BAKIT TINATAWAG NA ‘MORNING STAR’ O TALA SA UMAGA ANG BIRHENG MARIA SA LITANY

Mary as Morning Star

Mar Domingo

Hi Fr, tanong ko lang po, bakit po sa Litany of Blessed Virgin Mary, meron pong “Morning Star”? Diba po sa Panginoon lang yon?

The rising Sun and the Morning Star announcing the coming of the Sun

The Splendor of the Church

JESUS IS MORNING STAR OR IN OTHER TRANSLATION: “DAY STAR” “THE SUN” OF OUR LIFE. HE IS THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD. KASI GOD SIYA:

2 Peter 1:19 [KJV] “We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and THE DAY STAR arise in your hearts”

YUNG TERM NA ‘MORNING STAR’ FOR JESUS IS THE ANALOGY FOR THE SUN WHO IS THE BRIGHTEST STAR AND FROM WHOM THE MOON GETS HER LIGHT AND ALSO THE OTHER STARS FADE ONCE HE RISES. IT PORTRAYS THE LORD JESUS AS GOD WHO IS THE GREATEST OF ALL. THAT IS WHY HE IS KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. HE IS THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD:

John 1:3-5 [KJV] “All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made. In him was life: and the life was THE LIGHT OF MEN. And the light shineth in darkness: and the darkness did not comprehend it.”

THE BIBLE IS CLEAR THAT GOD IS THE SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS:

Malachi 4:2 [KJV] “But unto you that fear my name shall THE SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.”

THAT PROPHECY IS FULFILLED IN THE LORD JESUS WHO IS GOD AND HEALED THE SINFULNESS AS WELL AS THE INFIRMITIES OF THE PEOPLE.

SI MAMA MARY AY HINDI DIOS. TAO LANG SI MAMA MARY. BAKIT SIYA TINATAWAG NA MORNING STAR? SI MAMA MARY AY “MORNING STAR” KASI ANG MORNING STAR NAGBABADYA O NAGBIBIGAY HUDYAT NA MALAPIT NANG MAG BUKANG LIWAYWAY O MAG UMAGA. DARATING NA ANG SUN, THE MOST POWERFUL LIGHT. IBIG SABIHIN SI MAMA MARY AY HINDI DIOS. HINDI SIYA ANG SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. SIYA AY ORDINARIONG TAO NA GINAMIT NG DIOS UPANG IPABATID SA BUONG MUNDO NA MALAPIT NA ANG PAGDATING NG DAKILANG LIWANAG NA WALANG IBA KUNDI ANG PANGINOONG JESUCRISTO.

SO THE ARRIVAL OF MARY IN THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW AND OF LUKE SIGNIFIES MALAPIT NANG DUMATING ANG MESIYAS – JESUS OUR GOD – THE SUN OF OUR LIFE. KAYA ANG PAGDATING NI JESUS LAGING KAAKIBAT SA BABAENG MAGSISILANG SA KANYA: GEN 3:15, ISAIAH 7:14, MICAH 5:1-2, Mt 1:23, Lk 1:26-35, Gal 4:4. KAYA ANG LITANYA AY NAGPAPAHAYAG LAMANG NA SI MAMA MARY AY NAGSILBING HUDYAT NA PARATING ANG MESIYAS AT PATULOY SIYANG NAGPAPAALALA SA ATIN NG PRESENSIYA NI CRISTO.

Source: BAKIT TINATAWAG NA ‘MORNING STAR’ O TALA SA UMAGA ANG BIRHENG MARIA SA LITANY

DIVORCE vs. ANNULMENT

PAPANO UUNAWAIN ANG EXODO 20:3-5? By Reyden Ligtas Virtudazo

1 hour ago by splendor1618

• 1 Comments1 Comments

8

St. Joseph Catholic Church, Macon GA, USA

Reyden Ligtas Virtudazo

PAANO UNAWAIN ANG EXODO 20 : 3-5?

Malimit tayong mga katoliko ay pinupona ng ating mga kaibigan na nasa ibang bakuran ng pananampalataya, sa kadahilanang mali ang kanilang perception sa pagkakaroon natin ng mga imahen/rebulto sa loob ng ating simbahan o sa atin mang tahanan. Dahil diumano labag ito sa Biblia, gamit ang maraming talata para sabihin na tayong mga katoliko ay lumabag sa utos ng Dios.

Ex. 20:3-5

3 “Huwag kang sasamba sa ibang diyos, maliban sa akin 4 “Huwag kang gagawa ng imahen o rebulto ng anumang nilalang na nasa langit, nasa lupa, o nasa tubig upang sambahin. 5 Huwag mo silang yuyukuran ni sasambahin sapagkat akong si Yahweh na iyong Diyos ay mapanibughuing Diyos. Ang kasalanan ng mga magulang ay sinisingil ko sa kanilang mga anak hanggang sa ikatlo at ikaapat na salinlahi.

1Jn. 5:21

21 Mga anak, lumayo kayo sa mga diyus-diyosan.

Pah. 21:8

8 Subalit malagim ang kasasapitan ng mga duwag, ng mga taksil, ng mga nagpapasasa sa kasuklam-suklam na kahalayan, ng mga mamamatay-tao, ng mga nakikiapid, ng mga mangkukulam, ng mga sumasamba sa diyus-diyosan, at lahat ng mga sinungaling. Ang magiging bahagi nila’y sa lawa ng nagliliyab na asupre. Ito ang pangalawang kamatayan.”

Nota: ito’y ilan lamang sa napakaraming talata na kanilang ginagamit upang paratangan tayo na sumasamba sa diyus-diyosan. Kahit pa basahin natin lahat ang mga talatng kanilang ginagamit ito’y nauuwi lamang sa iisang talata ang Ex. 20-3-5

Paano natin ito unawain? Paano natin ito ipaliliwanag? Lumabag nga ba tayo?

Bilang isang pangkaraniwang katoliko, minabuti kong ibahagi sa inyo ang munti kong nalalaman sa biblia, dahil biblia ang gamit nila sa pagbatikos hinggil dito, biblia rin ang ating gagamitin sa pagsagot.

HINDI PO TAYO LUMABAG

Hihimayin natin ang talata

Una:

Sa verse 3 “Huwag kang sasamba sa ibang diyos, maliban sa akin,” Tayo bang mga katoliko ay may sinasambang ibang dios maliban sa tunay na Dios na nasa langit? Wala po! Katunayan, sa tuwing nagsisimba tayo paglinggo sa mesa sinasambit natin ang ganito: sumasampalataya ako sa Dios na makapangyarihan sa lahat na may gawa ng langit at ng lupa. Sino daw po ang Dios natin? Yong makapangyarihan sa lahat…. Hindi natin sinasabi na si Maria, Jose, Pedro, Pablo etc… o yong mga rebulto na nasa ding ding,,, at kung aawit ng papuri sa Dios ang mga katoliko ay kanyang sasambitin ang ganito: Papuri papuri papuri sa Dios sa kaitas-an at sa lupa ay kapayapaan sa mga taong kinalulogdan niya. Kaya alam namin kung sino ang aming Dios, dito pa lang ay masasabi na nating sablay na ang kanilang paratang.

Ikalawa:

Sa verse 4 “Huwag kang gagawa ng imahen o rebulto ng anumang nilalang na nasa langit, nasa lupa, o nasa tubig upang sambahin.” (Nota) sa pagbabasa natin ng biblia kinalailangan na lapatan natin ito ng tamang unawa….anong uri ng imahen/rebulto ang pinagbabawal? Mga imahen ng mga nilalang na iyong sasambahin bilang diyos o diyus-diyosan, ano itong diyus-diyosan? Sa tawag pa lang alam na natin na ito’y peke o huwad na diyos…. Iba ito sa tunay, yong makapangyarihan sa lahat. Ang susunod na tanong tayo bang mga katoliko ay may huwad o pekeng dios???????? Wala po! Kung ganon, si Birheng Maria, San Pedro, Pablo Jose etc..ay hindi diyus-diyosan sapagkat kaylan man hindi natin sila pinaniniwalaan na mga diyos, kaya ang kanilang mga larawan ay hindi rin puwedeng tawaging larawan ng diyus-diyosan. Maliwanag po ba?

Sabi nila…..Eh bakit kinalailangan pa na gawan sila ng mga larawan gayung ang sabi ay huwag kang gagawa ng imahen o rebulto ng anuman? Yan po ang pilit nilang sasabihin.

Ang salitang anuman ay hindi absolutong nangangahulogan na lahat na ng uri ng mga larawan ang ipinagbabawal gawin, kasi po kung susundan po natin ang ganitong unawa, lalabas na sinalungat ng Dios ang kanyang sariling utos….Narito sa talatang Ex. 20:3-5 ay bawal, pagkatapos sa Ex. 25:17-22 ay pinag-uutos gawin, ano yan??? Nakalimotan ba ng Dios na ipinagbabawal niya yon?

Ex. 25:17-22

17 “Gumawa ka ng Luklukan ng Awa na yari sa purong ginto. Ang haba nito’y 1.1 metro, at 0.7 metro naman ang luwang. 18 Lalagyan mo ng dalawang kerubing ginto ang dalawang dulo nito, 19 tig-isa sa magkabilang dulo. Ihihinang ang mga kerubin upang ito at ang Luklukan ng Awa ay maging iisang piraso. 20 Gawin mong magkaharap ang dalawang kerubin na parehong nakatungo, at nakabuka ang mga pakpak na nilulukuban ang Luklukan ng Awa. 21 Ilalagay mo ito sa ibabaw ng kaban na kinalalagyan ng dalawang tapyas na bato ng kautusang ibibigay ko sa iyo. 22 Doon tayo magtatagpo sa Luklukan ng Awa, sa pagitan ng dalawang kerubin; doon ko ibibigay sa iyo ang kautusan ko sa mga Israelita.

Ano ba ang tinatawag na kerubin? Ang mga kerubin ay mga anghel ng Dios, eh kung sinasabi sa talata na “ 18 Lalagyan mo ng dalawang kerubing ginto ang dalawang dulo nito” eh kung ginto yan eh di larawan nga yan….Kaya kung gagamitan natin ng tinatawag na sentido kumon, hindi lahat ng larawan ang pinagbabawal, Eh ano ang bawal? At ano naman ang hindi bawal? Ang bawal ay yaong larawan ng diyus-diyosan tulad ni astarot, baal, dagon etc.. at ang hindi naman bawal gawin ay yaong larawan ng mga lingkod ng Dios tulad ng kerubin…..Maliwanag na po ba?

Sabi nila…..Eh kerubin lang ang inutos na gawin at si moises ang inutosan hindi naman kasama ang mga katoliko sa inutosan? At tsaka sa katoliko iba’t ibang uri ng mga larawan nila di tulad ng pinag-uutos na keribin lang at di naman niluluhoran yon…..

Ang masasabi ko ay palusot na lang yan kasi napatunayan na natin na sablay ang bintang nila.

Larawan ng kerubin nga lamang ba ang ginawa at maaring gawin ayon sa palusot nila? Mali po! Ito kasing mga kaibigan natin na nasa kabilang bakoran ng pananampalataya, kung magbasa ng biblia yong gusto o pabor lang sa aral nila ang laging binabasa para gamitin pambatikos sa atin, hindi dapat ganon ang asal ng mga tinatawag na preacher, kasi po, kung laging pabor lang sa aral nila ang babasahin pagkatapos gamitin para tayo’y batikosin,,,,,, hindi po preacher ang dapat tawag sa kanila kondi batikista (pambabatikos)…… hindi din po mangangaral kondi mang-aasar yan dapat ang tawag sa kanila. Ganon pa man, hayaan n’yo po na sagotin natin ng buong husay ang batikos nila. Ang susunod na talata na ating babasahin ay para pabulaanan na kerubin lang ang ginawa at maaring gawin.

1 Har. 6: 23-29

Ang Loob ng Templo

23 Sa loob ng Dakong Kabanal-banalan, nagpalagay siya ng dalawang kerubin, imaheng nililok sa kahoy na olibo. Apat at kalahating metro ang taas ng bawat isa. 24 Kulang na dalawa’t kalahating metro ang haba ng bawat pakpak, kaya’t apat at kalahating metro ang sukat ng mga pakpak buhat sa magkabilang dulo. 25 Apat at kalahating metro rin ang sukat ng pangalawang kerubin, iisa ang sukat at hugis ng dalawa. 26 Apat at kalahating metro rin ang taas ng bawat kerubin. 27 Inilagay niya ang mga kerubin sa gitna ng Dakong Kabanal-banalan. Nakabuka ang kanilang mga pakpak, at sa gawing labas ay abot sa dingding ng silid ang tig-isa nilang pakpak. Sa gawing loob naman, ang mga dulo ng tig-isa nilang pakpak ay nagtagpo sa gitna ng silid. 28 Balot din ng gintong lantay ang dalawang kerubin.

29 Ang buong dingding ng Templo, maging sa Dakong Kabanal-banalan at sa Dakong Banal ay may ukit na mga kerubin, punong palma at mga bulaklak.

1 Har. 7: 27-30

27 Gumawa pa siya ng sampung patungang tanso para sa mga hugasan. Bawat isa’y dalawang metro ang haba at lapad; isa’t kalahating metro naman ang taas. 28 Ang mga ito ay ginawang parisukat na dingding na nakahinang sa mga balangkas. 29 Ang bawat dingding ay may mga nakaukit na larawan ng leon, baka, at kerubin. Ang mga gilid naman ng balangkas sa itaas at ibaba ng leon at baka ay may mga nakaukit na palamuting bulaklak na hugis korona. 30 Ang bawat patungan ay may apat na gulong na tanso at mga eheng tanso. Sa apat na sulok ng patungan ay may apat na tukod na tanso na siyang patungan ng hugasan.

Pansinin:

Kerubin

Baka

Leon

Bulaklak

Puno ng Palma

Tanong:

Bakit ngayon meron ng baka, leon, bulaklak at punong palma? Di ba inukit lahat yon, eh di larawan na naman yon….

Saang talata sa biblia na letra por letrang inutos ng Dios kay Solomon na gawin ang larawan ng baka, leon, bulaklak at puno ng palma?

At saang talata sa biblia na sinasabing kerubin lamang ang maaring gawin, tulad ng sinasabi nila?

At paano naman yong larawan ng ahas na tanso na inilagay sa tikin? Masasabi pa rin ba nila na kerubin lang ang pinagawa?

Bilang 21:8

8 at ganito ang sagot sa kanya ni Yahweh: “Gumawa ka ng isang ahas na tanso. Ilagay mo iyon sa dulo ng isang mahabang kahoy. Sinumang natuklaw ng ahas at tumingin doon ay hindi mamamatay.” 9 Ganoon nga ang ginawa ni Moises. Kaya lahat ng natuklaw ng ahas ay tumitingin sa ahas na tanso at hindi nga namamatay.

Sentido kumon na naman mga kapatid ang dapat pairalin sa pagbabasa sa biblia. Kung si Solomon nagpagawa ng mga baka, leon atbp.. at ito’y inilagay sa loob ng templo ng Dios kahit na hindi tuwirang inutos ng Dios ang mga iyon, tsaka hindi din naman tumotol ang Dios,,, sa makatuwid puwede gumawa provided na hindi ito diyus-diyosan tulad nila astarot, baal, diana, dagon atbp…na para sa mga pagano na di pa nakakikilala sa tunay na Dios , si astarot, baal, dagon ay mga diyos. Ngunit kaming mga katoliko ay alam naming kung sino ang tunay na Dios at kung ano sina Maria, Jose, Pedro…..sila’y mga taong buong pusong naglingkod sa Dios na dapat nating tularan, kaya nga tulad ng bayaneng si Rizal na may rebulto kung saan saan para siya’y maalala nating mga Pilipino, gayon din naman inalala naming mga katoliko ang mga tunay na lingkod ng Dios sa pamamagitan din ng pagawa ng kanilang mga larawan.

Source: PAPANO UUNAWAIN ANG EXODO 20:3-5?

ALL FALSE CHURCHES SEPARATED FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE FALLEN AND ERRED By St. Alphonsus Liguori

The view of St. Peter’s Basilica from the Apostolic Palace.While the Catholic Church has remained firm, the adversaries of the Church have fallen and continued to err more grossly

From St. Alphonsus Against the “Reformers”

“A church which is not one in its doctrine and faith can never be the True Church … Hence, because truth must be one, of all the different churches … only one can be the true one … and out of that Church there is no salvation. Now, in order to determine which is this one true Church … it is necessary to examine which is the Church first founded by Jesus Christ, for, when this is ascertained, it must be confessed that this one alone is the true Church which, having once been the true Church must always have been the true Church and must forever be the true Church. For to this first Church has been made the promise of the Savior that the gates of Hell would never be able to overturn it (Matthew 16:18) … In the entire history of religion, we find that the Roman Catholic Church alone was the first Church, and that the other false and heretical churches afterwards departed and separated from her. This is the Church which was propagated by the Apostles and afterwards governed by pastors whom the Apostles themselves appointed to rule over her … This character can be found only in the Roman Church, whose pastors descend securely by an uninterrupted and legitimate succession from the Apostles of the world (Matthew 28:20)

“The innovators themselves do not deny that the Roman Church was the first which Jesus Christ founded … however, they say … that it was the true Church until the fifth century, or until … it fell away, because it had been corrupted by the Catholics … But how could that Church fall which St. Paul calls the “pillar and ground of truth” (I Timothy 3:15)? … No. The Church has not failed … The truth is … that all the false churches which have separated from the Roman Church have fallen away and erred … To convince all heretical sects of their error, there is no way more certain and safe than to show that our Catholic Church has been the first one founded by Jesus Christ; for, this being established, it is proved beyond all doubt that ours is the only true Church and that all the others which have left it and separated are certainly in error … But, pressed by this argument, the innovators have invented an answer: they say that the visible Church has failed, but not the invisible Church … But these doctrines are diametrically opposed to the Gospel.

“The innovators have been challenged several times to produce a text of Sacred Scripture which would prove the existence of the invisible church they invented, and we are unable to obtain any such text from them. How could they adduce such a text when, addressing His Apostles whom He left as the propagators of His Church, Jesus said: “You cannot be hidden” (Matthew 5:14)? … Thus He has declared that the Church cannot help but be visible to everyone … The Church has been at all times, and will forever be, necessarily visible, so that each person may always be able to learn from his pastor the true doctrine regarding the dogmas of faith … to receive the Sacraments, to be directed in the way of salvation, and to be enlightened and corrected should he ever fall into error. For, were the Church in any time hidden and invisible, to whom would men have recourse in order to learn what they are to believe and to do? … It was necessary that the Church and her pastors be obvious and visible, principally in order that there might be an infallible judge … to resolve all doubts, and to whose decision everyone should necessarily submit. Otherwise, there would be no sure rule of faith by which Christians could know the true dogmas of faith and the true precepts of morality, and among the faithful there would be endless disputes and controversies … “And Christ gave some apostles, and others pastors and doctors, that henceforth we be no more children tossed to-and-fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine” (Eph. 4:11-14)

“But what faith can we learn from these false teachers when, in consequence of separating from the Church, they have no rule of faith? … How often Calvin changed his opinions! And, during his life, Luther was constantly contradicting himself: on the single article of the Eucharist, he fell into thirty-three contradictions! A single contradiction is enough to show that they did not have the Spirit of God. “He cannot deny Himself” (II Timothy 2:13). In a word, take away the authority of the Church, and neither Divine Revelation nor natural reason itself is of any use, for each of them may be interpreted by every individual according to his own caprice … Do they not see that from this accursed liberty of conscience has arisen the immense variety of heretical and atheistic sects? … I repeat: if you take away obedience to the Church, there is no error which will not be embraced.

Source:ALL FALSE CHURCHES SEPARATED FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAVE FALLEN AND ERRED By St. Alphonsus Liguori

Lawrence Luna

Refuting the Statement

” The Father will be the one to build the church and NOT THE SON! CHRIST IS PART of the church being its foundation!”

By: Lawrence Carlo Luna

From the website WWW.CONTROVERSYEXTRAORDINARY.COM, Bro Eli Soriano of Members of Church of GOD International had this teaching:

“The Prophet mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:18, being Jesus Christ in reality, will speak the Father’s own words (my words in his mouth). When Christ said, “Upon this rock I will build my church”, it is the “church of GOD” and not his own church- not the church of Christ that others perceived to be. It must be understood that the Father will be the one to build and NOT THE SON! The main reason is that Christ is part of the church being its foundation!”

Bro Eli: The Prophet mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:18, being Jesus Christ in reality, will speak the Father’s own words (my words in his mouth).

Lawrence: The Deuteronomy 18:18 speaks about the prophet to be send by GOD to speak his words. Well, no question for that since Christ testifies to the father because Jesus and the Father are connected to each other. Jesus speaks since he was tasked to proclaimed the kingdom of GOD, to save us through his crucifixion on the cross, and preach the word of GOD through his mouth about the salvation. Just like for example, the secretary will speak in the name/behalf of the president and the secretary will relay to the members the essence of the message of the president for them. This situation is also the same with Jesus since he speaks the truth and follow the will of GOD and proclaimed it to the people.

John 10:30 – My Father and I are one.

John 5:19 – So Jesus answered them, ” I TELL YOU THE TRUTH: THE SON CAN DO NOTHING ON HIS OWN; HE DOES ONLY WHAT HE SEES HIS FATHER DOING. WHAT THE FATHER DOES, THE SON ALSO DOES.

These are the reasons why in Deuteronomy 18:18 said ” I will put my words in his mouth” since he speaks to GOD and not his own but also the Son has the authority which came from the Father.

Connecting the Deuteronomy 18:18 to Matthew 16:18 as said by Bro. Eli ” that the Father and not the Son is the builder of the Church” can’t be applied since Deuteronomy 18:18 does not directly speaks the building and the builder of the church, rather the choosing the prophet to speak the words of GOD.

Deuteronomy 18:18 can be connected only if it talks about the church and its founder but it does not. Therefore, Deuteronomy 18:18 speaks about the prophet chosen by GOD while Matthew 16:18 speaks about the confirmation on the establishment of the church. Take note these verses have different topics being discussed.

Bro Eli: When Christ said, “Upon this rock I will build my church” it is the “Church of GOD” and not his own church- not the church of Christ that others perceived to be.

Lawrence: Matthew 16:18 – And I SAY also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I WILL BUILD UP MY CHURCH; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Very clearly seen in this verse that It was Christ who built the church because he said “I WILL BUILD UP MY CHURCH”.

Christ didn’t say ” My Father said that: I will build up my church” or ” He will build up his church”. Christ used the terms “I” and “MY” because he was the founder. It is grammatically, logically, and theologically wrong if you say “I will build up my church” but you are not the founder. If its true that Christ was not the founder, why he used the terms “I” and “MY”? See, you can’t say “I” and “MY” if you don’t claim that such thing or etc. is yours.

Also, the persons involved in that dialogue of Matthew 16:18 were Jesus and Peter. It was only both of them who had the conversation. Take note that there were only 2 persons involved on that conversation.

Also, Jesus was the founder of the church since he told Peter to take care his sheep.

John 21:17 – Jesus said to him “Take care of my sheep”.

See, it was Christ who founded because if he was not the founder, then no reason for him to say “Take care of my sheep” and give the keys to Peter as stated in Matthew 16:18-19 and John 21:17. The founder of course has the authority to give powers to his disciples.

Bro. Eli insisted that it was the father who founded since he connected Deuteronomy 18:18 to Matthew 16:18 plus, the statement mentioned in Matthew 16:16-17.

Matthew 16:16-17 – Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living GOD”. “Good for you, Simon son of John!” answered Jesus. “For this truth did not come to you from any human being, but it was given to you directly by my Father in heaven.

We have to remember that the truth about the proclamation of Peter on Jesus came from GOD since it was revealed by GOD and not based on the idea of Peter in his self. The proclamation was all about Christ being Messiah and Son of GOD.

It was also revealed about Jesus as “Messiah and Son of GOD” by the Father since this gives us a guarantee that the Son has the authority and that authority was already stated in Matthew 16:18-19.

Bro. Eli: It must be understood that the father will be the one to build and NOT THE SON!. The main reason is that Christ is part of the church being its foundation!

Lawrence: Here are the other verses that supports Christ was the founder:

Colossians 1:18 – HE IS THE HEAD IF HIS BODY, THE CHURCH; he is the source of the body’s life.

Romans 7:4 – That is how it is with you, my friends. As far as the law is concerned, you also have died because YOU ARE PART OF THE BODY OF CHRIST; and now you belong to him who was raised from death in order that we might be useful in the service of GOD.

Romans 12:4-5 – We have many parts in ONE BODY, and all these parts have different functions. in the same way, though we are many, WE ARE ONE BODY IN UNION WITH CHRIST, AND WE ARE ALL JOINED TO EACH OTHER AS DIFFERENT PARTS OF ONE BODY.

Romans 16:16 – Greet one another with kiss of peace. All the CHURCHES OF CHRIST send you their greetings.

In Colossians 1:18, it is said he (Christ) is the “HEAD OF HIS BODY, THE CHURCH. ” That’s why he is the founder and owner for he is the head of his church which is his body which he owned. it is not written ” Christ is part of the Father’s body, the church”. CHRIST IS THE FOUNDER AND OWNER FOR HE OWNED HIS BODY, THE CHURCH.

Remember a founder owned his group that he founded. It is never happened that a founder didn’t own the association that he founded.

In Romans 7:4, it is said “YOU ARE PART OF THE BODY OF CHRIST”. Meaning, IT IS US who are part of the body of Christ, not Christ is part of the church being its foundation as said by Bro. Eli Soriano. The body of Christ is the church which Christ is the head, owner and the founder (Col 1:18).

In Romans 12:4-5, it is said “WE ARE ONE BODY IN UNION WITH CHRIST”. Meaning we must be united in that one body or Church in union with with Christ. Bro. Eli will be correct if it is written ” we are one body of GOD in union with Christ”. But it was not written, so therefore, Bro. Eli was wrong.

In Romans 16:16, it is said ” CHURCHES OF CHRIST”, so the owner and founder of the Church is Christ. Bro. Eli will be correct if it is said “Churches of GOD in Christ Jesus”. See, Bro. Eli committed heresies.

Also, the term “Church of GOD” used in Acts 20:28 and 1 Timothy 3:15 is just the same with the term “CHURCHES OF CHRIST” since the term “Church of GOD” really gives us an assurance that the church founded by Christ is of GOD and pleases GOD, not founded by man or any false prophets.

The term “Church of GOD” is not even all capitalized because it is not the exact name of the church, rather, a description of the church which that church is the ground of pillar of truth. Bro. Soriano will be correct if it was written “Church of GOD in Christ Jesus” but it was not written.

Therefore, the founder of the church mentioned in the new testament is Christ and that is why the bible uses the terms “HE IS THE HEAD IF HIS BODY, THE CHURCH”, or “YOU ARE PART OF THE BODY OF CHRIST”, or “WE ARE ONE BODY IN UNION WITH CHRIST” or ” CHURCHES OF CHRIST” to strongly emphasize that Christ is the founder.

Christ can build the church for he was given an authority by the Father as said in John 5:19-29.

Also, you are pleased in the eyes of the Father when you enter to his Son’s church foe GOD the Father is pleased with Christ (Mark 1:11).

Christ can build a church since he is the fullness of grace and truth (John 1:17).

Source: REFUTING ELI SORIANO IN HIS CLAIM THAT THE FATHER BUILT THE CHURCH AND NOT THE SON By Lawrence Luna