Tag Archives: Calvin

EDSA 1 -People Power -Sign of Divine Intervention

This is hodge podge of Facebook posts -as answer to a question on comparing Israel’s Exodus in Egypt to what we experience at EDSA Revolt of 1986 as a sign of God’s intervention. Later I will clear the narrative -but for now I will just paste all posts here:

-I think you should be more worried on those who wants to bring back the Martial Law years as the good years -we can become a Singapore.? How old … were you in 1983 ? in 1986?


But it is an application of Scripture. Will we then narrow our application to something personal or churchly-and leave out what happens to the naked public square ? Maybe Edsa1 was not salvific as in Exodus or At Calvary. but it is a story of historical liberation from bondage . And to our generation -He did intervene in that history -from the salvation of Ninoy, Colson’s influence on Ninoy-to the non-violent liberation of Feb 25, 1986.

I don’t think my analogy is new. Search thru the (news) archives near the event.

Exodus created a nation wherein before Israel is just a <clan> of Jacob…This did not happen to us Filipinos. But I think you should also look into the historical analogies made by Columbus, the Pilgrims, the 17 states for the Independence of US from Great Britain and the US Civil War. It does not speak of salvation -but of liberation.

And also Cromwell against the Anglicans -and Luther against the Papist.

The Lord our God intervenes in history -not as always clear to us – in all of it..but He does …now we have 30 years to look back and discern His hand on it.

I think …  you are 30+ years old and during 1986 -you are just in elementary and thus you don’t have first hand memory on how brutal and Orwellian that dictatorship is.

Except the God who intervenes in history. Unless we don’t believe that God intervened at Edsa 1 anymore. That is more a triumph of Marcossian origin.


Why now ask the limits in application ? Why ? Is it because I mentioned that those rooting for a Marcos -wannabees like DU30 – is like the Israelites who wants to go back to Egypt and its garlic- affected you ? Maybe it should. Dont worry about Liberation Theology – I am Kuyperian  <Presbyterian/Cromwellian>. The comparison is about bondage ,liberation, Intervention and now those who wants to turn back the time – throwing the gains of freedom and wants the hard taskmasters of Martial Rule.

Like I said …bondage , deliverance by Divine intervention, and then the next generation forgetting this deliverance and wanting to go back to Egypt. Why is it off tangent ? Because the <majority of the> people God used are Catholics? Don’t forget that the period of 1980s was when Born Again Christians boomed…and DZAS was almost chosen as Radyo Bandido and that PCEC Head then Atty. Jun Vencer was much for non-violent protest. I know -I was part of a seminar where the position paper of PCEC was discussed. Evangelicals are weary of politicians with left-leanings are being used by Commnists then-and they should be -i.e. why God used other methods.

Don’t hide your preference for DU30 ….  . You know my preference.. <I am for Mar Roxas> and this is both coloring why you don’t want me to apply that Scripture to this situation -and why I am applying it. And as for Liberation Theology – I am more on the Presbyterian/ Theonomy view of the revolution of the ‘lesser magistrates’ <Calvin’s view in the Institutes> which was used by Cromwell,, the Huguenots, the Americans in their Independence revolution. and Kuyper alliance with Catholics -and Barth’s against Hitler and his Nazis.


The questioner made a reference to :  Martial Law as being constitutional …Martial rule in the Philippines was backed by U.S. in the context of Cold War….we are not even under forced labor- and another made a response -“Martial Law was not constitutional but also absolute. That is why Marcos was a dictator and his reign was also absolute. The then Pres.Marcos suspended the 1935 Constitution, dissolves the Congress and assumed absolute powers and issued Proclamation 1081 imposing Martial Law.” -this response is correct and to add he created another constitution afterwards to consolidate his constitutional parliamentary authoritarianism -where initially Marcos is both President and Prime Minister (eventually it was the technocrat -Cesar Virata became the Prime Minister)

Another made this response : It is not only oppression but of tortures, extra-judicial killings of thousands victims which are documented and incomparable to succeeding presidents after him and worse than Egypt’s force labor…the imposition of Martial Law was unconstitutional because it was done unilaterally and made to look that situations were already chaotic. As Enrile confesses to fake ambush as prelude to martial law…Actually, there were many law luminaries who challenge its constitutionality that time and what Marcos did was to change the 1935 with the new 1973 to legitimize martial law… that is why we have now the 1987 Constitution as that safeguards us from the repeat of martial law regime. That it cannot be done unilaterally anymore but also by Supreme Court and Congress.

From the official Gazette of the Government : After the declaration and imposition of Martial Law, citizens would still go on to challenge the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 1081. Those arrested filed petitions for habeas corpus with the Supreme Court. But Marcos, who had originally announced that Martial Law would not supersede the 1935 Constitution, engineered the replacement of the constitution with a new one. On March 31, 1973, the Supreme Court issued its final decision in Javellana v. Executive Secretary, which essentially validated the 1973 Constitution. This would be the final legitimizing decision with on the constitutionality of Martial Law: in G.R. No. L-35546 September 17, 1974, the Supreme Court dismissed petitions for habeas corpus by ruling that Martial Law was a political question beyond the jurisdiction of the court; and that, furthermore, the court had already deemed the 1973 Constitution in full force and effect, replacing the 1935 Constitution.

Phillippines 1986

( Tom Gralish / Staff Photographer / The Philadelphia Inquirer ) People Power: The Philippines EDSA Revolution // Jan-Feb 1986 Corazon “Cory” Aquino became president of the Philippines, after millions of Filipinos took to Manila’s streets in support of reformist soldiers who had mutinied against longtime dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

The questioner mentioned something – that I am seeing more than their weak and feeble eyes can see …and he implied that my application is not the faithful reading and application of a text -so my response is – As you can see your analysis also betrays your bias on reading our historical context and the text itself.

And in our FB message – ….  I can back down now. Forget it .politics and hermeneutics are incendiary ingredients. But we do need a framework to use. But i don’t know anyone who has it now . We are too close to the issues. I don’t discuss my political applications n in the pulpit like when in the time of Erap and Eddie Villanueva .I do make it known though in the blogs and social media.I am not a pastor nor an officer in any local church anymore.


Then I mentioned my rule in applying Scriptures in past concrete historical situation – And I still stand that throughout church history – Christians applied the Exodus deliverance motif to their concrete situation and were rewarded by the intervention of God. Applications does not required that every detail of the original redemptive -historical revelation-event should be there.

It does not mean that every action and motives in the historical situation be legitimate or sacro-sanctum – but it only need to be in consonance to general motif of the original revelation. I don’t believe in agnosticism or conservatism in application to historical situation especially when so many other witnesses or observers points in the historical situation -to be signs of God’s intervention.






God’s Foreknowledge and Man’s Free Will ?

I have read some part of Dave Hunt’s book -” What Love is this” and read  a part where he says that Luther and Calvin posits that man can never be free since God is omniscient and has foreknowledge -and then tries to argue against it.


See this post on his errors : http://conversationsincalvinism.blogspot.com/2006/08/dave-hunt-man-myth-dishonesty.html


Though recently deceased -his misrepresentation had affected a lot of people in not considering the truth of God’s eternal election and His subsequent rescue of radically depraved man.


I have not read those part of Luther and Calvin where they said that -but I can be wrong -but that is not the point. My reason for bringing it now is – does Hunt believes that when God created this world/ universe (which is the only one we know – though God can make multi-verses) -does He not know that Man -with his freedom -will not fall into sin -due to the instigation of the Devil?


Or was it possible that the angel Lucifer and the Man -Adam -after being created – and with freedom – will still choose -in their lifetimes to remain holy and righteous? This does not mean that God can only create a imperfect creature – based on our perspective …but is it not part of freedom to be always to be wrong and counter against the standard? Yes -this are speculative questions -but it seems that Hunt’s belief is that the perfect -perfect universe is  that no creature will go against his Creator.

images (2)

My belief? I believe that God – after making the decision to allow free creatures- fire sees that eventually someone will disobey Him and rebel against Him. It is not a question of if -but of when. So with infinite / multiple simulations in His Mind – He decided that gifting His Son with these people -His Son will make sure that -they will remain in Him until the end -no matter what -so that they will praise His Father -through the Holy Spirit – He -the Son will die for their rebellion -to pay for their sins. This is before time ..and even before the historical creation of Adam at Eden.

Sinner Saved


Eventually  -after the first week -Man will always be seen as not totally free- because of the choice of the first Man -Adam -he will always be in bondage to his sin-nature- but still be able to freed by someone like him. Here will the mystery of election and regeneration and effectual calling and perseverance and eternal security comes into the picture. Though free to be a sinner -his hope is in the eternal transaction of love between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Only love can rescue him – restore him and make him mature as a son to his heavenly Father.


The devil is not so. Because he was created as an adult/ mature -and with full knowledge -his one time decision fixed his destination to hell. There is no repentance -nor regeneration for him. He will remain as a reminder that freedom and full knowledge is not always to the advantage of the creature. Time and being time-bound is a gift -for us to change and be changed. Asking for something to be like the eternal- is in fact a gift not worth having.

Currently Reading: Did Calvin Murder Servetus?


Michael Servetus

Michael Servetus

Written by Standford Rives, Esq. , published 2008 is about 606 pages long.

Controversial and sure for a bashing from Calvinist. This is free ebook available from http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/. Thoroughly researched -with a lot of footnotes.

I will give my review when I finished it. However-it’s main theses is that Calvin haunted,prosecuted and have Servetus s executed because (from page 40 or 62 of the ebook) :

The printed text dealt with Calvin’s doctrine on infant baptism. 

Calvin believed an infant should be baptized, and this effectuates 

thereby entry of the child into the New Covenant.  Servetus’ 

handwritten note said: “Anyone who says one can be justified with-

out faith in Jesus has a demon.”  Servetus was an adamant sola-

fidist in the footsteps of the young Luther.  And by rejecting 

infant baptism, Servetus meant to uphold sola fide.

Proof this was the insult that particularly angered Calvin is 

that two years later, after Calvin deposited the original document 

with the Inquisitor’s office at Vienne, France, and hence it was no 

longer available to Calvin, he could still loosely quote it from 

memory. Calvin says in his Defensio of 1554 that Servetus “wrote 

with his own hand that the faith of demons reigned at Geneva; that 

we had no church nor God there; because, that by the baptizing of 

infants, we did disown Christ.”  In this 1554 exaggerated para-

phrase, we can still see the “has a demon” quote from documents 

Calvin had sent to the Inquisition at Vienne, France in March 1553, 

but which were only retrieved in 17479 by the scholar D’Artigny. 

Servetus’ harsh words were a sore and bitter pill that Calvin never 

forgot nor forgave. It is obviously what caused Calvin to remain 

angry with Servetus over the span of many years. The pursuit of 

Servetus unto death has no other primary explanation than revenge 

over personal insults made by Servetus of Calvin. ”

And that the accususation regarding being “antitrinitarian” is just meant to make sure that Servetus gets the capital punishment for blasphemy. The Justinian Codex is not in effect in Geneva and Servetus ‘sin’ is heresy-not blasphemy which Calvin keeps obfuscating before the Little Council.

This is damning evidence against Calvin. He is really truly just a  man-and not our Lord. But we should not throw his doctrine out immediately-but we must be cautious in using his words in explaining and maintaining it. We must remain within Scriptural bounds-especially about double predestination or reprobation.


Servetus Documentary

Servetus Documentary

Why Others are growing and others are degenerating

Date: Nov 24, 2008

Former Adventist and the current “Worldwide Church of God” -years ago are enmeshed and enslaved in sabbatarianism, food laws, Jewish holidays, and other OT/ Mosaic ordinances. But now , by the Grace of God-they were liberated from it by the simple understanding that we are in already in the New Covenant.

While my former presbyterians co-elders-confident that they know the 5 points of Calvinism-are enslaved to an Old Covenant ordinances of tithing and infant baptism. Once we stopped reading and giving priority to the Scriptures and giving more weight to our human confession of faith (Westminster’s) then we tend to degenerate. we no longer hear afresh the voice of our Shepherd-but just the voice of old men-like Calvin, Zwingli and the Puritans.

I revere them-in fact, I think that I know more of Calvin than anyone in the Philippines -but he is not my Lord and Savior. Jesus is! And he paid the debt I could not pay. I owe Him my allegiance-even if I lost my eldership.

Why I am no longer a Presbyterian

Date: Nov 21, 2008

It is because I realized that infant baptism is not required by Scriptures-since we are under the New Covenant and not the Old. The real children of Abraham are those with faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and not to those born of Christian parents.

The wording of Genesis 17 correspond to John 1:12-13 and Galatians 3:7 and 26-29. There is a major discontinuity there.

I also realized that the Reformed Covenant theology only started with Zwingli. And he used it to persecute the Reformation’s Anabaptist when before he agreed with them. In fact Calvin himself was friendly with Anabaptist in Strasbourg while in exile from Geneva.

Zwingli and Calvin are still deep into Constantinian view of society. And that colored or ruined their theology.