Responding to Muntinlupa Kaalaman on the Bible and the Philippines

This last August ay I encountered ang isang video ng isang content creator named “Muntinlupa Kaalaman” (through a mention by a friend who is also a fellow member and defender of the faith) na kung saan ay he argues na ang Philippines has mentions in the Bible; same that was argued by several religious groups in the Philippines and this claim has been widespread dahil din sa Pilipino pride and methods of proof-texting to try to prove among themselves which of them ay “totoo” at “nasa Bible”. These arguments presented in the video does not really hold much water because of the number of loopholes in their interpretation of the biblical text and relies upon presuppositions and a lot of assumptions. I see na ang content creator ay walang exposure to meaningful exegesis and hermeneutics on the text of Scripture, but why it matters to respond to these claims ay na ang mga ito ay misleading and does not present the facts and rhetoric ng biblical writers! They are reading something into the text but there are no meaningful point being drawn upon the text itself by letting the text speak for itself.

 

JOHN 15:16

John 10:16 reads in the New Revised Standard Version together with the Greek:

I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. (New Revised Standard Version)

καὶ ἄλλα πρόβατα ἔχω ἃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τῆς αὐλῆς ταύτης· κἀκεῖνα δεῖ με ἀγαγεῖν καὶ τῆς φωνῆς μου ἀκούσουσιν, καὶ γενήσονται μία ποίμνη, εἷς ποιμήν. (Nestle-Aland 28)

“Muntinlupa Kaalaman” argues na ang John 10:16 is futuristic in nature and therefore ay tumutukoy sa mga bagay na mangyayari palang at hindi currently occurring sa panahon ni Jesucristo. It totally came out of nowhere at what we see here that you do ay binibigyan mo lang ng meaning yung text rather than letting the text speak for itself. That literally goes away sa sinabi mo na “bayaan ang Biblia mismo” na magsabi sa atin kung ano yung meaning. Basically, ang ginagawa lang dito ng author ay eisegesis, speculation, at pagtagpi-tagpi ng mga text that absolutely have nothing to do with each other (proof-texting). Here's why masyadong misleading ang kanyang take sa John 10:16:

We should know that Jesus Christ was sent to Israel first and his disciples brought the message of salvation to the Gentiles. The house of Israel was the priority of the ministry of Jesus Christ first which can be seen in places sa New Testament na kung saan ay sinabi niya sa isang Canaanite woman (who is obviously a Gentile) who asked Jesus to heal his daughther. Jesus said:

“. . . I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Mt. 15:24, New Revised Standard Version)

Jesus here emphasizes his priority to his ministry to the house of Israel but however, it does not show rejection of the Gentiles. Jesus later healed the woman’s daugther na kung saan dito ay naging way para maipakita ang faith ng Canaanite woman and as a message that salvation can be extended even to those who are outside of the House of Israel. In this way also, Jesus Christ shows fulfilments of Old Testament prophecies. The sheep are from Israel (1 Kgs. 22:17; Ps. 44:11-22; 74:1; 78:52; 79:13; 95:7; 100:3), and are not of Gentiles like the Filipino people. Jesus told his disciples to “. . . Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Mt. 10:5-6). Jesus also said to the Samaritan woman that “. . . You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.” (Jn. 4:22). Si Apostle Paul din ay nag-preach muna to the Jews before preaching to the Gentiles where he said “. . . For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Rom 1:16); And then you have this in John 10:16 where Jesus Christ that he will bring that other sheep into one fold /flock and one shepherd. Jesus is the one that will gather the lost sheep of Israel; the sheep that was the people whose shepherds have let them astray (Jer. 23:1; 50:1-6; Ezek. 34:6). Jesus Christ is the Davidic King who is the Messiah will be the one that God will appoint as the one shepherd (Ezek. 34:1-24; Micah 5:4-5; Mk. 6:34). this is to Israel, and not to Gentiles. John 10:16 in no way, shape or form will refer to the Philippines.

ACTS 2:39

For the promise is for you, for your children, and for all who are far away, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him.” (New Revised Standard Version)

ὑμῖν γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἐπαγγελία καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν καὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς εἰς μακράν, ὅσους ἂν προσκαλέσηται κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν. (Nestle-Aland 28)

Ang scope ng message kung babasahin mo yung verse 6 at hindi puro cherrypicking, ito ay “ito the house of Israel”, and this is Peter preaching to Jews sa Jerusalem at ang mga Jews ang kanyang mga audiences, and ang main rhetorical goal ay na everyone who enter Christ through baptismal regeneration are adopted to Israel and benefit ang blessings ng Abrahamic covenant (Rom. 8:15; 9:1-5; Gal. 3:26). Ang problema dito sa sinasabi ng author ay na ang Acts 2:39 restrictly refers sa mga Pilipino, when this refers to the whole world in general. In what way, shape, or form does “far away” is substantive to the Philippines?

Acts 2:39 also does not give any geographical directions kagaya ng “far east” (that is a later European coining of terms for asia and not biblical nor ancient in nature). No word in the Greek says anything about distance and direction and the author relies alone on assumption rather than proven fact. The Greek uses the adverb μακρὰν (makran), that is the feminine accusative singular of μακρός (makros) at throughout sa New Testament ay it simply means "of long distance" (BDAG). If gusto ng author to imply a specific na direction, then there must be a necessity of coupling another term in order to do that; pero hindi ito ginawa ng author ng book of Acts. If the author of the book of Acts wishes to do so, we have common words used in Koine Greek for that, and as for the author’s assumptions, the Greek word ἀνατολή (hanatole). Using the methods being used by the author raises many questions on how the Greek word is used in other places in the Greek New Testament. New Testament writers μακρὰν in many contexts. Luke said that Jesus traveled μακρὰν from the house (Lk. 7:6). Paul was sent to μακρὰν to preach (Acts 22:21). Is Jesus traveling in the Philippines? Was Paul sent to preach in the Philippines?

 

ISAIAH 43:5

Do not fear, for I am with you; I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you;

אַל־תִּירָ֖א כִּ֣י אִתְּךָ־אָ֑נִי מִמִּזְרָח֙ אָבִ֣יא זַרְעֶ֔ךָ וּמִֽמַּעֲרָ֖ב אֲקַבְּצֶֽךָּ׃

 

The Hebrew word מִמִּזְרָח֙ (mizrach) in itself ay isang common na word for directions and not being substantive of “the Philippines”. Again, ang method na ginagamit dito ng author does not provide any proof that this gives specific reference to the Philippines. Again, yung approaches dito na porque “malayo” na ay “Pilipinas” na agad. The author is not aware of how the ancient world understood what “international” or “worldwide” is at the time before explorations are made at na may limited na understanding of Geography ang ancient authors unless explorations are made; and furthermore, there is no adjective coupled with מִמִּזְרָח֙ (mi-mizrach) for it to be translated as “Far East”. Isaiah does not have in mind ang South East Asia and this totally misses the point ng mga remnants of the house of Israel.

 

4990  מִזְרָח

מִזְרָח, Or. ) מַ׳Kahle Text 70(, SamP.M97 mazraÒ: זרח, Bauer-L. Heb. 493e; MHeb., EgArm. Nab. Palm. )Jean-H. Dictionnaire 146(, JArm. CPArm. Syr. מַדְנְחָא, Mnd. )Drower-M. Dictionary 239a(: מִזְרַח, מִזְרָ֫חָה, cs. מִזְרְחָה Dt 441 )Bauer-L. Heb. 527q(: the position of the rising sun:

—1. sunrise, שֶׁמֶשׁ מִ׳ Dt 447 Ju 2043 Is 4125 456 5919 Mal 111 ):: (מְבֹאוֹ Ps 501 1133, = חַשֶּׁמֶשׁ מ׳ Nu 2111 Jos 115 135 ).8.27.32 161.5f( 1912.27.34 2K 1033, מִזְרְחָה הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ towards the sun Jos 121 Ju 2119, cj. Dt 441, = מִזְרָ֫חָה Ex 2713 3813 Nu 23 338 3219 3415 Dt 317.27 449 Jos 118 121.3 187 1913 208 1K 725 Jr 3140 Zech 144 1C 918 2614, עַד־מִזְרָח until sunrise Am 812 ) מִצָּפוֹן וְעַד מִ׳ !, ï Budde JBL 44:93f(; אֶרֶץ מִזְרָח Zech 87;

—2. the east Jos 113 1710 Is 412 435 4611 Da 89 1144 Ps 10312 ):: (מַעֲרָב 1073 2C 44 294, מִזְרָח in the east Neh 1237, towards the east 1C 924, מִמִּזְרַח שֶׁמֶשׁ לְ east of Ju 1118, = מִזְרְחָה הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ לְ Ju 2119, מִזְרַח יְרִיחוֹ the eastern side of Jerusalem Jos 419, מִמִּזְרַח יָנוֹחָה eastwards towards Jerusalem 166; רְחוֹב הַמִּ׳ the eastern square 2C 294 )ï Rudolph 292(; שַׁעַר הַמּ׳ the east gate Neh 329, לַמִּזְרָח in the east Neh 326 1C 59 728 1216 2617; מִזְרָח לְ east of 2C 512, = לְמִזְרַח 1C 663; עַד לְמִזְרָח as far as east of 1C 439, לַמִּזְרָחָה in the east 2C 3114, פְּנֵי מִזְרָח לְ the eastern side of 1C 510. † (Koehler-Baumgartner, HALOT - Hebrew-Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament [Leiden: Brill, 2000])

The scholarly consensus is that Old Testament authors refer to places in the Middle-East/Ancient Near East that are known in this time. They simply use מִזְרָח with no attached name to name a specific country or place, but a region and they base on their location for directions. If they want to argue that מִזְרָח (mizrach) is confined to East Asia and the Philippines in particular, and מַעֲרָב (maarab) for the United States; then we need to apply this unilaterally to the whole corpus of the Old Testament; e.g the men whom David defeated escaped toward מִזְרָח and מַעֲרָב (1Chr. 12:15). Did they escape all the way to South East Asia or within the ancient Near East? The same topic of the gathering of Israel says that they were gathered out from מִזְרָח (east), and from מַעֲרָב (west), and from מִצָּפֹ֥ון (north), and from וּמִיָּֽם (south) (Ps. 107:3). Bakit ba hindi nila ginagamit ang passages na ito since magkapareho lang naman ng tinuturo sa Isaiah 43:4-5? If east (מִזְרָח) means the “Far East” and west (מַעֲרָב) means the “Far West”; does this mean north is the “Far North” (Arctic/North Pole) and south is the “Far South” (Antarctic)? Are you living in these regions who gathered to a central gathering area? When Yahweh said that “they” may know “. . . from the rising of the sun (מִזְרָ), and from the west (מַעֲרָב) that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else . . .” (Isa. 45:6); is Yahweh’s blessing to Cyrus of Persia only a proof for only those who live in the Philippines and the United States that Yahweh alone is the only true God? When Isaiah wrote that “they” shall “. . . fear the name of the LORD from the west (מַעֲרָב), and his glory from the rising of the sun (מִזְרָח) . . . (Isa. 59:19); are those who fear the Lord only found in the Philippines and the United States or it will refer to the whole world?

 

CONCLUSION

Ang Bible ay hindi isang palayok ng fishball at kikiam para ating piliin lang what suits our needs, kagaya ng Filipino pride natin. If that is what they want to do with the text of the Bible, then they do not pay respect or give reverence to the Spirit of the Book. These texts being used and explained above do not give any clue in any way, shape, or form about the Philippines and the Filipino people. Some text refers solely to the nation of Israel and the Near East alone, and some of them refer to the whole wide world and not confined solely to the Philippines and the Filipino people. Proof-texting will get you to a lot of trouble when you do not understand the intention of the author and the circumstances that surround them. A Filipino-Centric view of the Bible won’t get anyone to anywhere when your goal is to go deeper behind the message of the text. Filipino-centrism confines itself to only one group of people, when the Old Testament focuses on one chosen group of people that was chosen by God to bless all nations of the earth (Gen. 22:17-18); whether they are Jew or Gentile. One becomes a member of the household of Israel in Christ (Rom. 8:15; 9:4-26; Gal. 3:26). When an individual accepts the Gospel of Jesus Christ and follow the necessary principles and ordinances, he/she will be adopted to the household of Israel and enjoy the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant. When one desires to the adopted to the household of Israel, forcing the Bible to speak about you and only you is not the way. I hope that more Filipinos will learn how to correctly interpret Scripture for the glory of God and not themselves.