I Am a Child of God

The Creation - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata - Jehovah Issue Part 1

All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. - Matthew 11:27 NIV

Another Incoming Respose dito na naman tayo sa ating Copy-Paste written debate daw kung gusto nya pero puro copy paste ang gagawin at walang malalim na explaination. No other than Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, around of applause, everyone. LOL! Now we'll see his commentary na ang haba daw kuno pero galing lang sa copy paste biblical verse collection, makikita natin ngayon kung gaano siya ka galing sa usaping banal na kasulatan at matutunan natin ang kanyan creticism na may kabuluhan nga naman daw/kuno. So we will dive in and see what we can get -

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo NAGBASA KA NG MGA POST KO O BINUGAHAN MO LANG NG HANGIN?

Ang ganda ng Intro mga kapatid, ganito siya ka galing sa larangan ng Theology, wala kang katulad Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. LOL!

Creation
Under the direction of Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ created the heavens and the earth. From scripture revealed through the Prophet Joseph Smith, we know that in the work of the Creation, the Lord organized elements that had already existed. He did not create the world “out of nothing,” as some people believe.

I assume kinuha nya ito sa Gospel Topic and Question, and I'm pretty sure hindi nya naintindihan dahil sa quote palang nya selected parts or Cherry-picked content thinking that it has no Biblical Reference. Ay ka-very Good naman. Now let's see what this is all about, sa quote nya -

The above sentences says about that Jesus Christ created everything under the direction of the Heavenly Father. Actually, this is not just an LDS Theology, even biblical Scholars and other Religious Organization understand the same concept, baka ikaw lang Jose Rodelio Retome Rata ang walang alam nyan. Also, nakalagay dyan na the world was created throught an existed matter or elements, this is called Creatio ex Materia (Creation out of Existing Matter). We believe that matters and elements are eternal and existed with God, and we do not believe in Creatio ex Nihilo (Creation out of Nothing).

The scripture is plain that everything was created "through him and by him and for him" tinatanong kita sa debate natin tungkol nya pero wala kang malinaw nasagot kaya ayon puro nalang walang connect mga sagot mo. Check mo ulit itong link para maalala mo - (https://bustillo-family.blogspot.com/2025/12/exchanges-details.html)

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,

20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

- Colossians 1:15-20 (New International Version)

LDS, though we believe in Theophany, also LDS believe in Christophany, which basically means Christ existed with the Father and has his role long before the Creation of the World, which might also appear in some circumstances. There were reasons why he represents the Father in the Old Testament, which we simply call the Divine Investiture of Authority. Let me try using this scripture for you para may mapupulot ka na naman nakaalaman. Naniniwala ka ng walang nakakakita sa Ama as stated in John 1:18 (No man hath seen God at any time), but there are Prophet will simply contradict the statement of John, for example, on the list -

Moses (Exodus 33:11, 20-23) - lately lang napagusapan pero lihis ka ng lihis nito dahil ayaw mong tangapin na totoo ito "face to face, as one speaks to a friend". Obvious naman siguro na hindi may figure ang katawan ng Dios dyan pero hindi lang nya gusto makita ang kanyang mukha dahil sa kanyang Glory.
Isaiah (Isaiah 6:1-5) - Malinaw na nakita ni Isaiah ang Dios na nakaupo sa kanyang throne,
Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1:1, 26) - Nakita nya in a vision ang Dios nakaupo sa throne nya (or ayon pa sa doktrina nyong INC na Vision = Dream kuno, di ba?
Micaiah (1 Kings 22:19) - Same with Ezekiel and Isaiah sits on His Throne
Job (Job 42:5) - His declaration, "My eye sees...".
John the Revelator (Revelation 4:2-3): Saw God on a throne in heaven

So, palagay mo ano nga pala ito nakikita nila? Hindi ba ito counted sa turo nyo na nakikita nila kung ano ang figure ng Dios? So para sa inyo ang turo na yan ay nakikita lang nila isang Billboard lang na nakalutang sa alapaap para di makita ang itsura ng Dios? NGEE! May ganun!

Okay, balik tayo. Paano ngayon natin solutionan ang sinabi ni John sa John 1:18 (No man hath seen God at any time) dahil halos siguro lahat ng prophet na nabangit sigurado naman siguro sila sa kanilang nakita. Will, the answer is simple. Read the entire John 1:17-18 and analyze kung sino ang tinutukoy ni John, kulayan ko para makita mo explaination nito at di ka maguluhan at nakakahiya naman sayo VIP ka pa naman -

17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. - (Subjects)
18 No man hath seen God at any time; ("at any time" basically kasama dyan ang OLD TESTAMENT)
the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, (Highlights as Emphasis)
he (Jesus Christ on the Emphasis) hath declared him (the Prophet on the Subject).

Did you catch it, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? So John plainly explained that what the Prophet in the Old Testament saw, or even right after, until the Book of Revelation, they saw the Son who represents the Father. Kaya nga tinanong kita sa debate kung anong reason kung bakit pa nagdasal si kristo sabay sabi na makilala ang Ama na Tunay na Dios pero di mo naman pala alam ang explaination. Check mo ulit itong link para maalala mo - (https://bustillo-family.blogspot.com/2025/12/exchanges-details.html)

Dahil nakikita nila at ayon sa declaration ni John na ang Anak na si Christo ang nagpakita, ito yung sinasabi ko kanina na Divine Investiture of Authority at sa simply tawag nito in LDS terminology ay Pre-mortal Christ na kinikilalang si Jehovah sa Old Testament. So basically, nakausap na nila si Christo noon pa at sya mismo ang nag-guide sa kanila in behalf of the Father or under the direction of the Father since ang Ama naman talaga ang sinusunod and Christ was one with the Father (John 10:30). There are also reasons, why God chose to delegate the work to his Son that the Jews may believe that there is only One God to worship and that we understand that Monothiesm as they the Jews believe may come to the knowledge of Monolatry which means that God as the Father whom we worship is the one true God without denying that existence of Christ, who was also the God of the Old Testament (Isaiah 9:6), the God who will build his Church (Matthew 16:18) and the God who offers this world to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24-28).

If this is not enough, then let's go ahead sa ibang biblical verses to prove my claim. Let's use this scripture from Christ's words and let's get the important doctrine that Christ taught about his nature and existence before he was born. The Scripture was in Matthew 22:41-45, and I'll use the NIV version, so it will be easy for you to understand Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. Let's jump in -

Whose Son Is the Messiah?
41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,

42 “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?”
“The son of David,” they replied.
43 He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’? For he says,
44 “‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies
under your feet.”’
45 If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?”
46 No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.

Christ was talking about the Psalm of David found in Psalm 110:1. Sa verses na binigay ko sa taas ay simply lang ang Discussion nila at binigyan sila ng challenge ni Christo na kung ang Messiah ay ang Anak ni David bakit ngayon si David ay tinawag nya ito Lord o Panginoon. Does it make sense to you, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? Bakit kaya ano? Dati naba si Christo sa panahon ni David, o kaya nauna kay David? At kung si Kristo ang Anak ni David, sino bang Lord ang kinilala ni David sa Psalm 110:1? Ang Ama ba? Ngee! Nilinaw nga ni Kristo na ang Messiah ay maipanganak sa lineage ni David at parehong Messiah or Lord na kinikilala sa Psalm 110:1? Malamang siguro kapag nag-Bible Study kay Skip nyo yan para di sasakit ulo nyo Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. Take Note: Walang ibang Lord na kinikilala ang Old Testament noon kundi ang Jehovah.

Dagdagan pa natin para marami tayo matutunan. John 8:48-59, this is an intense exchange with Christ and the Jewish Leader, and they try to dispute Christ about his work, na ang Devil was with him since alam naman na siguro natin regarding sa kanyang mga ginagawa during his ministry. The Jews opposed his works at hindi daw ito sumunod Laws, so the Jews thought that Christ was indeed galing sa Devil or possessed by the Devil. We will not go through sa lahat ng context regarding this Chapter, but if you have time to review Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, basahin mo nalang para hindi masyado mahaba at nakakahiya naman sayo. Okay, So Let's get straight to the point, -

54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.
55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word.
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

Now what do we have here? Siguro magtanong ka kung anong meron at parang wala lang sa teaching ng INC at skip nyo na naman yan. Basic lang, at magstart tayo dyan sa pinaka basic. Ang kinikilala ng mga Judio na Dios na tinawag ni Christo na Ama ay sya ang nag-luwalhati kay Christo. Hindi nila ito nakilala pero magtaka kayo bakit nasabi ni Kristo ito? Hindi nila kilala na mismo sa mga nakasulat sa kanilang batas or doctrina ay tinuturo na nila na ang Dios na nagiisa. May alam ka ba kung bakit Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? Pero di na tayo mag-fucos dyan at palagay ko wala ka ring matinong sagot kung tatanungin kita. After a few words, Christ said that Abraham already knew Christ and his earthly life. Natural kung ikaw ba namang hindi naniniwala na dati nang kilala ni Abraham si Christo at di naman sila niniwala na may Christo na noon, sasabihin mo talaga nilang "Wala ka pa sa 50 edad nakita mo na si Abraham! Or sa ibang salita ang edad mo which is under 50 years old ay hindi pa sapat para makita si Abraham". Actually, it is a rhetorical argument since 50 years old is valued to be old enough to earn wisdom, full maturity, be valued or respected in their statement, since it's also the age of completion of active service. Di mo alam yan ano, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? So meaning para sa kanila, mga sinasabi ni Christ is more like of a Madman who speaks Madness, kaya nga nasabi pa nila na demon possessed si Christo. But when Christ insisted and told them that “before Abraham was born, I am!” dito na sila nagalit. And for what reason? Dahil ba na sinasabi ni Christo na existed na siya noon, together with the Prophets, or maybe something else, like maybe Christ was more valued on the days of Abraham and the rest of the Prophets? Also, there is no reason for them to stone Christ just to say such words, dahil isa dyan ay merong part sa Jewish belief that the souls God created before they came to word existed long before they were born, which is the Talmudic and Kabbalistic Traditions na naniniwala sila in Pre-existing of Soul na may pinaglagyan na tinatawag The Guf (Treasury of Souls). So Christ, though hindi sya nagtuturo ng Talmudic and Kabbalistic, is simply just consistent with his words in accordance with the known traditions that before Abraham was born, their souls were already there na nagkasama-sama, and for sure they knew who Christ was. So either way, if Christ teaches it or not, or simply made clear his doctrine about the laws and the prophets, there's no reason for them to stone him, so the question is, bakit pa siya babatuhin eh tradition and teaching na nila yan? The answer was right there in the words he used, which is "I am". This is actually heavy words para sa kanily, for some reasons that Christ uses the word seems obvious on their understanding that He meant to say that Christ was the "Eternal I AM" which is a clear reference to Exodus 3:14, the very reason why these angry Jews want to stone him dahil qualified sya to be stoned to death for blasphemy under Leviticus 24:16. The name Eternal I AM which is equevalent to the Tetragrammaton (YHWH יהוה) and of course the Jewish Tradition should only mention this name once in a year by a High Priest in the Holy of Holiest and 10 times at the Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) by the same High Priest. Kaya napaka sagrado nito at hindi basta-basta nalang bangitin kaya nga hindi na nila ito binabangit at pinalitan nalang ng Adonai "My Lord" sa pagdasal at HaShem "The Name" naman on conversation. Pero nagawa ni Christo ipakilala kung sino sya, so sino ba naman hindi magalit yan kung pinakilala ni Christo na sya pala yun. Baka ikaw magalit karin Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. LOL!

Now, we already established that Christ was the same being that was known by the prophets of Old, and of course, the Savior, the Redeemer, the Creator, as the scripture uses to know him. So why do we question the Scripture about his son, who was the heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2), Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? Why do we question Christ that through him and for him all things were created? Couldn't the Father create a world without Christ? And it gets more complicated. Mas lalo ka lang maguluhan kung hangang dyan lang ang limitation mo sa kaalaman ng banal na kasulatan.

There are also other references pero hindi ko na masyado habaan dito posibly it will be added on Part 2, at plan ko hati-hatiin ito at masyado mahaba, hoping na itong si Jose Rodelio Retome Rata may maisagot sa kanilang Bible Study.

According to the teachings of LDS-Christ created the heavens and the earth but according to the teachings of the Bible the Father alone is the Creator of all things.

As state on your quote, the Father did through Christ under his direction, baka di mo naintindihan ang difference. The Father is the one who made the Plan, executes it through Christ, kaya nga nilinaw sa panimula ng John 1:1-4 na kasama na ng Dios si Kristo. Balikan mo nalang basahin ang part na yan sa taas. If you insist the show me your commentary about my statement and prove it wrong the we will move forward sa part 2. Anyway, moving forward, check out the verses below about the existence of Christ with the Father. I had chosen one and maybe madagdagan pa on part 2.

John 1 - English Standard Version
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

So was Christ present with the Father. Ang palusot nyo dyan nasa utak palang ng Dios si Christo. Sure ka ba na yan ang ibig sabihin ng context ayon sa sinasabi ni John? If so, then the rest of Christ's words regarding his existence gaya ng nabangit ko na nauna ay hindi totoo, which basically means Christ is not telling the Truth, that He was with the Father, dahil nga ang Christo nakilala nyo ginawa lang ng Dios na luwalhatiin o iangat. Kung sa ibang termino pa binigyan lang ng Position or tinaas lang ang Rank but the nature ay tao pa din. Palagay mo ba Jose Rodelio Retome Rata hindi magulo? Bakit ginawa lang nya kay Christo yan, bat hindi sa lahat? Think daw.

So, if you are selective in reading the Scriptures, you will never learn and understand the message inside the Book. Kaya kung magbasa ka wag kang magcherry-picked lang ng idea na gusto mo without knowing the context. You should understand the very root and how it was delivered, and the understanding of the author of the text. Kung ganyan lang style mo Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, baka tatanda ka nalang na walang natutunan.

1 Corinthians 8:4,6 King James Version
4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
1 Corinthians 8:6 Good News Translation
6 yet there is for us only one God, the Father, who is the Creator of all things and for whom we live; and there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created and through whom we live.

Actually, the message was about the offering to idols or false gods. Alam mo naman siguro kung gaano ka jealus ang Dios sa bagay na yan. Natural God will prove his power and Dominion over other false gods. Also This simply helps us understand that Christ and the Father were distince being. Meaning they are not one person. The Father is Greater that Christ, that's why to avoid confusing titles we call God our Father and Lord Jesus Christ. But actually, both the Father and the Son hold the same title. Paul is just making it clear that they were different. If you think I missed something, then go back and read my statement above to clarify my claim.

God alone which is the Father is the Creator of all things no one help him.

Isaiah 44:24 - Good News Translation
24 “I am the Lord, your savior;
I am the one who created you.
I am the Lord, the Creator of all things.
I alone stretched out the heavens;
when I made the earth, no one helped me.

If you just select only the Good part using that Translation without knowing the Context of the Scriptures, you will end up problematic. Christ was also the Lord, so what gives? Christ was also the Savior, so what gives? Christ also created all things, so what gives? But reading prior verse will help you realized youre just simply ignorant of the truth. God talks about idolatry, and we all know that God is a Jealous God; of course, God would want his people to shift from a different belief and idolatry, especially during this time while they were in exile or under Babelonian Governance. Buti nalang di mo tinuloy hangang huli at makilala mo si Felix Manalo na magrestore sa mga Judio sa Lupang Pangako.

Isaiah 64:4,8 - Good News Translation
4 No one has ever seen or heard of a God like you, who does such deeds for those who put their hope in him.
8 But you are our father, Lord. We are like clay, and you are like the potter. You created us,

Just as I have said, kung hangang cherry pick lang ang ginagawa mo, hinding hindi ka matututu kung ano ang contexto sa nakasulat. Remember, the Old Testament believed in just one God as the only being they worshiped or knew to be the Lord of all things, but this doesn't say anything about Christ being the creator. Of course, Christ was not yet known during this time, and Isaiah's words only show that God was simply the creator. You must also consider that Christ, as the Scripture said in Colossians 2:9, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily," God the Father and Christ were one in their purpose, and Christ clearly states that in his teaching. So do we need to question Isaiah vs Christ just because they were inconsistent in their teachings? Who will you choose?

It is clear that the Father alone is the Creator of all things.
Therefore the teachings of LDS that Christ was the Creator of the heavens and of the earth is a big lie.

No, it's not. Simply You just missed the point of the Bible and tried to use your own ideology, thinking it was right by just selecting the best of your collection. This is simply a failed copy-paste program of yours, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. Sorry, you're wrong, and to be clear. We don't think the scripture is wrong at some point, but your interpretation and understand about the scripture is obviously too light. Try again Next time.

Check out other commentary below -

Vincent's Word Studies

Was, I am (γενέσθαι, ἐγώ εἰμι)
It is important to observe the distinction between the two verbs. Abraham's life was under the conditions of time, and therefore had a temporal beginning. Hence, Abraham came into being, or was born (γενέσθαι). Jesus' life was from and to eternity. Hence the formula for absolute, timeless existence, I am (ἐγώ εἰμι). See on John 1:3; see on John 7:34.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Verily, verily - This is an expression used only in John. It is a strong affirmation denoting particularly the great importance of what was about to be affirmed. See the notes at John 3:5.
Before Abraham was - Before Abraham lived.
I am - The expression I am, though in the present tense, is clearly designed to refer to a past time. Thus, in Psalm 90:2, "From everlasting to everlasting thou art God." Applied to God, it denotes continued existence without respect to time, so far as he is concerned. We divide time into the past, the present, and the future. The expression, applied to God, denotes that he does not measure his existence in this manner, but that the word by which we express the present denotes his continued and unchanging existence. Hence, he assumes it as his name, "I AM," and "I AM that I AM," Exodus 3:14. Compare Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 47:8. There is a remarkable similarity between the expression employed by Jesus in this place and that used in Exodus to denote the name of God. The manner in which Jesus used it would strikingly suggest the application of the same language to God. The question here was about his pre-existence. The objection of the Jews was that he was not 50 years old, and could not, therefore, have seen Abraham. Jesus replied to that that he existed before Abraham. As in his human nature he was not yet 50 years old, and could not, as a man, have existed before Abraham, this declaration must be referred to another nature; and the passage proves that, while he was a man, he was also endowed with another nature existing before Abraham, and to which he applied the term (familiar to the Jews as expressive of the existence of God) I AM; and this declaration corresponds to the affirmation of John Joh 1:1, that he was in the beginning with God, and was God. This affirmation of Jesus is one of the proofs on which John relies to prove that he was the Messiah John 20:31, to establish which was the design of writing this book.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

58. Before Abraham was, I am—The words rendered "was" and "am" are quite different. The one clause means, "Abraham was brought into being"; the other, "I exist." The statement therefore is not that Christ came into existence before Abraham did (as Arians affirm is the meaning), but that He never came into being at all, but existed before Abraham had a being; in other words, existed before creation, or eternally (as Joh 1:1). In that sense the Jews plainly understood Him, since "then took they up stones to cast at Him," just as they had before done when they saw that He made Himself equal with God (Joh 5:18).

Expositor's Greek Testament

John 8:58. The misunderstanding of His words elicits from Jesus the statement: πρὶν Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγώ εἰμι. “Before Abraham was born I am.” “Antequam Abraham fieret, Ego sum,” Vulgate. Plummer aptly compares Psalm 90:2, πρὸ τοῦ ὄρη γενηθῆναι … σὺ εἶ. Before Abraham came into existence I am, eternally existent. No stronger affirmation of pre-existence occurs, and Beyschlag’s subtle attempt to evade the meaning is unsuccessful.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

58. Before Abraham was, I am] Here our translators have lamentably gone back from earlier translations. Cranmer has, ‘Ere Abraham was born, I am;’ and the Rhemish, ‘Before that Abraham was made, I am,’ following the Vulgate, Antequam Abraham fieret, Ego sum. See notes on ‘was’ in John 1:1; John 1:6. ‘I am’ denotes absolute existence, and in this passage clearly involves the pre-existence and Divinity of Christ, as the Jews see. Comp. John 8:24; John 8:28; Revelation 1:4; Revelation 1:8; and see on John 8:24.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 58. - The reply of Jesus to this taunt is one of the most surprising and baffling kind on any hypothesis of our Lord's consciousness being limited as that of all other of the sons of men. He gives the solemn emphasis of the Αμὴν ἀμὴν once more - Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born (came into being), I am. Abraham came into existence by birth (the Vulgate translates, Antequam fierat Abraham Ego sum): I am. Numerous attempts have been made to explain this climacteric utterance on some humanistic theory. The contrast is very remarkable between γενέσθαι and εἰμι. Jesus Christ declared his own timeless existence to have been in his consciousness before Abraham came into being at all. The "I am" reminds us repeatedly, when used by Jesus, of the "I AM THAT I AM" of Exodus 3:14, and the "thou art" of Psalm 90. (89:2, LXX.); Psalms 102:28. His human consciousness gave utterance to the awful depths of the eternal Ego. Now, some critics have limited it in its meaning to "I existed in the counsel of God."

Tag ka ng Tag sa akin - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

ITINUTURO NG MGA MORMON-LDS NA NAPARITO NA SI CRISTO NOONG UNANG SIGLO PA AT NAPAKITA SA IBANG MGA TUPA NILA DOON SA ANCIENT AMERICA - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

OK, ito na naman tayo at tagalogin ko na at may problema pala ito sa comprehension ang VIP natin na kaibigan. Kaya ito gawin na natin sa Tagalog na may halong kunting English. Tingnan nga natin ngayon kung ano na naman pinagsasabi ng ating matalik na kaibigan na si Jose Rodelio Retome Rata kung may bago na naman ba tayong matutunan. Hala sige pagtagbaw -

Matthew 24:3 - King James Version
3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
[3 At samantalang siya'y nakaupo sa bundok ng mga Olivo, ay nagsilapit sa kaniya ng bukod ang mga alagad, na nagsisipagsabi, Sabihin mo sa amin, kailan mangyayari ang mga bagay na ito? at ano ang magiging tanda ng iyong pagparito, at ng katapusan ng sanglibutan?]
ITINATANONG NG MGA ALAGAD KUNG ANO ANG TANDA NG PAGPARITO NI CRISTO AT NG KAPUSAN NG SANLIBUTAN. SAMAKATUWID-ANG MULING PAGPARITO NI CRISTO AY KATAPUSAN NA NG SANLIBUTAN SAPAGKAT SIYA ANG HINIRANG NG DIOS PARA HUKUMAN ANG MUNDO.

Nothing seems unusual. May bago ba? O baka gusto mo lang magcopy-paste, yung mema lang para may laman kunyari. Matthew 24 was simply his apocalyptic statement during his sermon in Mount Olive, also known as the Olivet Discourse. So ano bang gusto iparating ng ating kaibigan nito? Natural isa itong teachings ni Jesus Christ sa mga mangyayari sa hinaharap para matulungan ang mga early believers about sa kanyang pangalawang pagparito. Problema nga lang dito ni Jose Rodelio Retome Rata mukhang akala siguro nito hindi namin alam at yun na nga Book of Mormon lang daw binabasa namin kaya ayon mga post nya copy paste sa bible thinking di namin alam. Kakahiya naman sayo Jose.

Acts 17:31 - King James Version
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
SA MULING PAGPARITO NI CRISTO NA SIYANG ARAW NG PAGHUHUKOM AY MASUSUNOG ANG BUONG LUPA.

Okay, so yan ba yung pinaglatad mo O dito na tayo sa 2 Peter. Nakalimutan mo yata ang Acts 17:13 o kasama na yan sa nauna? Confusing ka magcopy paste basta-basta mo nalang iwan na wala man lang malinaw na paliwanag sa doktrina nyo. Acts 17 simply states that there is a day that was set to judge the world, and no question about it, so para saan ito?

2 Peter 3:7 - King James Version
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
KAYA NGA AYON KAY APOSTOL PABLO PAPARITO SI CRISTO SA NAGLILIYAB NA APOY.

Okay, so dito na tayo. This is actually a normal teaching sa iba't-ibang secta at normally kung nagbabasa ka ng bibliya nakikita mo na to na part kung saan ang mga elements sa mundo ay magunaw sa subrang init. This is not actually new, nakikita naman na siguro ang unti-unting resulta ng climate natin ngayon, which basically walang problema if you present it as if it will come soon before the second coming. Malinaw naman sigur sa verse 10 "the Lord will come as a thief in the night" which means no man will ever know the exact timing. So for me, walang sense kung di mo naman pinapaliwanag ng maayos. Basta ka nalang humuhugot pero walang namang kinalaman sa pinaguusapan, ano ito mema lang?

2 Thessalonians 1:5-8 - King James Version
5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:
6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
YAN ANG MANGYAYARI SA MULING PAGPARITO NI CRISTO.

So ano to dugtong lang ba? Parang wala naman patunguhan tong post mo at wala naman akong nakitang contradiction regarding sa teaching ng simbahan regarding sa kanyang pangalawang pagparito. Unless kung meron kang gusto ipaabot na di kami naniniwala nyan. O baka meron kang nakitang turo na salungat sa turo sa pinaglalatad mo. Sa ngayon nakikita ko dito NONESENSE na commentary tapos ang proud mo sa sarili mo na nagpost ka ng ang hahaba na wala man lang laman. Ano ba ito Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, mema nalang ba?

ITINUTURO NG MGA MORMON-LDS NA NAPARITO NA SI CRISTO NOONG UNANG SIGLO PA AT NAPAKITA SA IBANG MGA TUPA NILA DOON SA ANCIENT AMERICA.
3 NEPHI 11:8-10,12-15
8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.
9 And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying:
10 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world.
12 And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into heaven.
13 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto them saying:
14 Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.
15 And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come.

Oh, dito tayo ngayon. Sige tingnan nga natin kung ano ba ang pinagsasabi ng ating VIP na si Jose Rodelio Retome Rata kung ano bang contradiction dito. Nako naman! kung Mabasa mo ang 3 Nephi 11, regarding ito sa time na nabuhay muli si Kristo at during this time andito pa siya sa mundo para ipakita nya sa mga naniniwala sa kanya na Buhay sya. At dahil ba dumaan sya sa Langit para magpakita din sa mga tao sa ibang lugar (gaya ng mga tao sa America) Second Coming na Agad? Sure ka ba sa pinagsasabi mo. Tandaan mo Jose Rodelio Retome Rata 40 days si Christo nagminister bago sya bumalik sa Ama -

Acts 1:3 (New International Version) After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.

So ang Gusto mo palang mangyari dito everytime sya magpakita sa mga naniniwala nya second coming pala yun? Example dito mga nasa list sa baba (More of this at 1 Corinthians 15) -

Road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35, Mark 16:12-13) - So ibig pala sabihin nito Second Coming na dahil Nagpakita sya sa mga naniniwala sa kanya at pinatunayan nya na Buhay sya? Sige daw, ipaliwanag mo at dito sa pangyayari na to nagpakita sya ng biglaan at walang nakakakilala sa kanya. So palagay mo Second Coming na ito, tama?
Nagpakita kay Simon Peter (Luke 24:34, 1 Corinthians 15:5) - So, paano na yan at nagpakita din sya kay Peter, Second Coming narin ba 'to?
The Ten Disciples (Upper Room - No Thomas) Luke 24:36-43, John 20:19-25, Mark 16:14 - Itong nagpakita siya sa ibang tagasunod nya na wala pa si Thomas, Second Coming narin ba? So ilan ba ang second Coming sayo Jose?
The Eleven Disciples (Upper Room - With Thomas) John 20:26-29, 1 Corinthians 15:5 - Ngayon ito nandito na si Thomas, sure na siguto ito na Second Coming sayo at pangalawang beses na sya nagpakita sa Apostoles nya nadagdagan nga lang ngayon at dito na si Thomas. So, Paano ba yan, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? Ilang Second Coming na ba?
Seven Disciples at Sea of Galilee (John 21:1-14) - Baka it Second Coming na din para sayo Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. Di sya nakilala dito pero nakagawa pa ng Himala. So, Second Coming narin ba to?
On a Mountain in Galilee (Matthew 28:16-20) - Palagay ko ito na talaga ang Second Coming dahil ito yung huling instruction nya sa mga apostoles para maikalat ang kanyang ebanghelyo. So Second Coming din ito para sayo?
500 Followers 1 Corinthians 15:6 - Malamang ito yung Sure na second Coming dahil ang daming nakakakita, palagay ko sa mga ito mapatunayan mo na ang Second Coming dahil nagpakita muli si Christo sa kanila.
James Christ Brother- 1 Corinthians 15:7 - Paano ito, nagpakita sya sa kanyang kapatid na si James? So, para sayo Second Coming na din, Tama ba Jose Rodelio Retome Rata?
Paul (on Road to Damascus) Acts 9:1-9, 1 Corinthians 15:8 - Ito Familiar naman siguro itong kwento ni Pablo na confusing para sa inyo. So, Second Coming na din siguro ito at nagpakita sya at nagsalita kay Pablo. Baka sure ball na to?

Sige nga isaisahin mo mga yan at ibat-ibang second coming yan. So paano mo mapaliwanag ngayon yan sa mga pinaglalatad mo? Kita mo kung gaano ka kahina kung biblical lang usapan. Di porket nagpakita si Christo Second Coming na. Feeling mo kasi makakita ka lang ng semilar thinking mo yun na agad, kapag ganyan ang INC thinking na yan ay madaling kayo mauto.

HALATADO ANG KASINUNGALINGAN NG PROPETA NILANG SUMULAT NG BOOK OF MORMON DAHIL HINDI PA NAPARITONG-MULI SI CRISTO.

Halatadong Walang kang Alam at pinagpopost mo MEMA lang ba para kunyari may laman pero napatunayan din na walang sense ang pinaglalatad mo. Klarong-klaro na pambata lang ang alam mo pagdating sa diskusyon.

NAKIKIPAG-USAP ANG DIOS KAY MOISES NG MUKHAAN SA PAMAMAGITAN NG HALIGING ULAP - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

Now, here we go again. Another empty Eisegesis from our friend Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, who seems to be the Great Defender of the INC doctrine. We'll see what we can get and how his Eisegesis fits in biblical standards. Here we go -

Exodo 33:9-11,20 - Ang Dating Biblia (1905)
9 At nangyari, pagka si Moises ay pumapasok sa Tolda ay bumababa ang haliging ulap at tumitigil sa pintuan ng Tolda ang Panginoon ay nakikipagsalitaan kay Moises.
10 At nakikita ng buong bayan ang haliging ulap at tumitigil sa pintuan ng Tolda; at ang buong bayan ay tumitindig at sumasamba, na bawa't isa'y sa tabi ng pintuan ng kaniyang tolda.
11 At nakikipagsalitaan ang Panginoon kay Moises ng mukhaan, gaya ng isang taong nakikipagsalitaan sa kaniyang kaibigan. At siya'y bumabalik uli sa kampamento, datapuwa't ang kaniyang tagapangasiwang si Josue, na anak ni Nun, na may kabataan pa, ay hindi umaalis sa Tolda.
20 At kaniyang sinabi, Hindi mo makikita ang aking mukha: sapagka't hindi maaaring makita ako ng tao at mabuhay.
KLARO SA MGA TALATANG IYAN, NAKIKIPAG-USAP ANG DIOS KAY MOISES NG MUKHAAN SA PAMAMAGITAN NG HALIGING ULAP. KLARO DIN NA HINDI NAKIKITA NI MOISES ANG MUKHA NG DIOS DAHIL MAMAMATAY SI MOISES.

Yes, I can see that. Everyone can see that, and I guess this was something that you wanna chopped a selected verse, because the rest of the verses will simply contradict themselves. Let's go ahead and read the rest of it, shall we? Exodus 33:17,20-23

17 And the Lord said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.

...

20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

21 And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock:
22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.

Seems like more interesting than your cherry-picked ideology, see how the Lord told Moses to see that He, as a God, has a body part visible to Moses. Of course, his face was supposed to be hidden for some reasons, but that doesn't say God has no physical form. We are indeed created in his likeness in his own image, which simply means that the human figure we have now was simply the same physical figure as God. Interesting, right, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? You may think this seems a contradiction in the next verses, while we already established that God shows his face in verse 11, and the next succeeding verse seems confusing. But the explainations on God's glory to its physical appearance are different. As Latter-day Saints, we believe that if God wanted to show his physical appearance, a man couldn't see it in a natural eye, but rather he needs to be transfigured. This was a different topic, so we will just respond to what our VIP friend wants to learn.

SAMAKATUWID-HINDI LITERAL NA NAKIKITA NI MOISES ANG MUKHA NG DIOS KUNDI NAG-UUSAP SILA NG HARAPAHARAPAN GAYA NG ISANG TAONG NAKIKIPAGSALITAAN SA KANYANG KAIBIGAN ANG DIOS MEANING ITINULAD LANG SA ISANG TAONG NAKIKIPAGSALITAAN SA KANYANG KAIBIGAN ANG DIOS HINDI SIYA ANG TAONG PINAGTULARAN.

OK, or maybe, so, how are you gonna explain the rest of the verses that I had posted? How was it possible that God could simply use a hand to cover Moses' eyes so he wouldn't perish at his sight? Was it the way you understood the scripture by simply chopping out some other verses? Good to know.

Exodo 33:11 - Ang Dating Biblia (1905)
11 At nakikipagsalitaan ang Panginoon kay Moises ng mukhaan, gaya ng isang taong nakikipagsalitaan sa kaniyang kaibigan. At siya'y bumabalik uli sa kampamento, datapuwa't ang kaniyang tagapangasiwang si Josue, na anak ni Nun, na may kabataan pa, ay hindi umaalis sa Tolda.
INUNAWA ITO NG ISANG MORMON-LDS NA ISANG LITERAL NA TEACHER AT SEMINARY TEACHER SA RELIHIYON NILA NA LITERAL NA ISANG TAO ANG DIOS.
NAKAKAHIYA ANG PAGKA-TEACHER NG TAONG ITO!

Just another Name-Calling Strategy to get the attention of the others and to humiliate the opposers, not even addressing the issue. What a shame! I'll help you out on that one

GINAGAMIT NIYA ANG TALATANG ITO PARA ISANGGALANG ANG ARAL NILA NA HINDI DAW NILA ITINUTURO NA ISANG 'MAN O TAO' SI JESUS NA BUMABABA MULA SA LANGIT.

This is actually literal; God can simply show his physical figure to whoever he wants if it's necessary to obtain faith in him or to show his greatness. Why would you limit God's capability by your own interpretations not even align biblically? This is not actually a contradiction, but rather God is simply avoiding his Glory to be in contact with the human eye that might end up their lives since his Glory is not just a natural light of the sun that you can simply say is just a bright light. For me, this glory was as the succeeding verses show that God wants Moses, his servant, to avoid looking on. like on verse 18 -

Exodus 33:18 And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.

But God did not even attempt to make it to be seen by Moses -

Exodus 33:22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:

So, it is not actually his physical appearance that is deadly, but the entire Glory of God that could end the life of Moses. The direct eye contact from man or Moses to God, as I have said, could end his life, for God's is full of Glory -

Matthew 6:22-23 (MSG Version) Your eyes are windows into your body. If you open your eyes wide in wonder and belief, your body fills up with light. If you live squinty-eyed in greed and distrust, your body is a musty cellar. If you pull the blinds on your windows, what a dark life you will have!

I don't think this is hard to understand, or maybe you don't want to understand, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. To me, I could simply say that you limit your understand about the nature of God, and in those limitations, your doctrine fails. Your god cannot make himself known and do whatever he wants, while my God can do all things beyond human imaginations can do. If God wanted to be shown or not, it is his will to do that, not your ideology. Your poor and powerless god can't even make himself appear to Felix Manalo, so why are you still there on your bigotry?

Take note of the following verses he used below. I'm already laughing at this point. Why would you choose this one? Come on, bro, do something better than this one; this made my day. LOL!

3 NEPHI 11:8-10,12-15
8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.
9 And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying:
10 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world.
12 And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into heaven.
13 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto them saying:
14 Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.
15 And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come.

Seriously? Just because you see the phrase or word Man you simply address it as a normal person in an unexplained phenomenon? Do you really read the scriptures that way? Come on, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, there must be a good explanation for that one, rather than simply quoting and stating it as if it were just an underrated event. If you see someone who jump of the 20-story building and survived on the fall, would you call him a "God falls from the Building"? Will maybe, because he survived, but for a normal person, of course not, a normal person would simply call someone he didn't know a Man, a Woman, a Child, and so on. If (in this event) it were an angel, a demon, or a prophet, and let's say a God or whatever, to someone who could simply distinguish a human form descending from above, why would they call it another being if they had seen a being that simply looks like a human? Does God have a different physical figure so you can easily say it is God without knowing what it was? So far, I found your post so hilarious and poor.

Glen Mari R. Lamis-KAHIT MAGLUPASAY KAPA KLARO ANG TURO NG AKLAT NINYO NA TAO SI JESUS NA NAKIKITA NG IBANG MGA TUPA NINYO NA BUMABABA MULA SA LANGIT NA BIGLANG ITINURO NG AKLAT NINYO NA DIOS NG BUONG DAIGDIG SI JESUS KAYA SALUNGATAN DIBA SEMINARY TEACHER?

And look at you thinking you had won something in a poor study. What a joke! Was there any better than this one? I only cover some parts of your poor study, not even the entire bible that would simply disaggree on your ideology. The Bible would simply laugh at you for the way you understood the context. Nice try, but you fail.

List of link Label with Saraijah

✅

About Saraijah Sisgon Bustillo

✅

Label with Next & Previos Button

AALISIN ANG SAGOT - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

NABASA BA NINYO ANG POST KO TUNGKOL SA REVELATION 7:2-3 BAGO KAYO MAGNGAWA MGA LDS KONO? - By Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Spamming Meme - Isisi mo sa iba para ikaw ang bida

✅

Question or Statement? - Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

Ok, so tell me; What did I claim? Do you know the difference between a question and a statement?

Meme Collection by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

ITONG MGA MORMON NAGTUTURO NG MGA BAGAY NA DI NILA NAUUNAWAAN. - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

ITONG MGA MORMON NAGTUTURO NG MGA BAGAY NA DI NILA NAUUNAWAAN.
1 Timothy 1:7 - King James Version
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

Oh really? So, what was 1 Timothy 1:7 all about? Does it include your accusation, or more accurately, bigoted criticisms? Tell us about the context.

DI NILA NAUUNAWAAN ITONG NASA 2CORINTO 12:2.
2 Corinthians 12:2 - King James Version
2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

Now, we'll see what we can learn about his INC ideology to see what he really knows about it. Let's go, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata.

ANG TINUTUKOY DIYAN NA THIRD HEAVEN AY ANG KINAROROONAN NG DIOS.
Psalm 115:3 - King James Version
3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.

Now, what a laughable claim. First of all, Paul never went back to any Old Testament text about his vision. Read verses 1-2 where he plainly didn't know why he received such a vision, and not even the Scripture they had that day could relate the vision he saw, but you claim it was somewhere in the Old Testament text, especially Psalm 115:3, seriously? Was it part of your doctrine? Did Manalo receive that answer to Paul's vision by just running through some hocus pocus text of the scripture? Come on!

ANG IKALAWANG LANGIT NAMAN AY ANG KULAY ASUL NA YAN NA PARANG TOLDA.
Isaiah 40:22 - King James Version
22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

This has nothing to do with your "Italian Flag"; your bigotry simply tells you you're misquoting the scriptures.

Isaiah is portraying what an incredible and majestic God is in this verse and the whole chapter. God is represented as one who is so high above the earth that His viewpoint can be likened to that of a person who sees all the earth's inhabitants as tiny little creatures. The metaphor of God's laying out the universe like a cloth or a tent shows His might and the enormity of His making.

ANG UNANG LANGIT NAMAN AY ANG KALAWAKAN NA NILIKHA NG DIOS SA IKALAWANG ARAW NA TINAWAG NIYANG LANGIT.
Genesis 1:6-8 - King James Version
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Seriously? Do you have any scholarly studies to prove your claim? How many agree on that kind of ideology? As I have said, Paul didn't refer to any scriptural reference link in his vision. Paul understood the scripture plainly than you or even your INC ministers. The only solution in Paul's vision is to have the vision itself be revealed by a prophet, so who has it, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? Did Felix Manalo tell you that He received a vision from heaven to understand the meaning of Paul's Vision? Tell us more about it.

Again, Paul's vision wasn't yet revealed in his time and wasn't even linked in the Old Testament, as you perfectly misquoted. It was not about Christ's Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31), not even the "Many Mansions" Teaching of Christ (John 14:2-6), but rather Paul's word plainly said "He cannot Tell"; obviously, it wasn't written yet in the scripture in his time. So how come you have the answer on the Old Testament, where it wasn't even revealed yet? See how you clearly made things up using your poor study. Nice Try!

Other Commentary that might help you out, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata-

Benson Commentary

2 Corinthians 12:2-3. I knew a man in Christ — That is, a Christian. He must undoubtedly have meant himself, or the whole article had been quite foreign to his purpose. Indeed, that he meant himself is plain from 2 Corinthians 12:6-7. Fourteen years ago — So long, it seems, the apostle had concealed this extraordinary event; a circumstance which shows how little disposed he was to speak vauntingly of himself. Whether in the body — And by the intervention of its senses; or out of the body — And without any such intervention, the things which I saw and heard were communicated to me; I know not — It is equally possible with God to present distant things to the imagination in the body, as if the soul were absent from it, and present with them, as seems to have been the case with Ezekiel in the visions mentioned Ezekiel 11:24, and Ezekiel 37:1; and with John in those recorded Revelation 17:3; Revelation 21:10; or, as the Spirit caught away Philip, (Acts 8:39,) to transport both soul and body for what time he pleases to heaven; or to transport the soul only thither for a season, and in the mean time to preserve the body fit for its re-entrance. But since the apostle himself did not know whether his soul was in his body when he had these visions, &c.; or whether one or both were actually in heaven; for us to inquire into that matter would be vain curiosity, and extreme folly. “It is of more importance to observe, that he supposed his spirit might be carried into the third heaven, and into paradise, without his body. For, from his making such a supposition, it is plain he believed his spirit could exist out of his body; and that, by the operation of God, it could be made to hear and see, without the intervention of his bodily organs.” Such a one caught up into the third heaven — The habitation of the divine glory, far above the aerial and the starry heavens. For, “in the language of the Jews, the first heaven is the region of the air, where the birds fly, which therefore are called the fowls of heaven. The second heaven is that part of space in which the stars are. This was called, by the Jews, the heaven of heavens. See 1 Kings 8:27. The third heaven is the seat of God, and of the holy angels, into which Christ ascended after his resurrection, but which is not the object of men’s senses, as the other heavens are.”

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary 12:1-6 There can be no doubt the apostle speaks of himself. Whether heavenly things were brought down to him, while his body was in a trance, as in the case of ancient prophets; or whether his soul was dislodged from the body for a time, and taken up into heaven, or whether he was taken up, body and soul together, he knew not. We are not capable, nor is it fit we should yet know, the particulars of that glorious place and state. He did not attempt to publish to the world what he had heard there, but he set forth the doctrine of Christ. On that foundation the church is built, and on that we must build our faith and hope. And while this teaches us to enlarge our expectations of the glory that shall be revealed, it should render us contented with the usual methods of learning the truth and will of God.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
To the third heaven - The Jews sometimes speak of seven heavens, and Muhammed has borrowed this idea from the Jews. But the Bible speaks of but three heavens, and among the Jews in the apostolic ages also the heavens were divided into three:
(1) The aerial, including the clouds and the atmosphere, the heavens above us, until we come to the stars.
(2) the starry heavens, the heavens in which the sun, moon, and stars appear to be situated.
(3) the heavens beyond the stars. That heaven was supposed to be the residence of God, of angels, and of holy spirits. It was this upper heaven, the dwelling-place of God, to which Paul was taken, and whose wonders he was permitted to behold - this region where God dwelt; where Christ was seated at the right hand of the Father, and where the spirits of the just were assembled. The fanciful opinions of the Jews about seven heavens may be seen detailed in Schoettgen or in Wetstein, by whom the principal passages from the Jewish writings relating to the subject have been collected. As their opinions throw no light on this passage, it is unnecessary to detail them here.

SA HULING ARAW BUBUHAYIN ANG MGA PATAY, SA ARAW NG PAGHUHUKOM - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Jose Rodelio Retome Rata - Keep Trying to disregard the Biblical Teaching

The life of Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

KLARO-DIYAN NA SA PAGBABALIK PA NI CRISTO TATANGGAP ANG TAO AYON SA KANYANG GINAWA. - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

The Rebuker is now the Protector - Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

From General Conference Message

✅

SI CRISTO ANG UNANG NABUHAY MULA SA MGA PATAY - By Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

1 Corinthians 15:20-23 - Pagkabuhay Muli issue ni Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Let's Examine - by Job Bautista

✅

ITONG MGA TALATA ANG NAGPAPATUNAY - By Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Kumita na ba Blog mo? - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Nagpakita Issue - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Concede Defeat Again - Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Walang alam sa Content and Context - Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Another Ja-Memes that has been made

✅

Masagot kaya sarili mong Tanong Jose?

✅

Hangal ang di Naniniwala sa Bible - by THE REBUKER

✅

Blog Reputation

My blog has been listed in some blog collection pages, but I didn't care about it until I found one that posted my Old Design. I forgot, and I never knew this was one of the designs that I made for so long, but now I replaced it with this one for no good reason, LOL! Will anyway, thanks to you for your support. I don't need any donations on my blog since I am doing this for a hobby, but if you have, why not? LOL!

Listed at blog ng mga Pinoy. Below was the precise address.
https://blogsngpinoy.blogspot.com/2017/07/jerry-bustillos-online-collection.html

Some other pagerank checkers. It's too slow at this time, but it's not a problem at all.

https://checkpagerank.net/index.php

Isaiah 46:11-13 It's not Cyrus - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

✅

Criticism's gone wrong

✅

Selected Content and be the victim - The Rebuker Style

✅

Ja Mes is running again.

✅

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

✅

Jose Rodelio Retome Rata - Di gumagana ang Common Sense

✅

Worship God in Spirit

✅

Funny Exchanges - Ja Mes

✅

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

✅

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

✅

Masyado ka lang talagang Weak at Low Standard, Ano pa ba?

✅

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

✅

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

✅

THE REBUKER and his Mythical Friends

✅

The David Lanz Collection - Madre De La Tierra

✅

The David Lanz Collection - Return to the Heart

✅

POEM - THE REBUKER

✅

Spending my Time

✅

Ordanita Temple Visit with Bulawen Saints

✅

RAISE ORGANIC CHICKEN

✅

APPLYING SAFETY MEASURES IN FARM OPERATIONS

✅

Father and Son

✅

Responding KUYA jay TV - Ang aral ng mga Mormon tungkol kay Cristo

✅

THE REBUKER: Quick Response List

✅

Red Alert 2: VS Computer Mode

✅

THE REBUKER: Fun Stuff

✅

Happy Birthday Saraijah

✅

Chat Me - THE REBUKER

Live Chat here. Post any comments in this Area

Journal Entry November 1: Finding Lost Souls in the Cemetery

✅

Responding THE REBUKER Part 4 - "IKAW LANG"

✅

Responding THE REBUKER - John 10:27-30 and Ephesians 4:6

✅

Responding THE REBUKER Part 3 - 1 Timothy 2:5

✅

Responding Stephan Reize - Sola Scriptura

✅

Silver Christmas Promo

✅

Scammer Alert

✅

Saraijah and her Mom in a Messenger

✅

Genshin Impact Gallery

✅

Classic Game Kung-Fu (Spartan X)

✅

Responding Linda Harrison Young and Joe Rich - Graven Image

✅

Responding THE REBUKER Part 2 - Christ not God Issue

✅

Conversation with THE REBUKER - Don't Add or Diminished the Scripture (End of Discussion)

✅

Responding THE REBUKER Part 1 - Don't Add or Diminish Issue (Case Closed)

✅

About the Critics: Jose Rodelio Retome Rata aka THE REBUKER

About the Critics:
Known as "THE REBUKER," pero may nag-disclose ng identity niya sa Social Media. Siya ay nagtatago ng kanyang pangalan for no good reason, possibly gumagamit ng dummy account para atakihin at pintasan ang iba't-ibang religious affiliations. Siguro okay lang sana kung constructive criticism, pero ang problema kay THE REBUKER ay puro Name-Calling, Rude Comments, Ad Hominem attacks, at Character Assassinations lang ang ginagawa niya na lumalabag pa sa community standards.

Hindi siya magaling sa critical thinking at parang binabalewala pa niya ang sarili niyang ideology. At tungkol sa INC Ideology nila, hindi siya masyadong nangaral tungkol dito kasi hindi niya ma-adapt ang teaching mula sa bible nila tungkol sa doctrine nila, tulad ng Nature of God, ang Restoration (since part sila ng restorationist kung pwede nila i-claim), at tungkol sa Christology.

Wala siyang napatunayan na kahit basic doctrine nila ay totoo.