SORIANO’s defective logic, ignorance of history exposed!
Soriano said:
Logic, man! Not your self-serving lies in place of Biblical History
4:40 AM Belief , Catholicism ,Religion 16 CommentsHistory written only within the capacity of man is not always reliable.
Saint Peter
My reply:
Not all history are accurate nor without biases, yet ESTABLISHED FACTS ARE UNDENIABLE like PETER being in Rome.
Soriano said:
Take the history of the Assyrian empire. In the entire history of the empire, there was no mention of King Sargon. However, the Bible mentioned a man, whom the Bible called King Sargon of Assyria recorded in the book of Isaiah.
ISAIAH 20:1
In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod, (when Sargon the king of Assyria sent him,) and fought against Ashdod, and took it;But to confirm the historicity of the bible, very recently, proofs of the reign of King Sargon was revealed. A myth he was for a long time, now archeology is helping Biblical truth prove his existence.
Sargon II was considered a Biblical myth throughout modern history until the archaeological excavations of the French scholar, Paul Emile Botta. Botta unearthed Sargon’s mighty palace at Dur Sharrukin (Khorsabad), just north of Nineveh near the Tigris river. This remarkable discovery had inscriptions on palace walls which proved many events in history and those mentioned in the Bible.
One of the inscriptions reads: “At the beginning of my rule, in the very first year I reigned…I set siege to and conquered Samaria…I carried away into captivity 27,290 persons who lived there; I took fifty fine chariots for my royal equipment.”http://www.bible-history.com/…/destruction_of_israel_sargon…
When history is quiet on certain things like above it does not mean that it’s should not be taken into account. We now know the additional history that was missing. History proves the truth of the Bible, and the Bible proves history.
Thus, when it comes to relating history, the Bible is quite different from other books available on this planet. History in the Bible is not just the recounting of what has passed. It is not linear but circular. Thus, it is made by looking forward to a foretold event in the form of a prophecy, and then after it was fulfilled, it is to look back into the past (the future foretold).
The events comes full circle, tying the future, past and present so that often, we read of the expression, “I have told you before….” The connotation is that there is always the involvement of The Almighty in the order of things who is the “of Him, through Him and to Him are all things.” This is where the Bible is outstanding.
ISAIAH 46:9-10
9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:JOHN 13:19
Now I tell you before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.
My reply:
I do agree on few points but no time to elaborate.
Soriano said:
An account of the alleged history that under the St. Peter’s Basilica there were graves found with inscriptions “Buried near Peter.” This is surely self-serving! After all, a pope was the one who allegedly revealed it. But is this actual history with tangible evidence investigated to be true? Notice this lie where in the first place Peter had never been in Rome. Here’s an excerpt –
What about the archaeological evidence? In the middle decades of this century scientists conducted digs under St. Peter’s Basilica to verify or disprove the tradition that the church had been constructed over Peter’s tomb.
And what do you think they found? That’s right: the tomb. Pope Paul VI was able to announce that conclusive proof had been discovered–for instance, neighboring crypts on which were written grafitti such as, “Buried near Peter.” (http://www.catholic.com/…/the-bible-says-that-peter-wasnt-i…)
Peter could not have been a pope in Rome. Why? The assignment in Biblical context is clear.
GALATIANS 2:7-8
7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
My reply:
Soriano failed to recognise or ignorant of the fact there were many Christian Jews in Rome. Let’s prove this first with reference.
Rome Historian Paul Johnson writes, “The diaspora [Jewish dispersion], through which Paul and others eagerly traveled, was vast. The Roman geographer Strabo [c. 60 B.C.—C.A.D. 21] said that the Jews were a power throughout the inhabited world…They had been in Rome for 200 years and now formed a substantial colony there; and from Rome they had spread all over urban Italy, and then into Gaul and Spain and across the sea into north-west Africa” (A history of the Jews [New York Harper and Row,1987],132). In fact, their presence became so dominant that Suetonius (fl. A.D. 117-138) tells us: “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, Claudius [reigned A.D. 41-57] expelled them from Rome” (Erdmans Handbook to the History of Christianity, ed. Tim Dowley [Grand Rapids Mich.: Eerdmans, 1977], 53)”
Furthermore, we know that the apostles went to different parts of the world to preach the gospel of salvation. St. Thomas in particular went to India and died in there. The Indians are of course are GENTILES. This shows that the missions for the Gentiles were NOT EXCLUSIVE to Barnabas and Paul.
How about St. Peter?
Let us read:
Acts 15:7 KJV
[7] And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made CHOICE among us, that the GENTILES BY MY MOUTH should hear the word of the GOSPEL, and believe.”
ST. PETER is in fact the ONE whom God appointed to RECEIVED the FIRST Gentile convert to the Church. The first Gentile convert is Cornelius.
Please read:
Acts 10:31-35 KJV
[31] And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. [32] Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee. [33] Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God. [34] Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: [35] But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. …
SORIANO simply LYING or mere ignorant or could be both.
Soriano said:
We must remember that earlier the original twelve were forbidden to go to the places of the Gentiles.
MATTHEW 10:5
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
My reply:
It is TRUE that they were sent first to the Jews as they are the one to whom God called his own people. It was them to whom the promise of the coming of Jesus was given. Secondly, Jesus and his apostles are all JEWS. This is why the Jesus said that salvation is from the JEWS.
Please read:
John 4:22-23 KJV
[22] Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. [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.
Jesus knew that salvation at some point will be extended to all people, to the Jess and to the GENTILES.
Please read:
Isaiah 49:6 KJV
[6] And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”
SORIANO said:
It was when the Apostle Paul and Barnabas were called, that there were legitimate apostles destined to Gentile nations.
THE ACTS 13:46-47
46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
My reply:
It was ACTUALLY St Paul recognized that the Apostles PETER, John and James are the pillars of the Church. These pillars were the one gave the permission for St. Paul and Barnabas to go to the GENTILES, yet there is NO MENTIONED that the rest of the apostles cannot serve the Gentiles. Thus, these pillars of the Church could send others
Please read:
Galatians 2:9 KJV
[9] And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, THEY GAVE TO ME and Barnabas the RIGHT HANDS of fellowship; THAT WE SHOULD go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.”
SORIANO quoted:
THE ACTS 13:1-2
1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
My reply:
The verse is correct and as a catholic we believe in this verse.
SORIANO further quoted:
THE ACTS 26:17-18
17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”It would be very unbecoming of Peter, who was destined to the Israelites, to sit as a reigning pope in the territory of the Gentiles. It is not only unbecoming but also illogical. It is against the will of the Lord. The Lord, who destines or designates, chose Paul to be an apostle to the Gentiles, including Rome. So why will Peter substitute himself for Paul, chosen by the Lord Himself?
My reply:
Jesus is the good shepherd of his flock according to John 10.
Let us read:
John 10:14-16 KJV
[14] I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. [15] As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. [16] And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.”
my comment:
Jesus is prophesying the coming together the JEWS and the Gentiles into the church.
It could be understood that Jesus is prophesying about PETER to be that shepherd. Jesus Christ himself is the Chief shepherd but through Peter. John 10:16 is fulfilled. Notice that in John 21 we know that Jesus commanded authority to PETER to feed Jesus lambs and sheep.
Please read:
John 21:15-17 KJV
[15] So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. [16] He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. [17] He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
Jesus then ENTRUSTED PETER TO FEED ALL JESUS LAMBS and sheep.
And that is also TRUE FOR THE CONVERTS WHO ARE THE GENTILES.
When did this prophecy fulfilled?
Let us read:
Acts 10:34-37 KJV
[34] Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: [35] But in EVERY NATION he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. [36] The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) [37] That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judæa, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; …
This is of course in reference to Cornelius who is the first ever GENTILES to convert. This gave way to the acceptance of the OTHER SHEEP that Jesus spoke of in John 10:16.
St. Paul agreed with this.
Let us read:
Ephesians 2:12-16 NASB
[12] remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded i from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. [13] But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. [14] For He Himself is our peace, who made BOTH GROUPS INTO ONE and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, [15] by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, [16] and might reconcile them BOTH IN ONE BODY to God through the cross, by o it having put to death the enmity.
Galatians 3:28 NASB
[28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all ONE in Christ Jesus.”
Jesus made St. Peter as the shepherd of his entire sheep both JEWS and Gentiles is crystal clear.
SORIANO said:
It is not very easy to tell and relate the truth. Because of this blog, I have received not a pocketful but a bucketful of defamations from Catholic defenders.
My reply:
Catholics are only defending their faith against your blatant lies and constant attacks against the Catholic Church. Now you are crying foul, how great is your hypocrisy.
SORIANO said:
Still and all, despite what defamers can do to me, no history – biblical or otherwise – will back up the claim that Peter stayed in Rome as the first pope. The history written in the Catholic encyclopedia by Catholics themselves, that the word “pope” was just invented in 521 AD used by Ennodius 400 years after the death of Peter, is a very clear proof of the fallacy of that claim that Peter was the first Pope!
My reply:
The formal Title could had only been from 521 AD yet it does not follow that the authority and office of St. Peter being the visible head of the Catholic Church only existed from that time. Soriano denies that St. Peter was a bishop of Rome. History tells us other wise.
Here is from St. Ireneus.
2.” Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
3. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the traditionwhich it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Makerof heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels.
http://www.catholic.com/tr…/the-authority-of-the-pope-part-i
Soriano said:
The apostles may augment the shortcomings of each one because it is a law of Christ. They were told to help each one meet the deficiencies of the other.
GALATIANS 6:2
Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.Peter, sometime, because of the proximity to the place of necessity, was sent to witness unto a Gentile by the name of Cornelius – but not be an Apostle to the Gentiles.
My reply:
Soriano is DENYING CLEAR PROOF by claiming that St.Peter was only sent to a Gentile because of proximity or to help out to Paul and Barnabas mission to the Gentiles. That IS A BIG LIE!!! As I clearly demonstrated, the CALLING OF THE GENTILES ONLY STARTED with the Gentile called Cornelius and IT WAS ST. Peter who FIRST ACCEPTED HIM.
Soriano quoted/said:
THE ACTS 10:1-3
1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always.
3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.The God of the Bible is an exact God. He made Paul and Barnabas to be Apostles to the Gentiles – not so with Peter. So why will Peter go to Rome, reign as a pope, be crucified in the inverted manner, and die in Rome, while it was not his place of authority and designation?
My reply:
Soriano is well refuted, his lack of knowledge of history and of the Bible is apparent. His interpretation is based on bias understanding against the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Soriano said:
In fact, the Apostle Peter himself was submissive to the wisdom and ability of the Apostle Paul in administering the churches of the Gentiles.
GALATIANS 2:9
And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen (Gentiles), and they unto the circumcision. (Cephas is Peter.)
My reply:
The Pillars certainly gave permission for St. Paul’s ministry. They gave him fellowship.
Soriano said:
In his farewell letter to Timothy, when his days were counted, the Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy the second letter, written in Rome in 65 AD, tasking Timothy to come to him the earliest possible time.
II TIMOTHY 4:6-9
6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.
7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
9 Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me:The tone suggests a clear possibility that the Apostle Paul would be dying in Rome where he was at that time. In the spirit, in practice, and history of the Roman Catholic Church or Catholic Church Peter could not have been a pope! Here are four reasons:
First, Peter was married. As a supposed Pope, Peter would prohibit his successors to marry. As a married man in reality, would he do that when he, himself is married? Would it not be unfair? It most certainly is unfair.
I CORINTHIANS 9:1-4
1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?
2 If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.
3 Mine answer to them that do examine me is this,
4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?
5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
(Cephas is Peter.)
My reply:
Soriano is making no sense. Know that St. Peter although was married yet HE LEFT EVERYTHING and followed Jesus. Moreover, He could had been a widow as there is no mention about his wife, only his mother in-law. Thus, likely he could had been a celibate like all of the apostles who served the Kingdom of God.
Matthew 19:11-12 CEV
[11] Jesus told them, “Only those people who have been given the gift of staying single can accept this teaching. [12] Some people are unable to marry because of birth defects or because of what someone has done to their bodies. Others stay single for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who can accept this teaching should do so.” Jesus Blesses Little Children
Soriano said
Second, the character of Peter is such that he will not allow his subjects, being the highest authority, to call him “Pope,” because he is an obedient apostle. Pope means “papa” or Father.
MATTHEW 23:9
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.The word “pope” was never used by this apostle. The fact that “pope” is not written in the New Testament is an evidence against it as bright as the noonday sun. Third, the Apostle Peter will not allow his constituents to bow down before him as the Popes have been practicing for the past centuries. This is a form of idolatry.
My reply:
Soriano correctly defined ” Pope” which means “papa” or “father”.
He however misunderstood MATTHEW 23:9 out of context. Jesus did not prohibited is calling ANYONE ON EARTH ” father”, rather he employed hyperbole to make his point. Jesus is saying that we should not elevate ourselves but remain humble. In verse 12 it tells us:
Matthew 23:11-13 CEV
[11] Whoever is the greatest should be the servant of the others. [12-13] If you put yourself above others, you will be put down. But if you humble yourself, you will be honored.
St. Paul would not contradict Jesus as he is a good follower. Yet, he even called himself ” father”.
1 Corinthians 4:14-15 NASB
[14] I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. [15] For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I BECAME YOUR FATHER through the gospel. …”
Soriano quoted:
THE ACTS 10:25-26
25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.
My reply:
Yes, to worship one as god other than the one true God is wrong. Peter explained to Cornelius that he is “ONLY A MAN.”
Soriano said:
The practices of the popes now, accepting the praises and the kneeling down of people before them, is a clear indication that they are not successors to Peter.
My reply:
When bowing down is not meant to worship as God then it is not CONTRARY TO CHRIST. In fact Jesus could will it.
Jesus said:
Revelation 3:9 NASB
[9] Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie-I will make them come and BOW DOWN at your feet, and make them know that I have loved you.”
Do Jesus wants us to commit idolatry? Of course not!
Soriano said:
Fourth, Peter is not power-hungry. He cannot be, from the start, a bishop of Rome that eventually rose to the power of being the overall leader of the Catholic Church. Consider power and the greed for more power as described below –
Why not Peter? Because biblically speaking, Paul was the bishop of Rome – considering places of assignment. Paul established the church in Rome and was the caretaker of the church in Rome. How can Peter be the bishop in Rome? Peter would never compete with Apostle Paul. It is reflective in Peter’s letter that tells the first century Christians his respect for the wisdom of Paul.
II PETER 3:15-17
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.
My reply:
When someone is ignorant of history and bias about it, he makes his own story to deny the truth. Soriano is that kind of person.
Soriano concluded:
THIS IS THE TRUTH!!!! Biblical history, logic, and the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ together deny the alleged papacy of Peter.
Certainly, the Bible is again abused and misused by SORIANO as it is also true to other false teachers do.
Jesus did not deny PETER being the head of the early church rather he made him one.
Jesus as king of the New Covenant as promised in the OT to his father David. Jesus gave PETER the KEYS much like Eliakim who is the Steward of David’s kingdom.
Let us read:
Isaiah 22:21-22 NASB
[21] And I will clothe him with your tunic And tie your sash securely about him. I will entrust him with your authority, t And he will become A FATHER to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. [22] “Then I will set the KEY of the house of David on his shoulder, When he opens no one will shut, When he shuts no one will open.”
Notice that Steward ELIAKIM was given authority, HE WAS CALLED FATHER and was GIVEN KEY. The apostle understood the Jesus is KING AND HE IS NOW MAKING PETER as steward, A FATHER and gave him authority. Jesus is not required to spelt it in detail that PETER/CEPHAS will also be called “father”. Pretty much like a package deal. It’s important to add that Abraham was so called ” rock” and became the “father” of many nations.
Coincidence? No! God is precise.
Soriano said:
More to come, God willing.
God bless you.
My reply: