In the process of recovering my old blogs, I found three that during their time were quite well received. These are blogs responding to allegations that the doctrine of the Trinity is based on the so-called Johannine Comma and that the doctrine of Christ’s Divinity is non-biblical. I am presenting here excerpts of those blogs; you may read the full article from the links provided.
The Johannine Comma
The Johanine Comma is a gloss on 1 Jn. 5:7 that subsequently — through the work of copyists — found its way into the main text to make it read:
And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one. And there are three that give testimony on earth: the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one. (1 Jn. 5:7)
So-called “Non Trinitarian Churches” think that the inclusion of the gloss into the main text was done to bolster the doctrine of the Trinity. But is this the only explanation? The so-called “Trinitarian” doctrine cannot be traced to a date earlier than the year 800 AD, about the time when the gloss found its way into some manuscripts of the Latin version of 1 John. The Latin Church already believed in the Trinity even before this date. Second, the gloss can only be found in Latin manuscripts and never in any Greek manuscript prior to the edition published by Erasmus — then still a Catholic Canons Regular of St. Augustine — in 1520. The Greek churches therefore never had no recourse to a gloss for their belief in the Trinity. Both these facts can only mean one thing: the belief in the Trinity antedates the Johanine Comma…
The Equivocation of Sandoval and Bularan I
The Websters New World Collegiate Dictionary defines “equivocate” as “to use equivocal terms in order to deceive, mislead, hedge, etc.; be deliberately ambiguous. The synonym given is “to lie”. A related word is “equivocal”, that is, (1) that can have more than one interpreetation having two or more meanings; purposely vague misleading or ambiguous; (2) uncertain;undecided;doubtful, and (3) suspicious; questionable.
It is good to remember these two words because this is the best way to describe what the ministers of the Iglesya Ni Cristo (1914) did in their program yesterday when they talked about the nature of Christ.
The Equivocation of Sandoval and Bularan
We have seen how Webster’s given definition of equivocation applies to the way Ka Sandoval and Ka Bularan explained Acts 14:11 using a Filipino translation that they made of the expression “The gods have come down to us in human form.” Another way of equivocating is when you use a word with two or more meanings that derive from different stages in its historical development. Here is an example:
Years ago, two of our seminarians got ordained to the priesthood and their picture together was published in our newsletter. Below the picture was a caption that read: “Our new priests: one is happy and the other is gay.” Everyone got a good laugh at that one, even the one who was referred to as “gay.” What made the caption funny was the double meaning in the word “gay”. Now, when we say “gay” we would normally mean a person with a homosexual orientation. There was a time, however, when “gay” was the synonym for “happy.”…
A Note on Sandoval and Bularan
Ka Sandoval and Ka Bularan are pastors of the Iglesya ni Kristo founded by Felix Y. Manalo in 1914. The main tenet of this church is that Felix Manalo is the seventh angel of the Apocalypse and that the name of the true Church is “Iglesya ni Kristo” (in English “Church of Christ”). All other doctrines they hold onto are borrowed from the churches that F. Manalo was a member of prior to founding his own church. At the time when I wrote the above articles (June 2005), Ka Sandoval and Ka Bularan were speakers in one of the two or three TV programs of their Church.
Originally posted 2008-05-09 11:42:05. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
Email This Post | Print This Post
- No related posts found.