Skip to main content

Iglesia Ni Cristo - Is it really the Church of Christ???

Image
By
+
JMJ

Recently a member of Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC), handed out pamphlets at an SSPX chapel.  While the Catholic Church is in a crisis on numerous levels, it remains today the Church of Christ.

As for the INC, there were a number of claims under the heading of "What We Believe and Why".  These are summed up as "the Iglesia Ni Cristo" upholds the pristine teachings of the Bible.

This will make our job of determining the veracity of their claims as to being the Church of Christ much simpler. 

Why?

Because if their belief can be found at fault in one aspect of the truths found in the Bible, then obviously their religion is not the Church of Christ.


I believe that the key is their rejection of the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Here's what they believe on the topic:

The Lord Jesus Christ
The Iglesia ni Cristo believes that the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Matthew 3:17), is the one and only Savior given by God (Acts 13:23). Christ is the sole mediator between God and men (I Timothy 2:5) and the only way to God (John 14:6).
But we do not subscribe to the belief that Christ is God-Man. He is man in nature according to His own testimony (John 8:40) and the teachings of His Apostles (I Timothy 2:5; Matthew 1:18).
The attributes of a human being were found in Christ. He hungered (Matthew 4:2), thirsted (John 19:28), became weary or tired (John 4:6), slept (Matthew 8:24), and died (Matthew 27:50; I Corinthians 15:3). However, Christ as distinct from all men, is the only one who did not sin (I Peter 2:21-22; Hebrews 4:15).
He has been exalted by God and given a name above all other names, that at the name of Christ every knee should bow, those in heaven, and those on earth (Philippians 2:9-11). He has been placed by God far above all principality, power, might and dominion, and every name that is named, and all things have been put under His feet (Ephesians 1:21-22). Christ will eventually subject all His power and authority to the true God (I Corinthians 15:27-28). He had in so many instances introduced Himself as the Son of God but never did He appropriate the title “God?nor “God the Son?for Himself because He is not God but man.

So, did Our Lord Jesus Christ ever claim or be acclaimed to be God in the Bible???

Looking at the "Textual Concordance of the Holy Scriptures" by Thomas David Williams, we find a number of references under the section "Christ is True God". Here is a sample of citations:
  1. John i. 1-3, 10,
  2. John viii. 57,58
  3. John viii. 25
  4. John x. 30-33
  5. John xx. 28, 29
  6. Acts iii. 14, 15
  7. Acts x. 36
  8. Coll. ii. 9.
  9. 2. Peter i. 1.
Obviously, just from looking at these scriptures it is obvious that Our Lord Jesus Christ is proclaimed to be God.

Thus we can conclude that the claim of Iglesia Ni Cristo to being the Church of Christ is false.

As a Catholic, I state with St. Thomas:
28 Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God.
29 Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed.
Would that others who have not seen, would believe.

P^3
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more

Regarding Post: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

By
 + JMJ   I've been watching the popularity of the post about Fr. Pfeiffer's attempted episcopal consecration and its continued top listing on the 'popular posts' list at the bottom of posts.  After some thought, I decided that I don't want to be responsible for anyone joining Fr. Pfeiffer's 'group', however unlikely that would be at this time. So I have reverted the article to the draft state. If anyone wants it reinstated, I would ask that they comment on this post with a rationale for reinstatement. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Schism

By
There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

By
+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

By
+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.
2 comments
Read more