Bible Verses Are Not Lego® Bricks
Like
the plastic Lego bricks that we put together to build a structure, the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) like to do the
same with Bible verses to prove their teachings.
 |
| From Wikipedia |
Most of the plastic bricks would fit any other bricks. So, we can interlock one brick with another brick without even thinking if they belong to each other. But it is not the same with verses. Every verse has a context. The context of a verse(s) would be the verses preceding and following it. The larger context would be the entire paragraph, the paragraphs (or chapters) before and after, and even the book where the passage is found. We cannot put verses together without checking its context. The context determines whether the verses connect with one another.
We
call this proof-texting. The problem with this approach is that the INC tends
to wrest verses out of its context.
“The Iglesia ni Cristo unashamedly
uses a proof-text method of handling Scripture. It knows which doctrines it
especially needs to depend and seeks verses and parts of verses to defend them,
often completely disregarding the context. … This proof-text method does have
the advantage of overwhelming opponents by the sheer volume of texts cited. In
one sermon, I heard 21 different texts referred to, and in another 26.” [Arthur Leonard Tuggy, Iglesia ni Cristo: A Study of Independent Church Dynamics, 127]
For
example, the INC has put John 4:24 and Luke 24:39 together merely because those
verses have the same word (“spirit”)
without considering its context. Then, they falsely concluded that, “Since ‘God is spirit (Jn. 4:24) and Jesus
Christ isn’t [Lk. 24:39], then Jesus
Christ is not God.” [Pasugo, April 2002, 7] (See also: “Did Jesus Deny His Deity in Luke 24:39?”)
Whenever
the INC would quote a verse, we should not counter by quoting another verse.
Doing so would just give the impression to people listening to the discussion
that we could make the Bible say what we want it to say. Instead,
like what we do here in Bible Exposé, we study those verses that the INC uses
as proof-texts, seeking to bring out its intended meaning by showing its real
context.
Other than Numbers 23:19, the INC also quotes Hosea 11:9 and Ezekiel 28:2 to teach
that Jesus is man, not God. (See also: “Does Numbers 23:19 Deny That God Would Become Man?”)
“I will not execute the fierceness
of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man;
the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.” (Hosea
11:9, KJV. Emphasis added.)
“Son of man, say unto the prince of
Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast
said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midsta of the seas; yet
thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God…” (Ezekiel 28:2, KJV. Emphasis added.)
After
quoting those verses, the INC makes this conclusion.
“Kung
gayon, ang Diyos ay Diyos at ang tao ay tao. Ang Diyos ay hindi tao at ang tao
ay hindi Diyos. Kaya wala sa Biblia ang aral na si Cristo ay taong totoo at
Diyos na totoo. Ang ating Panginoong Jesucristo ay tao ayon sa Biblia.”
[“Therefore, God is God and man is man.
God is not man and man is not God. Thus, the teaching that Christ is true man
and true God is not found in the Bible. Our Lord Jesus Christ is man according
to the Bible.”] [Pasugo, February 1995, 14]
But like Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9 and Ezekiel 28:2
did not actually rule out the possibility that God would become man. Indeed,
God actually became man (John 1:1, 14. See also: “What Does John 1:1 Say About The Nature of Jesus Christ?”). The INC merely took those verses out of
its context, putting the wrong verses together.
Hosea 11 is about God promising restoration for
Israel after pronouncing judgment upon the nation. His punishment for their
sins did not cancel out His promise to them.
“God
did not change His mind about bringing judgment on Israel, but He promised not
to apply the full measure of His wrath or to destroy Ephraim again in the
future. He would show restraint because
He is God, not a man who forgets His promises, is arbitrary in His
passions, and might be vindictive in His anger”. [Dr. Thomas L. Constable, Notes on Hosea 2012 Edition, 48. Emphasis added.]
Like what I wrote regarding Numbers 23:19 before,
Hosea 11:9 is not about the impossibility of God becoming man but about the His
immutability as far as His promises and purposes for the chosen people are
concerned.
Ezekiel 28 is part of a series of prophecies
against Gentile nations. At this point, the prophet Ezekiel pronounced judgment
upon Tyre. He focused on the sin of its king that brought upon the judgment on
the city.
“The
underlying sin of Tyre’s king was his pride, which prompted him to view himself
as a god. … Evidently in Ezekiel’s day the kings of Tyre believed they were
divine. The king’s claims to deity were false. … Evidently he felt he had
wisdom that only a god could possess.” [The Bible Knowledge Commentary, 1282. Emphasis added.]
Of course, man would never become God. But, Jesus
is not a man who became God. He is God Who became man. Denying that man would
ever become God does not also mean denying that God would become man.
Thus,
when we ignore the context of a verse, we are actually putting words in God’s
mouth. When we proof-text, we make Him say what He did not really say. We
should rather let God speak through His Word.
After
all, Bible verses are not Lego bricks.
________________________________
REFERENCES
Catañgay, Daniel
D. “Ang mga katangian ni Cristo at ang Kaniyang likas na kalagayan.” Pasugo: God’s Message. February 1995.
Catañgay, Tomas
C. “That stubbon skeptic, Thomas.” Pasugo:
God’s Message. April 2002.
Constable, Dr.
Thomas L. “Notes on Hosea 2012 Edition.” Sonic Light 2012.
http://soniclight.org/constable/notes/pdf/hosea.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2012.
Dyer, Charles H. “Ezekiel.”
The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Old
Testament. Eds. John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck and Dallas Theological
Seminary. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983, 1985.
Tuggy, Arthur
Leonard. Iglesia ni Cristo: A Study of
Independent Church Dynamics, Arthur Leonard Tuggy. QC, Philippines: Conservative
Baptist Publishing, 1976.
posted by Bible Exposé at 8:21 AM
<< Home