Job Bautista undying misinterpretation: Jesus not God Theory

And here we go again in there wrong understanding about the scriptures. Here let's try each scripture debunking his words by simply helping our friend understand it. The colored text are my comment. Follow the text below - 

Pagbubunyag sa maling aral na tinataguyod ng Lds Church ni Joseph Smith: 

Ayon sa huwad na aklat ( BOM) na ang Diyos daw nila ay si Panginoong Jesucristo? (I don't think you need to question something you already knew) Ayon sa Mosiah 7:27 "And because he said unto them that Christ was the God, the Father of all things, and said that he should take upon him the image of man, and it should be the image after which man was created in the beginning; or in other words, he said that man was created after the image of God, and that God should come down among the children of men, and take upon him flesh and blood, and go forth upon the face of the earth—". Ito po ay labag sa nakasulat sa Biblia maging man si Panginoong Jesucristo ay may  kinikilalang Diyos (I don't see how this verse contradicting something that has biblical relevance, so far the only thing I saw was there misinterpretations and assumption) ayon sa Juan 20:17, Mateo 27:46 na kanyang sinasamba ayon sa Juan 4:22. (by quoting this verses, he assumes Christ's words were merely his divine nature while he was in a mortal state. Though Christ is the Son of God, he never claim higher in authority as the Father, but rather honor the father and address as God since he was the God of All Spirit. Let's take a look each verses and see what he meant. John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. The letter in Bold Text shows how he's trying to claim that Christ was indeed human because the Father is his God, and therefore Christ is not God since there should be one whom everyone must worship. But he fail to analyzed that Christ never said anything about him and his divinity, but rather directing the audience that there is a Father who is much superior to him. This first assumption made him think of Christ as a mere human in nature, never realized that he was already risen from the dead. And here's the second he quoted in Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? I already replied his comment about this one, so I'll add a screenshot about it. Anyway, Christ is simply quoting Psalm 22:1 in fulfilling the writings of the Prophets and at the same time, he shows us that though God the Father, can save him anytime he wants, and yet God the Father choose to suffer his Son Jesus Christ to feel the pains and anguish, and that, the only way to fulfill the atonement is to let him suffer as human suffer the pains and death that perhaps he could comprehend every human soul who suffers the same thing. But here our INC friend is trying to twist the subject not knowing how Christ shoulders all of our afflictions. And for the last quote it says, John 4:22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. I don't think this is the subject he meant, but I guess it should be on the next verse. Let's add it here to help him out, John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. Alright, so I guess he made some brain game, that speculates Christ Teaching which leads us to analyzed on his words. Let's deal with it. Okay, so here Christ is talking to a Samaritan or a people of mixed culture and religion of Gentile and Israelite. Though Samaritans are actively observing the Laws and Prophets 2 Kings 17:24-41, this people practice traditions and the Hope for the coming of Messiah. Christ made a conversation to a Samaritan woman and was impressed in their faith, if we try to go back to Matthew 10:5 Christ Commanded his Apostle to go not into the City of Samaritan. Their different belief or practices were considered Pagans. Yet Christ knew something about their faith of the Messiah. To shorten the story, Christ made himself known to them and of course introduced his doctrine and the Father whom they should worship in Spirit. Christ plainly states that God the Father is the father of Spirit that doesn't mean his not divine. If further reading on that same chapter, The Samaritan knew the savior and they knew it was him who was prophesied by the prophet of old that will come to fulfill their words as the God and Savior. Kung ating itutuloy pa ang pagbasa sa Mosiah 7:27 Na itong  Diyos raw nila na si Panginoong Jesucristo ay ang Ama ng lahat ng bagay ? Ito po ay sumasalungat sa turo ni Panginoong Jesucristo na ang Ama ang tunay na Diyos ayon sa Juan 17:1,3. Nang siya ay tumingala sa langit . No it doesn't contradict, and it only shows how poor your understanding about Christ divinity and Calling. Christ was also address as the Everlasting Father, since he was the father of Gospel and we made covenant with God through Him. But that  doesn't says he is greater than God nor it says something about worshiping him as our God, the Father of our spirit. Anyway, to answer your confusion of scriptures you brought, in John 17:1 it says -

These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

I added verse 5 to complete the meaning and Job Bautista seems hiding some of it to avoid Christ calling and divinity. The Scripture taught us about Christ Divinity and God the Father as the God of our spirit. This means that Christ was sent for to atone from our sins, but he was with God before he was born. 

At ang karugtong pa na sinasabi sa Mosiah 7:27 na ang Diyos ay nag anyong tao? And there's no question about it, the word was God and the Word was made flesh. Christ was the Word and one of the witnessing heaven. Isang maliwanag na naman na salungat na naman sa Hosea 11:9 na ang Diyos ay hindi tao at maging ang turo ni Panginoong Jesucristo siya ay Tao na nagsasabi ng katotohanan ayon sa Juan 8:40. You just simply twisting it think Christ words as absolute. You need to break it down to understand it. Lets try to see how it was said

Hosea 11:9 (ESV) I will not execute my burning anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not a man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath.

Understanding this verse is simple if you came up to analyze the nature of God and the nature of Man. Of course, God is not a man in nature and will stand above to His creation. Unlike human whose understanding are limited to things he knows now and incapable of things compare to God's limitless power.

And in John 8:40 let's analyzed that words and understand what Christ really meant -

John 8:40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

Does this say something about Christ as human nature or a simple conversation to let the Jews understand him? If you read further you will come to realized the reason why Christ wanted to be stoned by his own people because of blasphemy, and blasphemy mean to make himself as a God.

Kaya ang turo ng Diyos ay hindi maaaring magka ka salungat sila ni Panginoong Jesucristo sa pagtuturo kaya kung inyong mapapansin ay consistent ang turo ng Diyos ay hindi Tao ayon sa Hosea 11:9, at si Panginoong Jesucristo ay isang Tao na nagsasabi ng katotohanan na narinig niya sa Diyos ayon sa Juan 8:40. You just simply fail to understand the scriptures. It's all about nature of God and besides, Christ is in Human state or form and he doesn't have any glory during his proclamation. You simply misunderstood Christ words and adapt it to your INC Doctrine of man. That seems very ignorant. Understand the scripture and how it was said will guide you to know who Christ is and his divine calling as the Son of God and not a mere human. Maging man si Propeta Ezekiel nag turo na ang Tao ay hindi Diyos at ang Diyos ay hindi Tao. Ezekiel 28:2. You just simply fail to understand the scriptures, Ezekiel 28:2 says this 

“Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: In the pride of your heart you say, “I am a god; I sit on the throne of a god in the heart of the seas.” But you are a mere mortal and not a god, though you think you are as wise as a god.

Let's try to see how the Hebrew understands it -

“Son
בֶּן־ (ben-)
Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 1121: A son

of man,
אָדָ֡ם (’ā·ḏām)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 120: Ruddy, a human being

tell
אֱמֹר֩ (’ĕ·mōr)
Verb - Qal - Imperative - masculine singular
Strong's 559: To utter, say

the ruler
לִנְגִ֨יד (lin·ḡîḏ)
Preposition-l | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 5057: A commander, civil, military, religious, honorable themes

of Tyre
צֹ֜ר (ṣōr)
Noun - proper - feminine singular
Strong's 6865: Tyre -- a Phoenician city

that this is what
כֹּֽה־ (kōh-)
Adverb
Strong's 3541: Like this, thus, here, now

the Lord
אֲדֹנָ֣י (’ă·ḏō·nāy)
Noun - proper - masculine singular
Strong's 136: The Lord

GOD
יְהֹוִ֗ה (Yah·weh)
Noun - proper - masculine singular
Strong's 3069: YHWH

says:
אָמַ֣ר ׀ (’ā·mar)
Verb - Qal - Perfect - third person masculine singular
Strong's 559: To utter, say

‘Your heart
לִבְּךָ֙ (lib·bə·ḵā)
Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

is proud,
גָּבַ֤הּ (gā·ḇah)
Verb - Qal - Perfect - third person masculine singular
Strong's 1361: To soar, be lofty, to be haughty

and you have said,
וַתֹּ֙אמֶר֙ (wat·tō·mer)
Conjunctive waw | Verb - Qal - Consecutive imperfect - second person masculine singular
Strong's 559: To utter, say

“I
אָ֔נִי (’ā·nî)
Pronoun - first person common singular
Strong's 589: I

am a god;
אֵ֣ל (’êl)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 410: Strength -- as adjective, mighty, the Almighty

I sit
יָשַׁ֖בְתִּי (yā·šaḇ·tî)
Verb - Qal - Perfect - first person common singular
Strong's 3427: To sit down, to dwell, to remain, to settle, to marry

in the seat
מוֹשַׁ֧ב (mō·wō·šaḇ)
Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 4186: A seat, assembly, dwelling place, dwelling, dwellers

of gods
אֱלֹהִ֛ים (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 430: gods -- the supreme God, magistrates, a superlative

in the heart
בְּלֵ֣ב (bə·lêḇ)
Preposition-b | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

of the sea.”
יַמִּ֑ים (yam·mîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 3220: A sea, the Mediterranean Sea, large river, an artifical basin

Yet you
וְאַתָּ֤ה (wə·’at·tāh)
Conjunctive waw | Pronoun - second person masculine singular
Strong's 859: Thou and thee, ye and you

are a man
אָדָם֙ (’ā·ḏām)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 120: Ruddy, a human being

and not
וְֽלֹא־ (wə·lō-)
Conjunctive waw | Adverb - Negative particle
Strong's 3808: Not, no

a god,
אֵ֔ל (’êl)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 410: Strength -- as adjective, mighty, the Almighty

though you have regarded
וַתִּתֵּ֥ן (wat·tit·tên)
Conjunctive waw | Verb - Qal - Consecutive imperfect - second person masculine singular
Strong's 5414: To give, put, set

your heart
לִבְּךָ֖ (lib·bə·ḵā)
Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

as that
כְּלֵ֥ב (kə·lêḇ)
Preposition-k | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

of a god.
אֱלֹהִֽים׃ (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 430: gods -- the supreme God, magistrates, a superlative

What does it says? The word אָדָם֙ means a Ruddy or Human Being, and simply this means nature of Man comparing the Nature of God. It doesn't say anything about the divinity of Christ before his human nature but rather it says it was all about him as God who is superior and above human. And this Job Bautista Never understand that is just because he wants to compare Christ in his human form to His Father as the God of all Spirit. That doesn't work and of course Christ during his ministry did leave his glory just to become human to suffer afflictions as human. This INC member could never comprehend that because they don't understand how atonement works and why Christ need to suffer even as human suffer.

Ang pinagbabatayan ng Lds cult na ang Diyos daw ay naglikha ng tao ayon sa kanyang wangis ? Hindi maaaring ihambing ang Diyos sa wangis ng tao dahil ang tao may iba’t ibang anyo may pangit at maganda  may maitim at maputi . Wrong! God Created us in his image and in that simple understand, the image of Male and Female is the same image as gods on how he created them as His Sons and Daughter. This Job Bautista has too much fallacy and poor exegesis on the scriptures. Kaya mali ang batayan ng mga kulto na Lds. Ang tinutukoy po dyan na kawangis ay ang Diyos ay Banal kaya magpakabanal ang Tao na kanyang nilikha . Fail! that doesn't say anything about Creation but rather it says something about the purpose of man. You fail many times already, can you give a good shot on interpreting the scriptures? Use your head and don't rely on INC man-made doctrine. You people with Bigot attitude will never understand the scriptures is you continue with that kind of attitude. Just remind you. Kaya nilinaw ni Apostol Pablo sa kanyang pagtuturo na ang Diyos ay walang kamatayan at hindi nakikita ayon sa 1 Timoteo 1:17.

17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Yea Sure, and How do you understand the same epistle of Paul to Timothy that says about Christ? Here's the Text -

1 Timothy 6
14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

I does say something about Christ as Immortal, Unseen or Invisible, The King of kings and Lord of lords, Who has honour and power everlasting. Does is say something about 1 Timothy 1:17. Pretty sure it does, but you don't understands it. See how you fail miserably?

Kaya hindi rin pasado sa kabanalan itong kinikilala nilang Propeta na si Joseph smith dahil hindi ito namuhay sa kabanalan  kundi siya po ay nabuhay sa kahalayan naging sugapa sa babae at siya ang pasimuno ng doktrina na polygamy isang doktrina ng demonyo na dumaya sa kanila ayon sa Rev. 12:9. Revelation 12:9 has nothing to do with the Church and the doctrine, and has nothing to do with Joseph Smith. You just simply assume by simply grabbing something out of the text in the scriptures. Too weak Job Bautista. Kaya napakalinaw na ang aral ng Lds church ay aral ng kulto at aral ng Anti-Cristo. And until you fail you still manage to turn the topic into a false accusation. This is how you people never understand the truth because of your teachings on scorning, lying and deceiving. This has been the only living proof that you can't make a healthy discussion and end up calling someone false without any proof.

In conclusion, I don't think you understood the scriptures very well of maybe some ministers are trying to inject that in your mind the principle that has nothing to do in Christ Deity. We believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Savior, Redeemer, judge and the Holy One of Israel, that's not ordinary man, but rather a God who was with the Father in the Beginning. Thank you and have a wonderful day. 

Job Bautista undying misinterpretation: Jesus not God Theory

And here we go again in there wrong understanding about the scriptures. Here let's try each scripture debunking his words by simply helping our friend understand it. The colored text are my comment. Follow the text below - 

Pagbubunyag sa maling aral na tinataguyod ng Lds Church ni Joseph Smith: 

Ayon sa huwad na aklat ( BOM) na ang Diyos daw nila ay si Panginoong Jesucristo? (I don't think you need to question something you already knew) Ayon sa Mosiah 7:27 "And because he said unto them that Christ was the God, the Father of all things, and said that he should take upon him the image of man, and it should be the image after which man was created in the beginning; or in other words, he said that man was created after the image of God, and that God should come down among the children of men, and take upon him flesh and blood, and go forth upon the face of the earth—". Ito po ay labag sa nakasulat sa Biblia maging man si Panginoong Jesucristo ay may  kinikilalang Diyos (I don't see how this verse contradicting something that has biblical relevance, so far the only thing I saw was there misinterpretations and assumption) ayon sa Juan 20:17, Mateo 27:46 na kanyang sinasamba ayon sa Juan 4:22. (by quoting this verses, he assumes Christ's words were merely his divine nature while he was in a mortal state. Though Christ is the Son of God, he never claim higher in authority as the Father, but rather honor the father and address as God since he was the God of All Spirit. Let's take a look each verses and see what he meant. John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. The letter in Bold Text shows how he's trying to claim that Christ was indeed human because the Father is his God, and therefore Christ is not God since there should be one whom everyone must worship. But he fail to analyzed that Christ never said anything about him and his divinity, but rather directing the audience that there is a Father who is much superior to him. This first assumption made him think of Christ as a mere human in nature, never realized that he was already risen from the dead. And here's the second he quoted in Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? I already replied his comment about this one, so I'll add a screenshot about it. Anyway, Christ is simply quoting Psalm 22:1 in fulfilling the writings of the Prophets and at the same time, he shows us that though God the Father, can save him anytime he wants, and yet God the Father choose to suffer his Son Jesus Christ to feel the pains and anguish, and that, the only way to fulfill the atonement is to let him suffer as human suffer the pains and death that perhaps he could comprehend every human soul who suffers the same thing. But here our INC friend is trying to twist the subject not knowing how Christ shoulders all of our afflictions. And for the last quote it says, John 4:22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. I don't think this is the subject he meant, but I guess it should be on the next verse. Let's add it here to help him out, John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. Alright, so I guess he made some brain game, that speculates Christ Teaching which leads us to analyzed on his words. Let's deal with it. Okay, so here Christ is talking to a Samaritan or a people of mixed culture and religion of Gentile and Israelite. Though Samaritans are actively observing the Laws and Prophets 2 Kings 17:24-41, this people practice traditions and the Hope for the coming of Messiah. Christ made a conversation to a Samaritan woman and was impressed in their faith, if we try to go back to Matthew 10:5 Christ Commanded his Apostle to go not into the City of Samaritan. Their different belief or practices were considered Pagans. Yet Christ knew something about their faith of the Messiah. To shorten the story, Christ made himself known to them and of course introduced his doctrine and the Father whom they should worship in Spirit. Christ plainly states that God the Father is the father of Spirit that doesn't mean his not divine. If further reading on that same chapter, The Samaritan knew the savior and they knew it was him who was prophesied by the prophet of old that will come to fulfill their words as the God and Savior. Kung ating itutuloy pa ang pagbasa sa Mosiah 7:27 Na itong  Diyos raw nila na si Panginoong Jesucristo ay ang Ama ng lahat ng bagay ? Ito po ay sumasalungat sa turo ni Panginoong Jesucristo na ang Ama ang tunay na Diyos ayon sa Juan 17:1,3. Nang siya ay tumingala sa langit . No it doesn't contradict, and it only shows how poor your understanding about Christ divinity and Calling. Christ was also address as the Everlasting Father, since he was the father of Gospel and we made covenant with God through Him. But that  doesn't says he is greater than God nor it says something about worshiping him as our God, the Father of our spirit. Anyway, to answer your confusion of scriptures you brought, in John 17:1 it says -

These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

I added verse 5 to complete the meaning and Job Bautista seems hiding some of it to avoid Christ calling and divinity. The Scripture taught us about Christ Divinity and God the Father as the God of our spirit. This means that Christ was sent for to atone from our sins, but he was with God before he was born. 

At ang karugtong pa na sinasabi sa Mosiah 7:27 na ang Diyos ay nag anyong tao? And there's no question about it, the word was God and the Word was made flesh. Christ was the Word and one of the witnessing heaven. Isang maliwanag na naman na salungat na naman sa Hosea 11:9 na ang Diyos ay hindi tao at maging ang turo ni Panginoong Jesucristo siya ay Tao na nagsasabi ng katotohanan ayon sa Juan 8:40. You just simply twisting it think Christ words as absolute. You need to break it down to understand it. Lets try to see how it was said

Hosea 11:9 (ESV) I will not execute my burning anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not a man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath.

Understanding this verse is simple if you came up to analyze the nature of God and the nature of Man. Of course, God is not a man in nature and will stand above to His creation. Unlike human whose understanding are limited to things he knows now and incapable of things compare to God's limitless power.

And in John 8:40 let's analyzed that words and understand what Christ really meant -

John 8:40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

Does this say something about Christ as human nature or a simple conversation to let the Jews understand him? If you read further you will come to realized the reason why Christ wanted to be stoned by his own people because of blasphemy, and blasphemy mean to make himself as a God.

Kaya ang turo ng Diyos ay hindi maaaring magka ka salungat sila ni Panginoong Jesucristo sa pagtuturo kaya kung inyong mapapansin ay consistent ang turo ng Diyos ay hindi Tao ayon sa Hosea 11:9, at si Panginoong Jesucristo ay isang Tao na nagsasabi ng katotohanan na narinig niya sa Diyos ayon sa Juan 8:40. You just simply fail to understand the scriptures. It's all about nature of God and besides, Christ is in Human state or form and he doesn't have any glory during his proclamation. You simply misunderstood Christ words and adapt it to your INC Doctrine of man. That seems very ignorant. Understand the scripture and how it was said will guide you to know who Christ is and his divine calling as the Son of God and not a mere human. Maging man si Propeta Ezekiel nag turo na ang Tao ay hindi Diyos at ang Diyos ay hindi Tao. Ezekiel 28:2. You just simply fail to understand the scriptures, Ezekiel 28:2 says this 

“Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: In the pride of your heart you say, “I am a god; I sit on the throne of a god in the heart of the seas.” But you are a mere mortal and not a god, though you think you are as wise as a god.

Let's try to see how the Hebrew understands it -

“Son
בֶּן־ (ben-)
Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 1121: A son

of man,
אָדָ֡ם (’ā·ḏām)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 120: Ruddy, a human being

tell
אֱמֹר֩ (’ĕ·mōr)
Verb - Qal - Imperative - masculine singular
Strong's 559: To utter, say

the ruler
לִנְגִ֨יד (lin·ḡîḏ)
Preposition-l | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 5057: A commander, civil, military, religious, honorable themes

of Tyre
צֹ֜ר (ṣōr)
Noun - proper - feminine singular
Strong's 6865: Tyre -- a Phoenician city

that this is what
כֹּֽה־ (kōh-)
Adverb
Strong's 3541: Like this, thus, here, now

the Lord
אֲדֹנָ֣י (’ă·ḏō·nāy)
Noun - proper - masculine singular
Strong's 136: The Lord

GOD
יְהֹוִ֗ה (Yah·weh)
Noun - proper - masculine singular
Strong's 3069: YHWH

says:
אָמַ֣ר ׀ (’ā·mar)
Verb - Qal - Perfect - third person masculine singular
Strong's 559: To utter, say

‘Your heart
לִבְּךָ֙ (lib·bə·ḵā)
Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

is proud,
גָּבַ֤הּ (gā·ḇah)
Verb - Qal - Perfect - third person masculine singular
Strong's 1361: To soar, be lofty, to be haughty

and you have said,
וַתֹּ֙אמֶר֙ (wat·tō·mer)
Conjunctive waw | Verb - Qal - Consecutive imperfect - second person masculine singular
Strong's 559: To utter, say

“I
אָ֔נִי (’ā·nî)
Pronoun - first person common singular
Strong's 589: I

am a god;
אֵ֣ל (’êl)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 410: Strength -- as adjective, mighty, the Almighty

I sit
יָשַׁ֖בְתִּי (yā·šaḇ·tî)
Verb - Qal - Perfect - first person common singular
Strong's 3427: To sit down, to dwell, to remain, to settle, to marry

in the seat
מוֹשַׁ֧ב (mō·wō·šaḇ)
Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 4186: A seat, assembly, dwelling place, dwelling, dwellers

of gods
אֱלֹהִ֛ים (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 430: gods -- the supreme God, magistrates, a superlative

in the heart
בְּלֵ֣ב (bə·lêḇ)
Preposition-b | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

of the sea.”
יַמִּ֑ים (yam·mîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 3220: A sea, the Mediterranean Sea, large river, an artifical basin

Yet you
וְאַתָּ֤ה (wə·’at·tāh)
Conjunctive waw | Pronoun - second person masculine singular
Strong's 859: Thou and thee, ye and you

are a man
אָדָם֙ (’ā·ḏām)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 120: Ruddy, a human being

and not
וְֽלֹא־ (wə·lō-)
Conjunctive waw | Adverb - Negative particle
Strong's 3808: Not, no

a god,
אֵ֔ל (’êl)
Noun - masculine singular
Strong's 410: Strength -- as adjective, mighty, the Almighty

though you have regarded
וַתִּתֵּ֥ן (wat·tit·tên)
Conjunctive waw | Verb - Qal - Consecutive imperfect - second person masculine singular
Strong's 5414: To give, put, set

your heart
לִבְּךָ֖ (lib·bə·ḵā)
Noun - masculine singular construct | second person masculine singular
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

as that
כְּלֵ֥ב (kə·lêḇ)
Preposition-k | Noun - masculine singular construct
Strong's 3820: The heart, the feelings, the will, the intellect, centre

of a god.
אֱלֹהִֽים׃ (’ĕ·lō·hîm)
Noun - masculine plural
Strong's 430: gods -- the supreme God, magistrates, a superlative

What does it says? The word אָדָם֙ means a Ruddy or Human Being, and simply this means nature of Man comparing the Nature of God. It doesn't say anything about the divinity of Christ before his human nature but rather it says it was all about him as God who is superior and above human. And this Job Bautista Never understand that is just because he wants to compare Christ in his human form to His Father as the God of all Spirit. That doesn't work and of course Christ during his ministry did leave his glory just to become human to suffer afflictions as human. This INC member could never comprehend that because they don't understand how atonement works and why Christ need to suffer even as human suffer.

Ang pinagbabatayan ng Lds cult na ang Diyos daw ay naglikha ng tao ayon sa kanyang wangis ? Hindi maaaring ihambing ang Diyos sa wangis ng tao dahil ang tao may iba’t ibang anyo may pangit at maganda  may maitim at maputi . Wrong! God Created us in his image and in that simple understand, the image of Male and Female is the same image as gods on how he created them as His Sons and Daughter. This Job Bautista has too much fallacy and poor exegesis on the scriptures. Kaya mali ang batayan ng mga kulto na Lds. Ang tinutukoy po dyan na kawangis ay ang Diyos ay Banal kaya magpakabanal ang Tao na kanyang nilikha . Fail! that doesn't say anything about Creation but rather it says something about the purpose of man. You fail many times already, can you give a good shot on interpreting the scriptures? Use your head and don't rely on INC man-made doctrine. You people with Bigot attitude will never understand the scriptures is you continue with that kind of attitude. Just remind you. Kaya nilinaw ni Apostol Pablo sa kanyang pagtuturo na ang Diyos ay walang kamatayan at hindi nakikita ayon sa 1 Timoteo 1:17.

17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Yea Sure, and How do you understand the same epistle of Paul to Timothy that says about Christ? Here's the Text -

1 Timothy 6
14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

I does say something about Christ as Immortal, Unseen or Invisible, The King of kings and Lord of lords, Who has honour and power everlasting. Does is say something about 1 Timothy 1:17. Pretty sure it does, but you don't understands it. See how you fail miserably?

Kaya hindi rin pasado sa kabanalan itong kinikilala nilang Propeta na si Joseph smith dahil hindi ito namuhay sa kabanalan  kundi siya po ay nabuhay sa kahalayan naging sugapa sa babae at siya ang pasimuno ng doktrina na polygamy isang doktrina ng demonyo na dumaya sa kanila ayon sa Rev. 12:9. Revelation 12:9 has nothing to do with the Church and the doctrine, and has nothing to do with Joseph Smith. You just simply assume by simply grabbing something out of the text in the scriptures. Too weak Job Bautista. Kaya napakalinaw na ang aral ng Lds church ay aral ng kulto at aral ng Anti-Cristo. And until you fail you still manage to turn the topic into a false accusation. This is how you people never understand the truth because of your teachings on scorning, lying and deceiving. This has been the only living proof that you can't make a healthy discussion and end up calling someone false without any proof.

In conclusion, I don't think you understood the scriptures very well of maybe some ministers are trying to inject that in your mind the principle that has nothing to do in Christ Deity. We believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Savior, Redeemer, judge and the Holy One of Israel, that's not ordinary man, but rather a God who was with the Father in the Beginning. Thank you and have a wonderful day. 

Some True Bug

You have heard someone call it Assassin Bug, and some others Kissing Bugs or maybe bedbugs. LOL! But actually this are True Bugs. Why was that, this insect used their sucking tube (proboscis) to earn a living. Some type of True Bugs were stinky and some has no odor. The Stink was actually a diversion or a common defense mechanisms for predictors to avoid being eaten. You may find it very friendly since they used tubes as their mouths unlike other insect like Bees or ants used a pincers or mandibles to slice their food. But careless handling of bug such as this could be very disappointing if you don't know which bug it is, this bug could liquefy their food in minutes using their saliva, like assassin bugs that could kill in just seconds and liquefy their victims internal organs and sucks it like juice. It's very painful than an ant sting.

Thank you for visiting this blog and have a nice day.

Blog has moved to www.jerrybustillo.blogspot.com.

You will be redirected after 5 seconds.

Daniel 1: God Gave Them Knowledge

Watch a short film about Daniel's Knowledge and skill by observing the Laws of that was given to them by the Lord. They were blessed because of obedience.

Daniel Interprets the Kings Nebuchadnezzar Dream. See Daniel 1-2.


Daniel 1

17 ¶ As for these four children, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.
18 Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar.
19 And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king.
20 And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king inquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.

God Gave Them Knowledge

Watch a short film about Daniel's Knowledge and skill by observing the Laws of that was given to them by the Lord. They were blessed because of obedience.

Daniel Interprets the Kings Nebuchadnezzar Dream. See Daniel 1-2.


Daniel 1

17 ¶ As for these four children, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.
18 Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar.
19 And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king.
20 And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king inquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.

Beautiful Tiny Moth

I caught a tiny moth with a black spot and pink body. Can you name it? this one is so beautiful and tiny, I decide to let it go as nature goes. Video was taken around second week of August 2021 and was edited last August 20, 2021. I forgot to cover the who story on how I caught this tiny moth.

Thank you for Visiting this Blog and see you on my Next Post.

Beautiful Tiny Moth

I caught a tiny moth with a black spot and pink body. Can you name it? this one is so beautiful and tiny, I decide to let it go as nature goes. Video was taken around second week of August 2021 and was edited last August 20, 2021. I forgot to cover the who story on how I caught this tiny moth.

Thank you for Visiting this Blog and see you on my Next Post.

Joseph Smith Polygamy: Fanny Alger

I suppose to post this last July 6, 2021 but I withhold it for some reason that I would like to add some source regarding Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger relationship and some controversy. Here is a video from Saints Unscripted might be of help and I would add some of sources if I could collect the entire event. Anyway, enjoy -

Okay, so here we go. Since everyone still stuck in some old issue. I will now present a list of Polygamy with Joseph Smith Jr with their controversies. We'll start with Fanny Alger. The links will lead you to the original source. So, this was the early practice that cause Oliver Cowdery's excommunications because of humors, and I will put some of it so everyone will be aware how was it all about. Let's start -

Fanny Alger

Born in 1816 to Samuel and Clarissa Alger, Fanny Alger joined the Church with her family in the early 1830s and worked in Joseph Smith’s household in Kirtland, Ohio. Several Latter-day Saints who lived in Kirtland in the 1830s later reported that Fanny Alger married Joseph Smith, becoming his first plural wife. The marriage was evidently of short duration. Fanny left Ohio with her parents in 1836 for Missouri, apparently staying at a tavern owned by the family of Solomon Custer in Dublin, Indiana. Within a few months, Fanny married Solomon. She remained in Dublin after her parents continued to Far West, Missouri. Fanny’s family followed the main body of the Saints from Missouri to Illinois and ultimately to southern Utah. When Fanny’s father, a patriarch, passed away in the 1870s, his obituary celebrated his family’s faithfulness.

Fanny and Solomon had nine children, only two of whom survived Fanny. The Custers maintained a grocery store in Dublin and invested in a sawmill in nearby Lewisville. The family moved to Lewisville during a time of financial difficulty, and Solomon attempted to sell the sawmill but ultimately declared bankruptcy. Fanny and Solomon moved back to Dublin, where they remained until his death in 1885.

Fanny and Solomon attended the local Universalist Church that Solomon’s father had helped establish. During her later years, Fanny also became interested in spiritualism. After Solomon’s death, Fanny moved to Indianapolis to live with her son Lafayette. She died in 1889 and was buried in Dublin next to Solomon in a plot of ground he had cleared as a child.
Relationship to Joseph Smith

Very little is known about the marriage between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger. The earliest sources emerged in the aftermath of the collapse of the Kirtland Safety Society in 1837. Angry investors in the society and local antagonists circulated many rumors attacking Joseph, including allegations that he committed adultery. Some of the rumors were said to originate with Oliver Cowdery, whose formerly close relationship with Joseph had become strained over a variety of matters. Some claimed Oliver heard Joseph confess to extramarital relations with Fanny Alger. In fall 1837, Joseph Smith confronted Cowdery about the rumor in a meeting attended by at least three others. In that meeting, Cowdery refuted the rumor that Joseph had confessed to him. The following April, when Cowdery was tried in Missouri for his Church membership over many charges, the high council discussed the rumors Cowdery had circulated. Joseph gave an explanation of his relationship to Fanny that appears to have satisfied the high council. Cowdery was excommunicated during this meeting.

Other than evidence of a visit in the early 1840s to her family who belonged to the Church branch in Lima, Illinois, Fanny’s name remains absent from Latter-day Saint records for nearly 30 years. In the late 19th century, a handful of statements by Latter-day Saints and former Church members indicated that Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger’s relationship was an early plural marriage. Eliza R. Snow, one of Joseph Smith’s plural wives, simply included Fanny in a list of his wives. Mosiah Hancock in 1896 and Benjamin F. Johnson in 1903 likewise described Fanny’s relationship to Joseph as a plural marriage that was kept confidential. Hancock told of a private marriage sealing performed by Hancock’s father in Kirtland. According to Johnson, Fanny was asked about her relationship to Joseph but refused to elaborate on the matter.

Though we know little about the introduction and early practice of plural marriage, Latter-day Saints honor the faith of early Church members who sacrificed to obey this difficult commandment.

Sources
“Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo,” Gospel Topics Essays, topics.lds.org.
"Letter from Thomas B. Marsh, 15 February 1838," Historical Introduction, in Mark Ashurst-McGee, David W. Grua, Elizabeth Kuehn, Alexander L. Baugh, and Brenden W. Rensink, eds., Documents, Volume 6: February 1838–August 1839. Vol. 6 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, edited by Ronald K. Esplin, Matthew J. Grow, and Matthew C. Godfrey (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2017), 10–17.

Joseph Smith Polygamy: Fanny Alger

I suppose to post this last July 6, 2021 but I withhold it for some reason that I would like to add some source regarding Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger relationship and some controversy. Here is a video from Saints Unscripted might be of help and I would add some of sources if I could collect the entire event. Anyway, enjoy -

Okay, so here we go. Since everyone still stuck in some old issue. I will now present a list of Polygamy with Joseph Smith Jr with their controversies. We'll start with Fanny Alger. The links will lead you to the original source. So, this was the early practice that cause Oliver Cowdery's excommunications because of humors, and I will put some of it so everyone will be aware how was it all about. Let's start -

Fanny Alger

Born in 1816 to Samuel and Clarissa Alger, Fanny Alger joined the Church with her family in the early 1830s and worked in Joseph Smith’s household in Kirtland, Ohio. Several Latter-day Saints who lived in Kirtland in the 1830s later reported that Fanny Alger married Joseph Smith, becoming his first plural wife. The marriage was evidently of short duration. Fanny left Ohio with her parents in 1836 for Missouri, apparently staying at a tavern owned by the family of Solomon Custer in Dublin, Indiana. Within a few months, Fanny married Solomon. She remained in Dublin after her parents continued to Far West, Missouri. Fanny’s family followed the main body of the Saints from Missouri to Illinois and ultimately to southern Utah. When Fanny’s father, a patriarch, passed away in the 1870s, his obituary celebrated his family’s faithfulness.

Fanny and Solomon had nine children, only two of whom survived Fanny. The Custers maintained a grocery store in Dublin and invested in a sawmill in nearby Lewisville. The family moved to Lewisville during a time of financial difficulty, and Solomon attempted to sell the sawmill but ultimately declared bankruptcy. Fanny and Solomon moved back to Dublin, where they remained until his death in 1885.

Fanny and Solomon attended the local Universalist Church that Solomon’s father had helped establish. During her later years, Fanny also became interested in spiritualism. After Solomon’s death, Fanny moved to Indianapolis to live with her son Lafayette. She died in 1889 and was buried in Dublin next to Solomon in a plot of ground he had cleared as a child.
Relationship to Joseph Smith

Very little is known about the marriage between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger. The earliest sources emerged in the aftermath of the collapse of the Kirtland Safety Society in 1837. Angry investors in the society and local antagonists circulated many rumors attacking Joseph, including allegations that he committed adultery. Some of the rumors were said to originate with Oliver Cowdery, whose formerly close relationship with Joseph had become strained over a variety of matters. Some claimed Oliver heard Joseph confess to extramarital relations with Fanny Alger. In fall 1837, Joseph Smith confronted Cowdery about the rumor in a meeting attended by at least three others. In that meeting, Cowdery refuted the rumor that Joseph had confessed to him. The following April, when Cowdery was tried in Missouri for his Church membership over many charges, the high council discussed the rumors Cowdery had circulated. Joseph gave an explanation of his relationship to Fanny that appears to have satisfied the high council. Cowdery was excommunicated during this meeting.

Other than evidence of a visit in the early 1840s to her family who belonged to the Church branch in Lima, Illinois, Fanny’s name remains absent from Latter-day Saint records for nearly 30 years. In the late 19th century, a handful of statements by Latter-day Saints and former Church members indicated that Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger’s relationship was an early plural marriage. Eliza R. Snow, one of Joseph Smith’s plural wives, simply included Fanny in a list of his wives. Mosiah Hancock in 1896 and Benjamin F. Johnson in 1903 likewise described Fanny’s relationship to Joseph as a plural marriage that was kept confidential. Hancock told of a private marriage sealing performed by Hancock’s father in Kirtland. According to Johnson, Fanny was asked about her relationship to Joseph but refused to elaborate on the matter.

Though we know little about the introduction and early practice of plural marriage, Latter-day Saints honor the faith of early Church members who sacrificed to obey this difficult commandment.

Sources
“Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo,” Gospel Topics Essays, topics.lds.org.
"Letter from Thomas B. Marsh, 15 February 1838," Historical Introduction, in Mark Ashurst-McGee, David W. Grua, Elizabeth Kuehn, Alexander L. Baugh, and Brenden W. Rensink, eds., Documents, Volume 6: February 1838–August 1839. Vol. 6 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, edited by Ronald K. Esplin, Matthew J. Grow, and Matthew C. Godfrey (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2017), 10–17.

Joseph Smith Polygamy: Fanny Alger

I suppose to post this last July 6, 2021 but I withhold it for some reason that I would like to add some source regarding Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger relationship and some controversy. Here is a video from Saints Unscripted might be of help and I would add some of sources if I could collect the entire event. Anyway, enjoy -

Okay, so here we go. Since everyone still stuck in some old issue. I will now present a list of Polygamy with Joseph Smith Jr with their controversies. We'll start with Fanny Alger. The links will lead you to the original source. So, this was the early practice that cause Oliver Cowdery's excommunications because of humors, and I will put some of it so everyone will be aware how was it all about. Let's start -

Fanny Alger

Born in 1816 to Samuel and Clarissa Alger, Fanny Alger joined the Church with her family in the early 1830s and worked in Joseph Smith’s household in Kirtland, Ohio. Several Latter-day Saints who lived in Kirtland in the 1830s later reported that Fanny Alger married Joseph Smith, becoming his first plural wife. The marriage was evidently of short duration. Fanny left Ohio with her parents in 1836 for Missouri, apparently staying at a tavern owned by the family of Solomon Custer in Dublin, Indiana. Within a few months, Fanny married Solomon. She remained in Dublin after her parents continued to Far West, Missouri. Fanny’s family followed the main body of the Saints from Missouri to Illinois and ultimately to southern Utah. When Fanny’s father, a patriarch, passed away in the 1870s, his obituary celebrated his family’s faithfulness.

Fanny and Solomon had nine children, only two of whom survived Fanny. The Custers maintained a grocery store in Dublin and invested in a sawmill in nearby Lewisville. The family moved to Lewisville during a time of financial difficulty, and Solomon attempted to sell the sawmill but ultimately declared bankruptcy. Fanny and Solomon moved back to Dublin, where they remained until his death in 1885.

Fanny and Solomon attended the local Universalist Church that Solomon’s father had helped establish. During her later years, Fanny also became interested in spiritualism. After Solomon’s death, Fanny moved to Indianapolis to live with her son Lafayette. She died in 1889 and was buried in Dublin next to Solomon in a plot of ground he had cleared as a child.
Relationship to Joseph Smith

Very little is known about the marriage between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger. The earliest sources emerged in the aftermath of the collapse of the Kirtland Safety Society in 1837. Angry investors in the society and local antagonists circulated many rumors attacking Joseph, including allegations that he committed adultery. Some of the rumors were said to originate with Oliver Cowdery, whose formerly close relationship with Joseph had become strained over a variety of matters. Some claimed Oliver heard Joseph confess to extramarital relations with Fanny Alger. In fall 1837, Joseph Smith confronted Cowdery about the rumor in a meeting attended by at least three others. In that meeting, Cowdery refuted the rumor that Joseph had confessed to him. The following April, when Cowdery was tried in Missouri for his Church membership over many charges, the high council discussed the rumors Cowdery had circulated. Joseph gave an explanation of his relationship to Fanny that appears to have satisfied the high council. Cowdery was excommunicated during this meeting.

Other than evidence of a visit in the early 1840s to her family who belonged to the Church branch in Lima, Illinois, Fanny’s name remains absent from Latter-day Saint records for nearly 30 years. In the late 19th century, a handful of statements by Latter-day Saints and former Church members indicated that Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger’s relationship was an early plural marriage. Eliza R. Snow, one of Joseph Smith’s plural wives, simply included Fanny in a list of his wives. Mosiah Hancock in 1896 and Benjamin F. Johnson in 1903 likewise described Fanny’s relationship to Joseph as a plural marriage that was kept confidential. Hancock told of a private marriage sealing performed by Hancock’s father in Kirtland. According to Johnson, Fanny was asked about her relationship to Joseph but refused to elaborate on the matter.

Though we know little about the introduction and early practice of plural marriage, Latter-day Saints honor the faith of early Church members who sacrificed to obey this difficult commandment.

Sources
“Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo,” Gospel Topics Essays, topics.lds.org.
"Letter from Thomas B. Marsh, 15 February 1838," Historical Introduction, in Mark Ashurst-McGee, David W. Grua, Elizabeth Kuehn, Alexander L. Baugh, and Brenden W. Rensink, eds., Documents, Volume 6: February 1838–August 1839. Vol. 6 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, edited by Ronald K. Esplin, Matthew J. Grow, and Matthew C. Godfrey (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2017), 10–17.

Job Bautista and his Alas referencing the Book of Mormon

He posted this on his Facebook Timeline
Not knowing what it was all about.

Let's get over to this Job Bautista's Critics claiming his Church is true using the Book of Mormon as his reference. This is kinda funny but let's dive into this poor criticism - 

This is one of his posts and he thinks he has something to bring. Okay, so let's debunk it and see how he fails.

_________

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo 

May isa pa uli akong alas na talagang Church of Christ ang pangalan ng Iglesia na itinayo ni Cristo ayon sa Mateo 16:18 at ipinangaral ng mga Apostol ni Cristo ayon sa Roma 16:16. This has been debunked over and over and he still can't understand the scripture. One thing is for sure is if the Church of Christ was the official name established by Christ, it wasn't the INC establish by Felix Manalo. This guy seriously needs to work out his belief and understanding of the scriptures. He just simply assumes that the registered church name is necessary to claim it as a true Church not knowing how the messenger was called and the authority from heaven. He doesn't know that and he doesn't care.

Well anyways, Greek Text using NA28 of this verse Romans 16:16 clearly state about plural term churches. Here's the text about it

16 ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ. ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς αἱ ἐκκλησίαι πᾶσαι τοῦ Χριστοῦ.

The word (ἐκκλησίαι - ekklēsiai) in English means "Churches" followed with (πᾶσαι - pasai) which means "All" and (Χριστοῦ - Christou) for "of Christ".

Does Job Bautista think about it? No, I guess not. He just simply get the words never thinks what it was all about.

At alam ba ninyo na kahit ang BOM nagpatotoo nito? Basahin natin ; yeah we all know that. We used the scripture booth the Bible and the Book of Mormon in personal study. We are aware of your problem. 

 4 Nephi 1: 1 And it came to pass that the thirty and fourth year passed away, and also the thirty and fifth, and behold the disciples of Jesus had formed a CHURCH OF CHRIST in all the lands round about. And as many as did come unto them, and did truly repent of their sins, were baptized in the name of Jesus; and they did also receive the Holy Ghost.

So, the disciples in former times establish a church of Christ in all the Land. Take note it doesn't say anything about the official name but rather a Church (or a group of believers) a people who accept the Gospel of Christ. That has nothing to do with buildings name or registered sect name nowadays, but rather a group of people who worship and believe in Christ as God and Savior. Does he even think about it? As I always said to this Job Bautista and it has all over in this blog that a church can be true if it was restored by God through his servants who hold the Revelation and Authority. You don't have that Job Bautista, so don't even think about boasting your church name game that has nothing to do with salvation. You fail.

Job Bautista's Alas referencing the Book of Mormon

He posted this on his Facebook Timeline
Not knowing what it was all about.

Let's get over to this Job Bautista's Critics claiming his Church is true using the Book of Mormon as his reference. This is kinda funny but let's dive into this poor criticism - 

This is one of his posts and he thinks he has something to bring. Okay, so let's debunk it and see how he fails.

_________

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo 

May isa pa uli akong alas na talagang Church of Christ ang pangalan ng Iglesia na itinayo ni Cristo ayon sa Mateo 16:18 at ipinangaral ng mga Apostol ni Cristo ayon sa Roma 16:16. This has been debunked over and over and he still can't understand the scripture. One thing is for sure is if the Church of Christ was the official name established by Christ, it wasn't the INC establish by Felix Manalo. This guy seriously needs to work out his belief and understanding of the scriptures. He just simply assumes that the registered church name is necessary to claim it as a true Church not knowing how the messenger was called and the authority from heaven. He doesn't know that and he doesn't care.

Well anyways, Greek Text using NA28 of this verse Romans 16:16 clearly state about plural term churches. Here's the text about it

16 ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ. ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς αἱ ἐκκλησίαι πᾶσαι τοῦ Χριστοῦ.

The word (ἐκκλησίαι - ekklēsiai) in English means "Churches" followed with (πᾶσαι - pasai) which means "All" and (Χριστοῦ - Christou) for "of Christ".

Does Job Bautista think about it? No, I guess not. He just simply get the words never thinks what it was all about.

At alam ba ninyo na kahit ang BOM nagpatotoo nito? Basahin natin ; yeah we all know that. We used the scripture booth the Bible and the Book of Mormon in personal study. We are aware of your problem. 

 4 Nephi 1: 1 And it came to pass that the thirty and fourth year passed away, and also the thirty and fifth, and behold the disciples of Jesus had formed a CHURCH OF CHRIST in all the lands round about. And as many as did come unto them, and did truly repent of their sins, were baptized in the name of Jesus; and they did also receive the Holy Ghost.

So, the disciples in former times establish a church of Christ in all the Land. Take note it doesn't say anything about the official name but rather a Church (or a group of believers) a people who accept the Gospel of Christ. That has nothing to do with buildings name or registered sect name nowadays, but rather a group of people who worship and believe in Christ as God and Savior. Does he even think about it? As I always said to this Job Bautista and it has all over in this blog that a church can be true if it was restored by God through his servants who hold the Revelation and Authority. You don't have that Job Bautista, so don't even think about boasting your church name game that has nothing to do with salvation. You fail.