Insular Life Assurance Company Ltd vs. Ebardo (G.R. No. L-44059) Case Digest

 

 

 

 

Insular Life Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Ebardo

G.R. No. L-44059.

 

Facts:

            Buenaventura Ebrado was issued by The Life Assurance Company on a whole-life for 5,882.00 pesos with a, rider for Accidental Death for the same amount Buenaventura Ebrado designated T. Ebrado as the revocable beneficiary in his policy. Buenaventura Ebrado died when he was hit by a failing branch of a tree. As the policy was in force, The Insular Life Assurance Co., Ltd. liable to pay the coverage in the total amount of 11,745.73 pesos.

            Carponia T. Ebrado filed with the insurer a claim for the proceeds of the Policy as the designated beneficiary therein, although she admits that she and the insured Buenaventura C. Ebrado were merely living as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. Legal Wife Pascuala Ebrado also filed her claim as the widow of the deceased insured. She asserts that she is the one entitled to the insurance proceeds, not the common-law wife, Carponia T. Ebrado.

            The trial court rendered judgment declaring among others, Carponia T. Ebrado disqualified from becoming beneficiary of the insured Buenaventura Cristor Ebrado and directing the payment of the insurance proceeds to the estate of the deceased insured.

 

Issue:

            Whether common-law wife named as beneficiary in the life insurance policy of a legally married man can claim the proceeds thereof in case of death of the latter.

 

Held:

            NO. When not otherwise specifically provided for by the Insurance Law, the contract of life insurance is governed by the general rules of the civil law regulating contracts.  And under Article 2012 of the same Code, "any person who is forbidden from receiving any donation under Article 739 cannot be named beneficiary of a fife insurance policy by the person who cannot make a donation to him.  Common-law spouses are, definitely, barred from receiving donations from each other. Article 739 of the new Civil Code provides:

The following donations shall be void:

1. Those made between persons who were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of donation;

2. Those made between persons found guilty of the same criminal offense, in consideration thereof;

3. Those made to a public officer or his wife, descendants or ascendants by reason of his office.

In the case referred to in No. 1, the action for declaration of nullity may be brought by the spouse of the donor or donee; and the guilt of the donee may be proved by preponderance of evidence in the same action.

            In essence, a life insurance policy is no different from a civil donation insofar as the beneficiary is concerned. Both are founded upon the same consideration: liberality. A beneficiary is like a donee, because from the premiums of the policy which the insured pays out of liberality, the beneficiary will receive the proceeds or profits of said insurance. As a consequence, the proscription in Article 739 of the new Civil Code should equally operate in life insurance contracts. The mandate of Article 2012 cannot be laid aside: any person who cannot receive a donation cannot be named as beneficiary in the life insurance policy of the person who cannot make the donation.

            Policy considerations and dictates of morality rightly justify the institution of a barrier between common law spouses in record to Property relations since such hip ultimately encroaches upon the nuptial and filial rights of the legitimate family There is every reason to hold that the bar in donations between legitimate spouses and those between illegitimate ones should be enforced in life insurance policies since the same are based on similar consideration As above pointed out, a beneficiary in a fife insurance policy is no different from a donee. Both are recipients of pure beneficence. So long as manage remains the threshold of family laws, reason and morality dictate that the impediments imposed upon married couple should likewise be imposed upon extra-marital relationship. If legitimate relationship is circumscribed by these legal disabilities, with more reason should an illicit relationship be restricted by these disabilities.

Constantino vs Asia Life Insurance Company (G.R. No. L-1669) Case Digest

 

 

 

Constantino vs. Asia Life Insurance Company

G.R. No. L-1669.

 

Facts:

            In consideration of the sum of 176.04 pesos as annual premium duly paid to it, the Asia Life Insurance Company; whereby it insured the life of Arcadio Constantino for a term of twenty years. The first premium covered the period up to September 26, 1942. The plaintiff Paz Lopez de Constantino was regularly appointed beneficiary.

                After that first payment, no further premiums were paid. The insured died on September 22, 1944. It is admitted that the defendant, being an American corporation, had to close its branch office in Manila by reason of the Japanese occupation, i.e. from January 2, 1942, until the year 1945.

                Plaintiffs maintain that, as beneficiaries, they are entitled to receive the proceeds of the policies minus all sums due for premiums in arrears. They allege that non-payment of the premiums was caused by the closing of defendant's offices in Manila during the Japanese occupation and the impossible circumstances created by war. The lower court absolved the defendant. Hence this appeal.

 

Issue:

            Whether the beneficiary in a life insurance policy may recover the amount thereof although the insured died after repeatedly failing to pay the stipulated premiums, such failure having been caused by the last war in the Pacific.

 

Held:

            No. Since the year 1917, the Philippine law on Insurance was found in Act Number 2427, as amended, and the Civil Code. Act Number 2427 was largely copied from the Civil Code of California.  Pursuant to the express terms of the policy, non-payment of premium produces its avoidance.

                Professor Vance of Yale, in his standard treatise on Insurance, says that in determining the effect of non-payment of premiums occasioned by war, the American cases may be divided into three groups, according as they support the so-called Connecticut Rule, the New York Rule, or the United States Rule.

                The first holds the view that "there are two elements in the consideration for which the annual premium is paid — first, the mere protection for the year, and second, the privilege of renewing the contract for each succeeding year by paying the premium for that year at the time agreed upon. According to this view of the contract, the payment of premiums is a condition precedent, the non-performance would be illegal necessarily defeats the right to renew the contract."

                The second rule, apparently followed by the greater number of decisions, hold that "war between states in which the parties reside merely suspends the contracts of the life insurance, and that, upon tender of all premiums due by the insured or his representatives after the war has terminated, the contract revives and becomes fully operative."

                The United States rule declares that the contract is not merely suspended, but is abrogated by reason of non-payments is peculiarly of the essence of the contract. It additionally holds that it would be unjust to allow the insurer to retain the reserve value of the policy, which is the excess of the premiums paid over the actual risk carried during the years when the policy had been in force. This rule was announced in the well-known Statham case which, in the opinion of Professor Vance, is the correct rule.

                The appellants and some amici curiae contend that the New York rule should be applied here. The appellee and other amici curiae contend that the United States doctrine is the orthodox view.

                We have read and re-read the principal cases upholding the different theories. Besides the respect and high regard we have always entertained for decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, we cannot resist the conviction that the reasons expounded in its decision of the Statham case are logically and judicially sound. Like the instant case, the policy involved in the Statham decision specifies that non-payment on time shall cause the policy to cease and determine. Reasoning out that punctual payments were essential, the court said:

                . . . it must be conceded that promptness of payment is essential in the business of life insurance. All the calculations of the insurance company are based on the hypothesis of prompt payments. They not only calculate on the receipt of the premiums when due, but on compounding interest upon them. It is on this basis that they are enabled to offer assurance at the favorable rates they do. Forfeiture for non-payment is a necessary means of protecting themselves from embarrassment. Unless it were enforceable, the business would be thrown into confusion. It is like the forfeiture of shares in mining enterprises, and all other hazardous undertakings. There must be power to cut-off unprofitable members, or the success of the whole scheme is endangered. The insured parties are associates in a great scheme. This associated relation exists whether the company be a mutual one or not. Each is interested in the engagements of all; for out of the co-existence of many risks arises the law of average, which underlies the whole business. An essential feature of this scheme is the mathematical calculations referred to, on which the premiums and amounts assured are based. And these calculations, again, are based on the assumption of average mortality, and of prompt payments and compound interest thereon. Delinquency cannot be tolerated nor redeemed, except at the option of the company. This has always been the understanding and the practice in this department of business. Some companies, it is true, accord a grace of thirty days, or other fixed period, within which the premium in arrear may be paid, on certain conditions of continued good health, etc. But this is a matter of stipulation, or of discretion, on the part of the particular company. When no stipulation exists, it is the general understanding that time is material, and that the forfeiture is absolute if the premium be not paid. The extraordinary and even desperate efforts sometimes made, when an insured person is in extremes to meet a premium coming due, demonstrates the common view of this matter.

                It should be noted that the parties contracted not only for peacetime conditions but also for times of war, because the policies contained provisions applicable expressly to wartime days. The logical inference, therefore, is that the parties contemplated uninterrupted operation of the contract even if armed conflict should ensue.

                After perusing the Insurance Act, we are firmly persuaded that the non-payment of premiums is such a vital defense of insurance companies that since the very beginning, said Act number 2427 expressly preserved it, by providing that after the policy shall have been in force for two years, it shall become incontestable (i.e. the insurer shall have no defense) except for fraud, non-payment of premiums, and military or naval service in time of war (sec. 184 [b], Insurance Act). And when Congress recently amended this section (Rep. Act Number 171), the defense of fraud was eliminated, while the defense of non-payment of premiums was preserved. Thus the fundamental character of the undertaking to pay premiums and the high importance of the defense of non-payment thereof, was specifically recognized.

                In keeping with such legislative policy, we feel no hesitation to adopt the United States Rule, which is in effect a variation of the Connecticut rule for the sake of equity. In this connection, it appears that the first policy had no reserve value, and that the equitable values of the second had been practically returned to the insured in the form of loan and advance for premium.

Tanong Galing sa Member ng Iglesia ni Cristo-Manalo

 Author: jenny
E-mail : SnowAngel_rHose06@yahoo.com
URL    :
Whois  : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=124.217.32.154
Comment:
excuse me..tanong ko lang sa mga CATHOLIC mayroon bng nakasulat sa bible na IGLESIA KATOLIKA APOSTOLIKA ROMANA??if meron den i will convert to your religion, tska patunayan nyong hindi bawal kumain ng dugo,hindi bawal ang pagsamba sa mga diyos diyosan,bawal na pag aasawa ng pari, hindi bawal ang fiesta,,,and for the information of all,kea lang naman po kayo nang uusig is that nabubulgar na ang mga maling aral niyo,,and thank God,,kasi tama ang nakasulat sa bible,na kung pinag uusig ang panginoong Hesukristo kami man din,,so,makinig muna kayo ng totoong aral bago kayo mang usig,,kayo din!!!para sa kaalaman din ng iba wala kaming nilalabag sa mga utos ng Diyos,,if meron po kayong mapatunayan na meron kameng nilalabag den ipagsigawan niyo sa buong madla,,but for sure wala naman kayong mapapatunayan..dats ol..hope na magliwanag ang inyong nabubulagang puso..

-SINAGUTAN NILA:

Bro. G-one T. Paisones

Bro. Noel D. Paisones Sr.

Dear Jenny,

Sa hindi pa natin sasagutin ang tanong mo ay dapat nating malaman na si Cristo lang ang nagtatag ng Kanyang iglisya (Mat. 16:18); itoy naitatag N’ya sa kanyang kapanahonan ( Mat. 18:17); itoy Kanyang katawan (Col.1:18); Sya ang manliligtas ng iglisya (Efe 5:23); ito’y itinayo nya sa saligan ng mga apostol (Efe 2:20); itoy sasamahan Nya hanggang sa katapusan ng sanlibutan (Mat. 28:20) at bibigyan Nya ito ng patnubay(Juan. 14:16-17) at ang patnubay, ang Espiritu Santo na magtuturo sa iglisya ng lahat ng bagay at magpapaalala ng lahat ng sinabi ni Cristo (Juan. 14:26)

Ang tunay na iglisyang itinatag ni Cristo ay magpasahanggang sa ngayon ay narito pa at hindi ito kalian man tatalikod at mawawalang parang bula (Mat. 16:18) (Mat. 28:20) (Juan. 14:16-17,26)

Sa kapanahunan natin ngayon may mahigit na sa 33000 kristianong denomenasyon (sekta); at lahat nag-aangkin na sila raw ang totoong iglisyang itinatag ni Cristo. Sa 33000 sekta isa lang ang tunay na iglisiang Itinatag ni Cristo. Ang tunay na iglesya:

-Si Cristo ang nagtatag

-Naitatag ni Cristo ang kanyang iglisya sa kanyang kapanahonan

-Hindi ito madadaig ng Kamatayan

-Sa mga panahon ng mga Apostol hanggang sa ngayon ay existed itong Kanyang iglesya

-Ang iglisyang ito ay can trace back its origin to the apostles.

Ang iglisyang that can trace back its origin to the apostles ay ang Roman Catholic Church (Pasugo Magazine –April 1965- page 41) (The World book Encyclopedia-1986 page 580) (The World Alamanac & Book of Facts-1966 page 501).

Ang Pasugo pa mismo ang nag patunay na ang Roman Catholic Church ay ang isa at tanging makapagpabalik ng dugtong nito sa mga apostol. Narito ang kanilang pahayag “So we don’t question the claim of the Catholic Apologist, that the Catholic Church alone could trace back its origin to the apostles” –à itoy inilathala ni Brod. C. P. Sandoval sa Pasugo Magazine –April 1965- page 41.

Ø SASAGUTIN PO NATIN PONTO-4-PUNTO ANG MGA TANONG MO

Tanong #1: Mayroon bang nakasulat sa bible na Iglisya Katolika Apostolica Romana?

àSagot po natin ay mayroon pong mababasa sa Biblia na Iglisya Katolika Apostolica Romana.

Mababasa natin ang Iglesia (Church) (ἐκκλησία): Mat. 16:18 “18} And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (KJV).

Mababasa natin ang Katolika (Catholic) (καθ’ ὅλης): James 1:1 “Catholic Epistles of St. James the Apostles” (Douay Rheims Version).

Mababasa natin ang Apostolica (Apostolic): Mat.10:39 “Apostolic discourse” (Jerusalem Bible); Act. 1:25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs (TNIV).

Mababasa natin ang Romana (Roman): Rom. 1:1 “The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans” (KJV)

Kapatid na Jenny baka isipin mo na ang word na Catholic ay mababasa lamang sa Catholic Bible; narito po ang karagdagang ebedinsya sa na mababasa talaga ang word na Catholic sa Bible:

Catholic or General Epistles (Introduction of the Greek New Testament –Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft- Page 48)

Catholic Epistles– A term applied to the Epistles of James, Peter, John and Jude. It goes back to the early church father, but how it arose is unknown. The most commonly accepted explanation is that these epistles were addressed, not to individual churches or persons but to a number to the church at large, i.e., the universal church (NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible, Page 108)

Kapatid na Jenny kung gusto mo ay sa isang citas lang sa biblia natin babasahin ang na Iglisya Katolika Apostolica Romana; ang sagot parin natin ay MAYROON MABABASA at MAIINTINDIHAN.

The Jerusalem Bible: ROMANS “The letter of Paul to the Church in Rome” Chapter 1, Verse 7-8 “ To you all, then, who are God’s beloved in Rome, called to be saints, may God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ send grace and peace. First I thank my God through Jesus spoken of all over the world.”

The Greek New Testament: Roma 1:8 Πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν ὅτι ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν καταγγέλλεται ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ,

Roma 1:8 ………………………he pistis humon KATAggelletai en holo to kosmo,

Novum Testamentum Latine : Roma 1:7-8 7omnibus qui sunt Romae dilectis Dei vocatis sanctis gratia vobis et pax a Deo Patre nostro et Domino Iesu Christo 8primum quidem gratias ago Deo meo per Iesum Christum pro omnibus vobis quia fides vestra adnuntiatur in universo mundo.

à dito ating makikita na ang Iglisya sa Roma ang may maramin bunga at narinig ang pananampalataya nito sa buong (Universal or catholic) mundo. At mapapansin sa itaas na sa Roma 1:1,6-8 mababasa at maiintindihan natin na may nabangkit na Iglesia, Roma, Universa or Catholic (Paki tingnan sa ibaba ang masusing explanation) at itoy Apostolica dahil si San Pablo ang sumulat nito sa Roma, at si San Pablo ay Apostol.

CATHOLIC-universal (Webster’s II New Riverside Pocket Dictionary, Page 45)

CATHOLIC-members of the Universal or Catholic Church (Webster’s New School & Office Dictionary, Page 142)

CATHOLIC-or Universal (Introduction to the Catholic Epistles of James, Douay Rheims Version)

Luke 4:14 (Novum Testamentum Latine) –UNIVERSAM

Luke 4 :14 (Novum Testamentum Graece) –kaq olhV (KATHOLIS)

1 Cor. 14:23 (Novum Testamentum Latine) 23si ergo conveniat universa ecclesia in unum et omnes linguis loquantur intrent autem idiotae aut infideles nonne dicent quod insanities.

Gawa 9:31 ΠΡΑΞΕΙΣ 9:31 Greek NT: WH / NA27 / UBS4 with Concordance
ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐκκλησία καθ’ ὅλης τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ Γαλιλαίας καὶ Σαμαρείας εἶχεν εἰρήνην οἰκοδομουμένη καὶ πορευομένη τῷ φόβῳ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ τῇ παρακλήσει τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐπληθύνετο.

Gawa 9:31 Mababasa natin sa Grego ang EKKLESIA KATHOLIS (ἐκκλησία καθ’ ὅλης) – which correspond to Catholic Church.

Liban sa Biblia ang KASAYSAYAN ay nag papatunay rin na ang Roman Catholic Church ay ang iglesyang itinatag ni Cristo-Jesus. Dapat malaman ng ating mga giliw na mga kapatid na mga non-catholic na ang HISTORY-is the study of the past particularly the written record of the human race, but more generally including SCIENTIFIC and ARCHAELOGICAL discoveries about the past. At ang Bible mismo ay isang HISTORICAL Books.

More than 1900 years ago, Jesus Christ the Son of God, come upon earth to save mankind. After His atoning death on the cross He rose glorious and immortal. Before leaving this world to go to the Father, our Lord founded the Catholic Church and gave to that church the command to “teach all nations” (The Old World and America by Furlong-Page 100).

Grollier Encyclopedia –volume V, page 106: “Catholic Church (Gr. Katholikos, universal, general). Term generally applied to the Divine society founded by Jesus Christ, and endowed by the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost.”

The New Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language (International Edition): Page 155: CATHOLIC– of the original Christian Church before the schism between East and West (ORTHODOXY)// of the Roman or western church after this schism and before the Reformation.

Information Almanac 1988 –Page 724: Roman Catholics– Traditionally, by Jesus who named St. Peter the 1^st vicar; historically in early Christian proselytizing and the conversion of imperial Rome in the 4^th century.

International Encyclopedia Volume 15,Page 520: Roman Catholic Church – there are two equally valid definitions of the Catholic Church comparable to the twofold nature of Jesus Christ its founder.

At marami pang ibang mga Standard references na nag papatunay na si Cristo talaga ang founder ng Roman Catholic Church tulad ng:

–World Almanac and Book of Facts –1986 Edition- Page 243-

–New Book of Knowledge Encyclopedia –Volume 18, Page 287-

–Young Student Encyclo.–Weekly Reader Book- Vol. 18, Page 2021/2121

àNasagot po ang tanong #1

#2: Patunayan nyong hindi bawal kumakain ng dugo

Noon ang dugo ay ginagamit ng mga Israylita para sa alay dahil sa kanilang kasalanan kayat itoy ipinagbawal kainin (Leviticus 17:10-11 And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.)

Kahit na sa panahon ng mga apostolis ang dugo ay ipinagbawal dahil itoy kanilang napanunod sa relihiyong Judaismo ng Kanilang mga magulang (Act 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.)

Ngunit unti-unti’y namulat o nakita ng mga Apostolis na itong mga PAGKAIN ay walang kaugnayan hinggil sa Kaligtasan bagkus ang nabubuhay sa Grasya ng Dios; “sapagkat ang pag-pasok ng tao sa kaharian ng Diyos ay hindi nababatay sa kinakain at inumin kundi sa pagiging matuwid, pagkakasundo-sundo at kagalakan na pawing kaloob ng Espiritu Santo” (Roma 14:17 Tagalog Popular Version or TPV)

Ipinagtibay ni San Pablo na huwag hamakin ang kumakain ng kahit lamang gulay, at huwag naming hatulan ng kumakain lamang ng gulay ang kumakain ng kahit ano, sapagkat siyay tinanggap ng Diyos. (Roma 14:3 TPV)

Ang prinsipyo na ito ay sinimulan ng panginoon… “Kayo man baga’y wala ring pang-unawa? Tugon ni Jesus. Hindi ba ninyo alam na hindi nakapagpaparumi sa tao ang kinakain nya, sapagkat hindi naman pumapasok iyon sa kanayang puso, kundi sa tiyan at pagkatapos ay idudumi. (Sa pagkasabi nito’y para nang ipinahayag ni Jesus na maaring kanin ang lahat ng pagkain) Marcos 7:18-19

Eze. 39:17-21(KJV) And, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; Speak unto every feathered fowl, and to every beast of the field, Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, [even] a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh, and drink blood. Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bullocks, all of them fatlings of Bashan. } And ye shall eat fat till ye be full, and drink blood till ye be drunken, of my sacrifice which I have sacrificed for you. Thus ye shall be filled at my table with horses and chariots, with mighty men, and with all men of war, saith the Lord GOD. And I will set my glory among the heathen, and all the heathen shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid upon them.

Leviticus 10:18 Behold, the blood of it was not brought in within the holy [place:] ye should indeed have eaten it in the holy [place,] as I commanded.

àDito malinaw kapatid na Jenny na ang dugo ay ipapakain.

#3: Hindi bawal ang pagsamba ng dios-diosan?

At tungkol naman sa mga dios-diosan, siguro ang ibig mong sabihin ay ang mga imahe ng mga santo. Ang mga mga imahe ng mga santo ay hindi dios-diosan sapagkat hindi sila kinikilalang Diyos ng mga Katoliko at hindi ito ang doctrina ng santa Iglesia Catolica na mga Dios ang mga ito.

Kung may mga katolikong kumikilala na ang mga imahe ay Dios, sila ay nagkasala na tinatawag ng ADOLATRIA ayon narin sa batas ng Santa Iglesia Catolica.

Ito ang tunay na turo ng Santa Iglesia Catolica hingil sa mga imahen:

“We honor sacred images in order to show our veneration for the person the represent, not to adore them as gods.” (My Catholic Faith, Page 191)

“We do not pray to the crucifix, to the images and relics of the saint but to the person they represent” (Catholic Catechism, Number 565)

Hindi ba malinaw na ang aral ng Santa Iglesia Catolica na ang mga imahe ay hindi sinasamba bilang Diyos.

At ano naman ang pahayag ng mga protestante tungkol sa pagsamba ng dios-diosan:

Idolatry –the worship of false gods (NIV Compact Dictionary of the Bible, Page 266)

At ano ang sabi ni San Pablo 1 Cor 8:4 “So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world”

Siguro sasabihin ng mga ministro ni Manalo at nang ibang protestante na paggawa ng mga imahe ng mga santo ay pagsamba ng mg adios-diosan ay nagkakamali sila.

At kung sasabihin rin ng mga ministro ni Manalo mali ang pag gawa ng mga imahe; ang sagot natin jan ay hindi lahat.

Ang Diyos pa mismo ang nagpagawa ng mga imahe ng mga anghil Ex 25:18-22 “And thou shalt make two cherubims [of] gold, [of] beaten work shalt thou make them, in the two ends of the mercy seat. {25:19} And make one cherub on the one end, and the other cherub on the other end: [even] of the mercy seat shall ye make the cherubims on the two ends thereof. {25:20} And the cherubim shall stretch forth [their] wings on high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces [shall look] one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubims be. {25:21} And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee. {25:22} And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which [are] upon the ark of the testimony, of all [things] which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.

At sa templo pa ng Diyos ipalalagay ang mga banal na imahe 2 Cron 3:1, 7, 10-13(KJV) “Then Solomon began to build the house of the LORD at Jerusalem in mount Moriah, where [the LORD] appeared unto David his father, in the place that David had prepared in the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite. {3:7} He overlaid also the house, the beams, the posts, and the walls thereof, and the doors thereof, with gold; and graved cherubims on the walls.10 And in the most holy house he made two cherubims of image work, and overlaid them with gold. {3:11} And the wings of the cherubims [were] twenty cubits long: one wing [of the one cherub was] five cubits, reaching to the wall of the house: and the other wing [was likewise] five cubits, reaching to the wing of the other cherub. {3:12} And [one] wing of the other cherub [was] five cubits, reaching to the wall of the house: and the other wing [was] five cubits [also,] joining to the wing of the other cherub. {3:13} The wings of these cherubims spread themselves forth twenty cubits:

At ang utos ng Diyos na doon tayo sumamba sa kanya, sa lugar na pinili ng Diyos, ito ay ang kangyang templo na may imahe 2 Cron 7:15-16(KJV) Now mine eyes shall be open, and mine ears attent unto the prayer [that is made] in this place. {7:16} For now have I chosen and sanctified this house, that my name may be there for ever: and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually.

Mailinaw na malinaw kapatid na ipinag utos ng Diyos na doon sumamba sa kanyang templo (structural) na may mga imahe (Ex 25:18-22) (2 Cron 3:1, 7, 10-13) (2 Cron 7:15-16)…….sumunod ba kayo rito?

#4: Bawal na pag-aasawa ng mga pari?

Ang aral ng Katoliko tungkol sa Celibacy o ang hindi pag-aasawa ng mga pari alang-alang sa Diyos ay nasa Biblia at turo ito ng Panginoong Jesus.

Ang sabi ni apostol Pablo sa 1 Cor. 7:8, 32-33 (KJV) “{7:8} I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. {7:32} But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: {7:33} But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please [his] wife.

àAt pakakatandaan natin na si Apostol San Pablo ay Pari-Roma 15:16 (Cebuano Popular Version)

Ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo ay ganito rin ang itinoro sa Mat. 19:12 (KJV) “For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from [their] mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive [it,] let him receive [it.”

àAt pakakatandaan natin na ang Panginoon Jesu-Cristo ay Pari- Heb. 3:1 (Cebuano Popular Version.)

#5: Hindi bawal ang fiesta?

Ang Fiesta – ito po ay otos at toru na mababasa natin sa Biblia

1 Cor 5:8 (KJV) “8} Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth.

Sa katunayan ay namimista ang Panginoong Jesu-Cristo taon-taon Luke 22:1, 78 (KJV) “{22:1} Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. {22:2} And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people. {22:7} Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. {22:8} And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

Ang Fiesta ng Santa Iglesia Catolica ay ang pagdiriwang at pag-alaala sa mga Santo, kay Santa Maria at mismo sa Dios.

At hindi po totoong kami ay nang-uusig sa Iglesia ni Cristo ni Manalo bagkos ang mga ministro ang nang-uusig sa mga Paring katoliko.

At kapatid kong tongkol naman sa debate ng Iglesia ni Cristo Team VS Catholic Faith Defensers Team, pawing puro makatutuhanan po ang mga isinulat naming.

Kapatid na Jenny hindi po kami bulag, sa katunayan wala ho kaming kahit isang kosing na matatanggap sa mga Pari, gusto lang namin na maiparating ang tamang aral ng Santa Iglesia Catolica.

Kapatid na Jenny wag ho sana kayong maghusga sa amin…Suriin mo ang Docrina ng Santa Iglesia Catolica ng taos puso…tiyak ko na gagaya Karin nila…