that Bro. Eli is guilty of the accusation hurled against him on the grounds of presumption of innocence and base on the evidences presented of the incredibility of the circumstances that surrounds it.

Another question that I posted for the Catholic Priest, Abe Arganiosa to answer is the question of his crying for justice for the rape case. Was he a witness to the alleged crime to be sure that it really happened? Was he the victim of rape to seek justice? Let us analyze his ambiguous stand on when and how to cry for justice.

Abe Arganiosa says,



To use the case of the Maguindanao Massacre and compare it with the alleged rape case filed in court is a wrong analogy. 50 people were clearly murdered while Daniel Veridiano was not clearly raped. There’s no need to cry for justice over an impossible crime which was use to give burden to the Innocent. We can cry for justice for the victims of the Maguindanao Massacre but there is no need to cry for Justice for Daniel Veridiano. He himself attests that no harm  has been done to him by Bro. Eli or by the congregation.

He even had a written statement of his confession about the evil acts before he was excommunicated.

No matter how hard he deny and say that he did not wrote this letter, his video is clearly not a forgery. Daniel Veridiano was actually excommunicated for raping more than twenty men in the Department he heads. The man allegedly crying for rape is the real rapist.

That was proven by the testimonies of his victims.

By now, the length and size of his penis have become common knowledge to the public. Over at YouTube, the videos describe his organ as really large. His rape victims demonstrate an open “O” with their thumb and pointer finger. They say it is 5-and-a-half inches in length but the size has become their problem because when he forced his penis into their anus, it was really painful.

Abe Arganiosa’s insolence evidently lead him to act as a false lawyer for the real rapist who is crying for rape. I have proven on this article that Bro. Eli Soriano is innocent of that crime. Crying for justice in behalf of a rapist who claims to be raped is not only stupid but also reflects the kind of preacher that Abe Arganiosa is. He is a homophobic celibate and narcissistic bigot who doesn’t care to be insolent without even analyzing and investigating what is true or not.