“Eli, Eli, Hindi Ka Israeli!”

(In English, “Eli, Eli, you’re not an Israeli!”) So quips my friend, Pastor Marvin Bagabaldo, in his book, “Ang Dating Daan, Pasasaan?” (“The Old Path, Where Is It Going?”) He was questioning the unbiblical tendency of Eli Soriano of Ang Dating Daan (ADD) to claim (falsely) that he and his group fulfilled prophecies that are actually specific to the nation Israel. (For example, see how Soriano thought that Zechariah 13:8-9 prophesies about the ADD.) 

In his zeal to prove that his group is the only true church, Soriano also misinterpreted Isaiah 24:15: “Therefore in the east give glory to the LORD; exalt the name of the LORD, the God of Israel, in the islands of the sea.” (Isaiah 24:15, NIV)

Quoting that verse, Eli Soriano of Ang Dating Daan (ADD) concluded that, “The Philippines (formerly called ‘Las Islas Filipinas’ [The Philippine Islands] in honor of King Philip II of Spain), which is a group of Island (sic) in the Pacific Ocean, is included in Biblical prophecies.” (God-InspiredProphecies about a Poor Nation and a Nobody Like Brother Eli) 

Highlighting the word “east,” Soriano was so confident in asserting that our country fulfills this prophecy. “The possibility of this prophecy being fulfilled in the Philippines is 100 percent! Brother Eli and his group are ‘easterners’; and his group is the only congregation in the Philippines that offers the sacrifice of thanksgiving unto the God of Israel — weekly.” (Ibid) And, with the Philippines having more than 7,100 islands, depending on whether it’s high tide or low tide, our country fulfilled the clause “in the islands of the sea” as far as Soriano is concerned.

It appears that the fruit does not fall far from the tree. A breakaway group from the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) led by Nicholas Perez gave birth later on to Soriano’s group. Yet, despite the fact that the INC and the ADD are against each other doctrinally, they both agree that the Philippines is in Bible prophecy. They both claimed to be the only true church. And one way to prove that is to point out that its founder or leader, its group and the place where the group hails fulfilled the prophecies of the Word of God. 

Yet, did Isaiah 24:15 really prophesy about the Philippines?

To justify his interpretation, Soriano claims that, “There are prophecies meant to have dual fulfillment: both for the Jews and the Gentiles.” (Ibid) But he also admitted, “There are prophecies meant solely to be fulfilled in the nation of Israel.” (Ibid)

So, how do we know which prophecies are solely for Israel and which are for both Jews and Gentiles?

In a word, context.

Chapters 13 to 23 of Isaiah prophesied about “God’s judgment on the nations through the Assyrian invasions”. (Bible Knowledge Commentary, 1072) Then, from chapter 24 to 27, the prophet foretold “the Lord’s eventual judgment on the whole world” (Ibid). This portion of Isaiah is “[k]nown as ‘Isaiah’s apocalypse’ … [It] describe the earth’s devastation and people’s intense suffering during the coming Tribulation and the blessings to follow in the millennial kingdom.” (Ibid) The context of the prophecy is not talking about our past or present times. It is talking about the things that are yet to happen in the future. Also, who was the pronoun “they” referring to in verse 15? It is not talking about Filipinos. The context shows that it refers to the remnant of Israel who would survive the worldwide judgment. The Lord will gather together again those Jews who were dispersed all over the world.

Let’s read the entire passage:

“They raise their voices, they shout for joy; from the west they acclaim the LORD’s majesty. Therefore in the east give glory to the LORD; exalt the name of the LORD, the God of Israel, in the islands of the sea. From the ends of the earth we hear singing: ‘Glory to the Righteous One.’” (Isaiah 24:13-16a. Emphasis added)

Note the geographical markers: “from the west,” “in the east,” “in the islands of the sea,” “from the ends of the earth.” In his article, Soriano conveniently focused only on “in the east” and “in the islands of the sea” while he left out “from the west” and “from the ends of the earth.” (Following his argument, if “east” refers to the Philippines, what does “west” refer to? Does that mean another true church will surface “from the west”, for example, the United States of America? That’s what happens when we fail to consider the context.)

These geographical markers are just the Bible’s poetic way of saying “from all over the world.” So, was the phrase “in the east” referring to the Philippines? Psalm 113:3 tell us, “From the rising of the sun [east] to the place where it sets, [west] the name of the LORD is to be praised.” (Emphasis added) The New Living Translation goes this way: “Everywhere—from east to west—praise the name of the LORD.” (Emphasis added) So, the answer is “No.”

What about “in the islands of the sea”? Again, the answer is “No.” In the English Standard Version, it is translated, “the coastlands of the sea”. In Esther 10:1 we read, “King Ahasuerus imposed tax on the land and on ​the coastlands of the sea.” (Emphasis added. In the NIV, “distant shores.”) Does that mean that the Persian king taxed the Philippines also? When the Bible came about, the Philippines did not exist yet as a country. So, when original readers of the Bible read those words, they would not even think of our country. Their frame of reference was their known world.

 Isaiah 11:11 tells us the location of these islands or coastlands of the sea and the rest of the geographical markers: “In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the coastlands of the sea.” It should be Isaiah who should define these markers, not Soriano. “The remnant will be drawn by God from the north (Hamath), south (Egypt and Cush), east (Assyria... Elam... Babylonia) and west (islands of the sea)-from the four quarters of the earth.” (The Bible Knowledge Commentary, 1057. Emphasis theirs) Note that, as far as the prophet is concerned, “east” was Assyria, Elam and Babylonia and that “the islands of the sea” was actually west and not east. So Isaiah could not be prophesying about the Philippines at all!

The Moody Atlas of the Bible Lands underscored the importance of knowing geography in understanding the Word of God.

“In our worthy desire to interpret and apply Scripture properly, therefore, we must ensure as much as possible that the enterprise is built knowledgeably upon the grid of the Bible’s own environment. … Without such knowledge, one is faced with the prospect of foisting upon the Scriptures an alien, if modern, grid with potentially disastrous consequences.” (Moody Atlas of the Bible Lands, 3, 4)

So, Isaiah 24:15 was “meant solely to be fulfilled in the nation of Israel.” It does not in any way refer to the Philippines. His interpretation of Isaiah 24:15 is a clear case of “eisegesis” or reading into the text something that it did not intend to teach. It is not really letting the Bible speak for itself. It is actually making the Bible say what he thought it intended to say. In short, it’s a plain and simple misinterpretation.