Skip to main content

Filipino Racists Who Are Also Roman Catholic Fanatics Contradict Themselves

Let's focus on another division within Rome. This is the trend of Roman Catholics who are Filipino racists. This may be the mindset of the Filipino racist who are also practicing Roman Catholics:
1.) If you're a Filipino then you should practice Roman Catholicism.  
2.) The born again Christian faith must be rejected as something that was just "made in America". They believe that Billy Graham is the founder of the born again Christian group during the 1970s. 
3.) They may also be adhering to the ideology that Filipinos are the most powerful race in the world.

It's time to address the foolishness of their foolish arguments one by one. This would point out how they are self-contradictory individuals.
1.) The argument that if you're a Filipino then you should practice Roman Catholicism relies on the logical fallacy called appealing to tradition 
These group may insist that because Roman Catholicism was practiced in the Philippines for several centuries now that they must indeed be Roman Catholics. They may claim that Roman Catholicism is an inseparable part of being a Filipino. They insist that since they were raised Roman Catholics then they will die as Roman Catholics no matter how wrong it is. They want to remain as Roman Catholics with the fear that they may lose their identity as Filipinos. 
What they may be ignoring the major fact that the Philippines wasn't always populated by mostly Roman Catholics. The religion was brought in by the Spanish colonizers and wasn't always in the Philippines. The natives of the Philippines were once practitioners of ethnic tribal religions. So why are they not practicing ethnic tribal religion instead of Roman Catholicism since ethnic religion was also practiced by their ancestors? I guess they'll just reply that since the tribal religion has gone extinct and that God supposedly moved the covenant from Israel to them. Please show a specific verse in context. 
2.) The idea that born again Christian didn't exist until the 1970s and is just an American invention of Billy Graham is riddled with contradictory claims  
Billy Graham was already addressed as a friend of the Jesuits in the Catholic Herald of June 3, 1966 and he's still openly a friend of the Jesuits. Graham's crusades didn't create born again Christianity. Being a born again Christian is not about joining a sect called "born again". Need I remind you that Graham himself is supposedly a Baptist pastor in name and profession? One important fact about Graham is his fellowship with the Popes or that he considers Roman Catholics as part of the family in Christ. The late John Paul II regarded him as a brother in Christ. If Graham founded born again Christianity and John Paul II regarded the former as a brother then shouldn't Roman Catholics embrace born again Christians as family? That's quite a dilemma for their fanaticism. 
Also the idea that born again Christianity was just a term invented by Americans is also contradictory. Even the 1899 Douay Catholic Bible translate "born from above" as "born again" which puts the claim in a dilemma. They appeal to the Greek whenever it's convenient never mind that the Greek actually contradicts them. Did they know that the word baptize comes from the word baptizo which means to immerse or that catholic was meant as a descriptive word and not the official name of the church?   
3.) The idea of the Filipino master race while practicing Roman Catholicism puts them in a bigger dilemma  
As said earlier, the Philippines wasn't always a nation full of Roman Catholics and that the Spaniards brought the religion to the country. If they hate foreigners so much or keep blaming foreigners for their problems, they need to remember that the Roman Catholic institution is a worldwide organization. You have Roman Catholics in almost every part of the globe so what makes them think that the Philippines is so "special"? Did God just move His covenant from the Jews to the Filipinos? They'll probably just misquote verses in the same way as the members of the Iglesia Ni Cristo (Manalo).  
Jesus was born in His humanity in a Jewish home. While they can claim that the Pope is the successor of Peter (and Peter is a Jew) but they have to answer if the Popes were Filipinos. For those of them who are have their xenophobic hostilities, they need to ask themselves if the Vatican is located in the Philippines or in Italy or if the Pope is a foreigner or not. This should also be another dilemma that the Filipino language is a mixture of several languages and that today's Filipino alphabet could not be possible without foreign influence. Not to mention when they may be attending Masses officiated in American-English singing hymns in English along with Filipino hymns. The Roman Catholic translations were originally written in Latin and not in Filipino.. 

Filipino racists who are Roman Catholics may also have all their bizarre beliefs not supported by the official Roman Catholic doctrine. Some of these beliefs include not bathing on Good Friday, some of them may believe Jesus dies every Good Friday, the belief of folk monsters not recognized to be real by Roman Catholic doctrine, wearing of garlic to repel evil spirits and voluntary crucifixion as a form of penance. Many of these doctrines have been officially shunned as heretical by the Roman Catholic institution and a result of syncretism between Filipino folk religion and Roman Catholicism.

Popular posts from this blog

Do Feminists Ever Realize That Women Shouldn't Use Acts of Violence Against Men?

It's irritating to be told that men shouldn't use violence on women but the other way around is okay. No, it's not okay to hit anyone regardless of gender out of anger or frustration. If men shouldn't hit women except in acts of self-defense then the other way round should apply. But you have to remember the stupidity of selective justice and selective outrage of feminists. They think men should respect them while they think discriminating against men is okay. Their quest for "equality" is nothing more than a big joke.

Why is it usually a big fuzz when a man hits a woman but not so many people react if a woman hits a man? That kind of hypocrisy is worth addressing. They say men shouldn't hit women because they are "weaker" but is it okay for a person of lower rank to attack a person of higher rank? The word submission doesn't exist in the feminist dictionary unless it's men submitting to them. Whether they like it or not the husband is t…

You Can't Preach About God's Love For Sinners Without Preaching About His Wrath Against Sin

It's a problem that so many quack preachers love to preach God's love for sinners but not about God's wrath against them because He must punish both the sin and the sinner. Everything from God's love to His wrath is dictated by the fact that He is holy and you are not. The message about God's love for sinners will make no sense if you don't preach about God's wrath against sin first. I remembered listening to "Hell's Best Kept Secret" and "True and False Conversion" by Ray Comfort. There was this point where Kirk Cameron talked about what if I sold my property to save someone from a disease. If the person doesn't know anything about the disease then my selling of all my property to pay for the badly needed treatment won't make sense. Another illustration was all about the flight. You have to tell the person that the parachute is not meant to improve the flight but to tell the person that it's for emergency reasons. If you…

It's Not Okay to Be Blindly Loyal to the Pope and His Army of Pharisees

Some rabid Roman Catholics keep sensationalizing the sins of fraud pastors (as if true born again Christians ever support them) while they keep hiding the sins of their priests or Pharisees. They also say that born again Christians are blindly loyal to the pastor never mind that they are blindly loyal to the Pope and his Pharisees. Blind loyalty towards a a prosperity gospel pastor, a so-called successor of a so-called last messenger or any quack preacher is no different than blind loyalty towards the Pope and his Pharisees. Worse, Roman Catholics believe that their Pharisees are instruments in saving their souls or that the Pope supposedly holds salvation in his hands never mind all the priestly scandals are telling them otherwise.

I could remember how often Bible reading is discouraged (and yet some of these rabid Roman Catholics tell me I should read the Bible and I can't get wrong with it) because it could drive me crazy from reading it. Some Roman Catholics I've met &quo…

Don't Even Think About Legalizing Prostitution or Sex Trade

There's some people who seek to legalize prostitution. Some "rational" atheists are already talking about prostitution should be legalized so it could be controlled by the government. The claim that "studies" show that prohibition doesn't work is a lie straight from the pits of Hell. The Israelites were doing sin not because God forbade it but because they were disobedient and the rulers did nothing to prevent those sins. It's not surprising is that the same people who seek to legalize prostitution also want to legalize narcotics and hard liquor all in the name of "succeeding in the war against them".

The logic behind legalizing prostitution is that so the government can control them and tax them. But the problem with the quest to legalize prostitution is that it encourages the sin rather than discourage it. The problem is not the war against prostitution but ignoring Ecclesiastes 8:11. Do you know why the war against prostitution isn't wo…

Is Salvation in Peter's Hands (As Well as the Popes) Because Jesus Supposedly Gave Him the Literal Keys of Heaven?

According to a self-proclaimed Roman Catholic apologist (who I'll probably dub as Mr. Whistle when I mention him) he claimed that salvation is in the hands of Peter because Jesus gave the former the keys of Heaven. The guy is clearly taking things out of context with what he says. I wonder does he even bother to check out the idioms of the Bible since some passages use a figure of speech instead of speaking everything literally?

If he can't get Matthew 16:18 correctly where he said that Peter the Rock even when the Good News Translation for Roman Catholics says otherwise (and worse for them Peter is differentiated as a rock and the Rock is clearly not him) then he also misinterprets Matthew 16:19. Let's try to understand Matthew 16:19 with the keys and what they really mean. In his interpretation he's already telling everyone that born again Christians should just go back to the Roman Catholic institution because the Pope supposedly holds salvation in his hands. I don&…

Atheists With Abusive Mindsets Do Exist

It's a myth over the modern world that there's no such thing as an atheist with an abusive mindset. I can see atheists who claim that abuses only come through theism. I don't deny that there's such a thing as religious people with an abusive mindset such as Roman Catholic fanatics, Islamic extremists and any form of religious extremism. The problem of the claim is that it denies the reality that there's such a thing as atheists who have an abusive mindset. One such person is the late Christopher Hitchens who claims that he has the right o treat religion with ridicule, hatred and contempt. Isn't that an example of an atheist with an abusive mindset? Sad to say, Hitchens himself is still cursing God from the pits of Hell. Christians should pray that Richard Dawkins wouldn't make the same wrong decision as Hitchens.

One horrible atheist blogger claimed he was indeed one of the most scientific people on Earth. Just reading his blog alone is so tiresome that I&…

Why This Ministry DOES NOT Support the Westboro Baptist Church

The Westboro Baptist Church is a so-called Baptist institution founded by Fred Phelps who is a lawyer and a theologian. Is it your average Baptist assembly or is this another of Satan's brain children? I would like to present my stand why this ministry does not support the Westboro Baptist Church and why as a Baptist, I do not support them either:
The founder Fred Phelps who serves as its pastor. I do find it disturbing he says that he supports sound doctrine of good Christian preachers of the past like John Calvin and Charles Haddon Spurgeon but his doctrine is not sound at all. His preaching is definitely not balanced. While I do appreciate him attacking the Great Whore of Revelation, apostasy, ecumenism, homosexuality, abortion, pornography and a lot of sins however he is no better than the Roman Catholic institution which he frequently criticizes. Although he claims to be a Calvinist and a Spurgeon fan, however many of those who are Calvinist preachers like Paul Washer, John …