Soriano Limits God's Engagements

The first response you'll get from Soriano regarding God's omnipresence (present everywhere) is "you won't find the word omnipresent in the Bible". Sure enough he'll get his crowd going by stamping it in their brains that if it can't be found in the Bible, it must be rubbish. There are a lot of theological words not found in the Bible. Like 'trinity', 'polytheism', 'monotheism', etc. But Eli Soriano does not find any problem using the words 'rapture' when teaching about Christ's return, or 'atheists' when teaching about non-believers of God. This shows a double standard or utter hypocrisy on Soriano's part to pick words that support whatever he teaches and ridicule those that he does not.

A true preacher of the Bible will not negate words meant to describe context or teaching that the Bible states clearly, but does not give a name for. The Bible is crystal clear that the Lord is present everywhere. "Omni" (latin for "all") seems to fluster Soriano because of his unbiblical teaching that God has a behind (click here for the blog post on this). He is bent on his own fallacy that God having a behind, logically has eyes in his being. And it goes against human logic that God will be everywhere because His being sits His behind on a throne in heaven. The funny thing is, Soriano opens his argument (in his personal blog) that God's ways are not our ways, Isaiah 55:8 "For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD." But then he immediately employs "human logic" when told of Proverbs 15:3, "The eyes of the LORD [are] in every place, beholding the evil and the good.". Arguing that God's eyes cannot be 'logically' everywhere because His being is stuck in His throne!

Here are more of Soriano's supposed Biblical support for his wayward doctrine:

• God does not dwell in temple made by man (Acts 17:24). Two points for Soriano to ponder on his use of this verse, certainly 'presence' does not automatically mean 'residence' as he implies... and not everything man builds is a temple.
• God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33) and... “For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work (James 3:16). With these verses, Soriano declares God would not be found in a prostitution den or a casino for these are places for demons. Anyone who suggests that God is present in these places are wicked. Another two points for Soriano to ponder here, does everybody who enters a casino gamble? What of those abducted and imprisoned in whorehouses? Does God say, "Sorry kids, Soriano says I can't go there to help you, so tough luck."

I've offered these rebuttals to his followers and sure enough they try to discredit me instead of addressing my rebuttals. I know when I've left them nothing to say whenever they start asking for my Church affiliation, or who my Pastor is. With it they will tell you "your church is not in the Bible", or "your Pastor is afraid to face Soriano". Your Pastor only wants your tithes so he can live lavishly. I mean How disinformed are these people? They are so brainwashed by Soriano that they end up hating other religions the way their leader badmouths them.

They conclude that I am from the devil because I say God is omnipresent. He is everywhere and in everything be it Heaven, Earth, or Hell. They say it is a great insult to God when I said God's presence is also in Hell where the wicked are departed and suffer the unlimited and unending fury of God because of their sin.

While it is true that hell is a place for those separated from God in Matthew 25:41, God cannot be in a place that is separated from Him. However the Bible also states, the wicked in hell endure His everlasting anger in Revelation 14:10 where it speaks of the torment of the wicked. God fills all things with His presence (Colossians 1:17) and upholds everything by the word of His power (Hebrews 1:3).

So although God is sometimes separated from His children because of sin (Isaiah 52:9), and He is far from the wicked (Proverbs 15:29) and orders the godless subjects of darkness to depart at the end of time to a place of eternal punishment, God is still there in the midst. He knows what those souls suffer who are now in hell; He knows their anguish, their cries for respite, their tears and grief for the eternal state that they find themselves in. He is there in every way as a perpetual reminder to them of their sin which has created a chasm from every blessing that might had been theirs.

He is there in every way, but He displays no attribute other than His wrath. The same wrath that awaits Soriano and those he has deceived. How arrogant of them to limit God's presence simply because it violates "human logic". Completely forgetting that God is beyond human understanding. They need our prayers to understand that God's ways are NOT our ways.

Portions of text credit to www.gotquestions.org

Eve Didn't Need Jesus' Help?

One of the more unbiblical things Soriano teaches his flock is that Eve, the wife of Adam, is already a saved soul on account of her giving birth. This bizarre lesson from Soriano is based on a couple of verses in the Bible. First, he tries to establish that Eve did not willfully sin in Eden, but was JUST deceived by the devil in 1 Timothy 2:14 "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." Soriano suggests that she was less of a sinner than Adam. Then he follows up with the next verse where he claims Paul declared Eve to have enjoyed salvation through childbirth in 1 Timothy 2:15, "Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." So when Cain (the first murderer) came into the world, Eve was saved.

Wow!

The whole deal about the Lord Jesus coming down to earth to save mankind excludes Eve then? Wasn't it the Bible that said "all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23)? How could it be 'ALL' if it excludes Eve? How could she have special favors when she's the reason Adam ate of the fruit in the first place?. Is the Bible lying, or is Soriano lying?

After a thoughtful study of Soriano's "doctrinal verses" I have come to see how SHALLOWLY Soriano interprets scripture yet again. This time around, he willfully neglects the prior verses where Paul was scolding (if that is the appropriate term) women who cause disruptions while men are praying at church. Paul goes as far as telling women how to dress and conduct themselves during worship. Such words could be considered hurtful to the point where Paul reminds women of their second-class stature even in Eden. Such a lecture would have certainly disheartened any woman and Paul was sensitive enough to offer a consolation that through their childbearing (meaning rearing, teaching, instruction, care of children) they are saved (from their second class social stature) if they are to do their duties faithfully.

I doubt if Soriano even considered trying to understand WHY Paul used Adam and Eve analogously. Because his interpretation is void of awareness as to the social standing of women in the early church. When he came across the words "Eve" and "saved" in one verse, he immediately concludes Eve is saved from God's wrath.

Here's the low down on all these. Eve sinned against God and was banished from Eden, remember that. She suffered spiritual death upon eating the forbidden fruit (because she wanted to be like God) and was punished with great pains in giving birth. It does not make sense for God to punish and banish Eve then save her just because she gave birth. The fact that she's no longer in Eden, and that she has great pains in childbirth is evidence of her separation from God.

Faith alone, [Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.] in Jesus Christ alone, [John 14:6, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."] is the ONLY WAY to salvation.

Teaching people that Eve saved herself through childbirth is a works-based thinking of salvation. God considers as filthy rags all manner of good works that man can accomplish in Isaiah 64:6, "But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags". There is nothing Eve could have done to wash her sins away. Only the atoning blood of Christ will do it, nothing less.

The truth is, Soriano hopes this doctrine on Eve will be a foothold for his more elaborate works-based doctrine of salvation. But he chose a shaky foothold, set on shallow interpretation. His followers only need to open their eyes and see the truth in scripture and the fallacy in Soriano's words.