I Am a Child of God

Ja Mes is running again.

If you think I did it then go ahead prove it. If you can't then don't fool yourself. You can't even provide the exact detail of your claim even the church history that you know nothing of. Try me and Let's talk about it.

SINONG MGA PROPETA ANG NANGARAL SA IBANG MGA TUPA NI JESUS - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

Yung magtanong ka na nga lang kung Paano nangyari o di kaya Paano nyo maipaliwanag. Tapos tanong mo maghanap ka ng pangalan para mapatunayan sa Bible? Seriously? Di mo nga mapatunayan na si Manalo ang tinawag para sa pag Gather sa mga Nawawalang Tupa sa Pilipinas, natural dahil non-biblical, tapos magtanong ka ng pangalan? Come on!

Tanong na illogical? Tapos maghanap ng Sagot sa Bibliya? Ganun?

Jose Rodelio Retome Rata - Di gumagana ang Common Sense

Yung pilit mo nalang kahit ano pumapasok sa utak mo basta lang ma-justify ang doctrinang hindi naman sinunod ang nakasulat. Kaya kahit ano nalang itanong baka sakali makailag.

Worship God in Spirit

Funny Exchanges - Ja Mes

You can ask a fair question.
Not this one.

Abusive Ad Hominem Attack - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata aka THE REBUKER

This is a form of Abusive Ad Hominem, yung tipon hindi na sya magbigay ng statement pero direct na ang concerns or commentary sa Family or even Family Members. Familiar ba ang Lahat?

Yung makikipag diskusyon ka pero isabay mo ang Ad Hominem attack. Last time was a personal attack or Character assassination. Ngayon naman idamay na lahat ng pamilya. Ganun ba talaga ang turo ng Iglesia Ni Kristo. Kulang nalang nito pagplanuhang attakihin o di kaya ano THE REBUKER?

So ano ba ang point dito? Wala ako nakikita na point kaya nonesense kausap itong Troll na to.

What do you mean by this, Jose Rata?

See the Word is in All Caps. Halatang Galit.
Ano pa ang point sa post ng biblical verse where the application is absent

My explanation, Palagay nyo ba napapasin ito? Guess what? Check below -

Youre right, Hindi nga. Still insisting on something he didn't know about my family and me

And my Challenge to him.
Try nga natin kung kaya mo patunayan ang accusation mo.

Troll is a Troll, nothing beats a troll in INC.
The Reasons why I stopped using this Account,
because my wife had read these kinds of comments, na galing sa kanya, and she felt threatened.

O sa mga kapwa INC, alam nyo na. THE REBUKER hides his account for no good reason. At ako nakalatad lahat ng detail ng aking personal information, you can go directly to me at the very detail in my account anytime. THE REBUKER is a disgrace to the Iglesia Ni Cristo. If you allow this kind of troll in your organization, wag kayo magtaka tawagin kayong culto.

If you think you're not a threat, JOSE RATA, then prove it.

Umiiyak ang Dios nyo - by Jose Rata a.k.a. THE REBUKER

Ok, so here we are again sa scriptural presentation ni THE REBUKER, thinking this was just insane doctrine because the God of LDS is Crying and quoting Hebrews 5:7. So, what was the context all about? Does this prove that the Christ who cries, suffers Pain, agony and Death is not a Son of God or should we say a God? Let's find out -

In the Scripture, we do understand that Christ the savior will soon come as the prophecies of the prophets (Isaiah 9:6, Micah 5:2), but it is not just a savior, he was also the judge of every human soul (John 5:22, 2 Corinthians 5:10, Matthew 25:31-32). It is important to note or understand that the reason why Christ was to be born in Human, leaving his entire Godhood, to experience what the human has to experience (Hebrews 4:15-16, Philippians 2:7-8, John 1:14). He can't save and judge human without knowing how a human experience make sense to him (Hebrews 2:17-18, Isaiah 53:3-4). So he was born as part of the plan and as example to everyone (1 Peter 2:21, John 13:15).

So what's the Issue?

The issue they try to brought was that "If Jesus was God, then he should not feel pain, suffering or experience death" or perhaps the main issue was his emotional feeling as he cries in agony.

Okay, but if you read the scripture this doesn't need to be an issue at all, simply because Christ was sent to be the last lamb to be sacrifice to end the law (Hebrews 10:10-12, John 1:29, 1 Peter 1:18-19). The reason why he need to go through all of the sufferings like human does, is indeed to comprehend how and what human feels was all about and as he conquers this pain and sufferings, every human will be subjected to him through his atonement. Our INC friend doesn't have any teachings about this so instead they go through the bible and find a good source to satisfy their unitarian view without understand the scriptures.

Hebrews 2:17-18: "Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted."

Hebrews 4:15: "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself

by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, - Philippians 2:8-10

To sum it up for you THE REBUKER, it is necessary for Christ to experience Human pains so he could succor or knows the how human feels so he could understand every human needs.

From THE REBUKER's arrogant comment in one of my Post.

Now, what will happen if Christ wouldn't need to go though such experience.

Could he judge righteously and understand the human experience and sufferings?
Can he say "be ye perfect" like the Father, if he is not even perfect?

Simple di ba? Kaya yang post mo THE REBUKER, NONESENSE, I repeat NONESENSE. If hindi naranasan ni Kristo na magdusa at masaktan gaya ng isang tao, I would simply say in the Last day if he judge me, "Bakit ikaw ba naranasan mo ang naranasan ko na magdusa, umiiyak sa sakit, at iniwan ng pamilya?" Think about it THE REBUKER, gamitin mo rin utak mo paminsan, di lang puro copy paste.

His Post and sometime his Trolling Comment to every Group that he made
which I don't even care.

Hebrew 5:7 During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.

So, when the scripture said the Lord wept, does it meant he was just a human? And when the scripture said about the "Anger of the Lord" Deuteronomy 9:7-8), does it also mean he was a human since he was angry. There are lots of examples actually, but I wouldn't want this to be a long post.

LITERAL NA NAKITA NI JACOB ANG MUKHA? - by THE REBUKER

Dito na naman tayo sa isa pang contexto na wala man lang sense sa kanyang pinagsasabi. Una dyan nakita mo na stand ko pero nganga ka parin dahil malamang di ka nakakaintindi. Sige Patulan kita nito basahin mo hangang dulo -

Before that according to the Analysis on our debate that you miserably lose, I already Stablish my point or my stand about the plurality of God. Again as base on my analysis, I don't believe that God was alone in the realm before the world was Created and those being whom I do believe was with him were also the same being as he is, and that is God, the scripture use a small caps to emphasize their difference or labelled them as judges.

Check out the complete structure, click here -
https://bustillo-family.blogspot.com/2025/12/exchanges-details.html

The only problem to you THE REBUKER, was that you don't want the belief of others who even know how the context of the scripture goes, rather you want them to be converted in to your own ideology that you can't even stand. So lets take some of it -

Genesis 32:11
Ang Biblia, 2001
11 Hinihiling ko sa iyo na iligtas mo ako sa kamay ng aking kapatid na si Esau. Ako'y natatakot sa kanya, baka siya'y dumating at kaming lahat ay pagpapatayin niya, ang mga ina pati ang mga anak.
Genesis 32:30
Ang Biblia, 2001
30 Tinawag ni Jacob ang pangalan ng lugar na iyon na Peniel na sinasabi, “Sapagkat nakita ko ang Diyos sa harapan, at naligtas ang aking buhay.”

ANG TURO NG MGA MOR-MOONS LITERAL NA NAKITA NI JACOB ANG MUKHA NG DIOS SAMANTALANG MAMAMATAY ANG MAKAKAKITA SA MUKHA NG DIOS.

Yes exactly, as the context of the scripture goes, unless you call Jacob a liar. Okay, so let me explain further, When the scriptures tells us something about angels, messengers, and even Christ before his mortal ministry, there is only one source of being where they came from and you can't simply call them different just because they are not meant to be worship. You can't sustain that ideology. The scripture plainly saint to Serve Only the One True God, why would the scripture tells us that if we already knew that God was the only being we worship? Why would Christ, prayed to the Father with phrase "that they may know thee the one true God"? Does the God of Israel or Abraham Isaac Jacob and the rest of prophet talk and worship different God? Do the Israelite soon after the law was revealed changed the same law that was followed in Jesus time? I don't think so, you just don't know your scripture well and that's your problem

Exodo 33:20
Ang Biblia, 2001
20 Ngunit, kanyang sinabi, “Hindi mo maaaring makita ang aking mukha; sapagkat hindi ako maaaring makita ng tao at siya'y mabubuhay.”
Exodo 33:23
Ang Biblia, 2001
23 Pagkatapos, aking aalisin ang aking kamay, at iyong makikita ang aking likod; subalit ang aking mukha ay hindi makikita.”
INUNAWANG LITERAL NA NAKITA NI JACOB ANG MUKHA NG DIOS SAMANTALANG ANG IBIG SABIHIN DIYAN NI JACOB AY PNABORAN SIYA NG DIOS KAYA NALIGTAS SIYA SA GALIT NI ESAU NA KANYANG KAPATID.

On this context, it was Moses who was instructed by God in favor to the Israelites. Yes, Moses didn't saw God's face when he ask to show him God's glory. Your cherry-picked idea doesn't work here. Moses already claimed in Exodus 33:11 where God speaks to him face to face, then there you are using that magic trick of chopping the verses to satisfy the INC doctrine. Okay, so what was the context? Here let me show you (Exodus 33:17-23) -

17 And the Lord said to Moses, “I will do the very thing you have asked, because I am pleased with you and I know you by name.”
18 Then Moses said, “Now show me your glory.”
19 And the Lord said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
20 But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.”
21 Then the Lord said, “There is a place near me where you may stand on a rock.
22 When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by.
23 Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.”

See where you failed? God has a complete body part but does it said he can't be seen. Maybe or maybe you don't understand what Moses request. He simply want the Lord God to show him his Glory in which no man could ever withstood if God himself will show his glory, and that's basic. So, what did God said? He gave Moses instruction so he can see at a glance that the God of Israel is not just a Transparent Plastic Balloon that you INC believe. There were also a reason behind why the Lord instructed Moses that his face not to be seen at that time for the sake of Israel's belief and worshipping the God in their spirit and not just made by stones or Materials (Deuteronomy 4:15-16).

Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female.

Which simple mean, God don't want to be mistaken as idols or graven images which is common in their times. So it was plainly explain why God hid his face so no man would just simply engrave an image out of the definition to what they saw. But that doesn't main God has no figure, We are created in God's image and likeness.

Genesis 33:9-10
Ang Biblia, 2001
9 Subalit sinabi ni Esau, “Sapat na ang nasa akin, kapatid ko. Ang nasa iyo ay sa iyo na.”
10 Sinabi sa kanya ni Jacob, “Hindi, nakikiusap ako sa iyo, na kung ngayo'y nakatagpo ako ng biyaya sa iyong paningin, ay tanggapin mo nga ang aking kaloob mula sa aking kamay; sapagkat nakita ko ang iyong mukha, na gaya ng nakakita ng mukha ng Diyos, at ikaw ay nalugod sa akin.
AYAN ANG IBIG SABIHIN NG NAKITA ANG MUKHA NG DIOS NI JACOB AY NAKATAGPO SIYA NG BIYAYA SA DIOS AT NALIGTAS SIYA SA GALIT NI ESAU.
ANG KATUNAYAN NA NAKATAGPO SIYA NG BIYAYA SA DIOS AY BINASBASAN SIYA NG DIOS SA PAMAMAGITAN NG ANGHEL NG DIOS.

Oh come on! Ganyan ang pagkaintindi mo sa banal na kasulatan or sa specific verse na yan? Ulit-ulitin mong basahin yan makikita mo kung gaano ka kahina sa pangunawa sa banal na kasulat, Tapos manghamon ka ng debate? Sure ka? The context of Jacob wristled with an Angel/God has no connection with Jacob's reconciliation to his brother. This is obviously misinterpreted or misunderstood study of THE REBUKER. Iwan ko lang kung sinong maniwala sayo dyan but this has nothing to do with his spiritual experience with the messenger and to his brother. But to be fair para naman di ka mukhang kahiya-hiya, Jacobs plain words ay nasabi nya "nakakita ng mukha ng Diyos" ay nang dahil sa kanilang reunion at dahil mahal nya ang kanyang kapatid, kaya noong nakita siya ang phrase na yun ang tangin nagpatunay sa kanyang tunay na pagmamahal. Hay nako!

Genesis 32:26
Ang Biblia, 2001
26 Sinabi niya, “Bitawan mo ako, sapagkat nagbubukang-liwayway na.” At sinabi ni Jacob,[a] “Hindi kita bibitawan malibang ako ay mabasbasan mo.”
Genesis 32:29
Ang Biblia, 2001
29 Siya'y tinanong ni Jacob, “Hinihiling ko sa iyo na sabihin mo sa akin ang iyong pangalan.” At kanyang sinabi, “Bakit itinatanong mo ang aking pangalan?” At siya'y binasbasan doon.
MGA MOR-MOONS MAGBASA KAYO NG BIBLE HINDI PURO BOOK OF MOR-MOONS NA GAWA-GAWANG KASINUNGALINGAN NG PROPETA NINYO!

Ok, so ito yung pilit mong ipagkalat dahil mali daw kuno, pero ang problema hindi mo matangap ang akung statement using Biblical Context. So sino may problema? Ulitin ko nalang dito para may reference ka dito sa blog mo at someday may matutunan ka para pwede mo ishare sa pamilya mo. So, again here is my stand, and the scripture goes and there are not just one God as a being and there is one God who holds the title God as the Father. There's a difference, God is both a being and a title and as the scripture addressed them using the small caps simply because they were celestial being.

From a Facebook post by Glen Mari R. Lamis

Ok, to be fair ulit at nabangit ko ang history sa pamilya ni Samson so here's the scripture verses (Read in Full Judges 13)-

18 He replied, “Why do you ask my name? It is beyond understanding.” 19 Then Manoah took a young goat, together with the grain offering, and sacrificed it on a rock to the Lord. And the Lord did an amazing thing while Manoah and his wife watched: 20 As the flame blazed up from the altar toward heaven, the angel of the Lord ascended in the flame. Seeing this, Manoah and his wife fell with their faces to the ground. 21 When the angel of the Lord did not show himself again to Manoah and his wife, Manoah realized that it was the angel of the Lord. 22 “We are doomed to die!” he said to his wife. “We have seen God!” 23 But his wife answered, “If the Lord had meant to kill us, he would not have accepted a burnt offering and grain offering from our hands, nor shown us all these things or now told us this.” - Judges 13:18-23 NIV

Moving on so here's the last part of you comments. So what was this all about?

2 Timothy 4:3-4
Living Bible
3 For there is going to come a time when people won’t listen to the truth but will go around looking for teachers who will tell them just what they want to hear. 4 They won’t listen to what the Bible says but will blithely follow their own misguided ideas.

Di ko alam anong point mo sa pag-include nitong verse na wala namang kinalaman sa pinagusapan, masyado mo lang pinapahaba ang comments mo para magmukhang authentic pero sablay ka parin. So far masasabi ko lang None-Sense ang post mo.

Exchanges Details - Jerry Bustillo with THE REBUKER

JOSE RATA complains on his own doing

Unang Pagkabuhay ng mga Patay by the Rebuker

THE REBUKER - Niloloko ang sarili

Pera-pera Childish comment by Jose Rata

Fail Aesegesis - John 10:16

2nd Attempted Defeat - Fail to Present

3rd debate attempt - Concede Defeat

Full conversation behind the Failure of Jose Rodelio Rata with his Alibi that he think he won't by just running away on a debate. He wants to stop the debate on his first attempt to question something that was already answered. He's not satisfied just because he couldn't find literal event that he think everything was written on the Bible. See for yourself.