The Philippine-based Christian organization plays a vital role in representing and supporting several churches in the Philippines. A recent occurrence regarding their response to a sermon by renowned Filipino preacher Ed Lapiz has sparked concern within the evangelical community.1 Following an extended period of anticipation, many church leaders and members expressed discontent with the response of the organization’s Theological Commission (hereafter, TheoCom) group with their recent position paper concerning the contentious sermons and teachings made by the “Jesusness” preacher.2 Unexpectedly, TheoCom refrained from fully revealing Lapiz’s name, designating him as heretical, due to emotional considerations.3 While we aim to preserve the individual’s anonymity, it is imperative to tell the faithful about the origin of the erroneous doctrine to protect the body of Christ and maintain orthodox beliefs. Our loyalty must be directed towards Jesus and his teachings rather than any individual, regardless of their prominence or popularity within mainstream Christianity. As Paul said, “Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?”4     

Call Out Privately or Call Out Publicly?

A private call out is preferable for minor doctrinal and/or behavioral faults within the local church environment that seek to correct the individual involved.5 A public call is more suited for major doctrinal and/or damaging behavior that requires raising awareness for the Body of Christ.6 The ministry of Lapiz is watched and listened to by people everywhere. The scope of this work extends well beyond the confines of his own ministry. As a result, it is imperative that we warn the body of Christ about the spiritually dangerous doctrine that he has.

This is not about making heads roll or calling out for blood; it is about protecting Christ’s body from a false teacher. If the TheoCom accepts Lapiz’s explanation that he is simply conducting an “honest” or “theological” study into the subject, they must review his sermon and teaching on “Jesusness” in the past.7 This does not represent a genuine theological inquiry; instead, it reflects a conclusion drawn from his prior research, which he has already concluded. It is unfortunate that the TheoCom consistently avoids mentioning the identity of Lapiz and the other individuals in question, as doing so could probably jeopardize their desire to reach out to them.8 Therefore, they exercise extreme caution when referencing the particular individual in their position paper and even during the interview.9 It is understandable to reach out in brotherly love if the problem stems from relational issues. Obviously, this is not the biblical way to call out someone who has simply advocated and taught unorthodox teachings.10 Paul included Hymenaeus in his first and second letters to Timothy to caution him and the congregation about the teachings of this former church leader, if you will observe.11 Hymenaeus exerted considerable influence, successfully persuading Alexander and Philetus to adopt his teachings.12 We commend the Philippine-based Christian organization for their pastoral reminder towards Lapiz and the rest of the erring pastors, but hoping they corrected them in public. Preachers like these should be called out since their teachings reached well beyond the confines of their local church. As Anne Kennedy writes, “Is the error being propagated publicly? It must be refuted publicly — in the pulpit, in print, and in person.” 13 Is it not loving and gentle to specifically address them by name while informing them of their heretical teachings? Paul writes subsequent to addressing Hymenaeus and Philetus, 

²⁴ And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, ²⁵ correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, ²⁶ and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will. – 1 Timothy 2:24-26    

Is it not essential to alert the public regarding the heresies disseminated by certain pastors, especially the highly influential Jesusness preacher? Are we not spiritually concerned about the flock that gathers and listens to them every week? The Philippine-based organization’s position paper is comprehensible solely to those individuals who are familiar with the heretical doctrines being disseminated by Lapiz and the other pastors aligned with his theological perspective. The Christian population lacking theological training finds themselves at a disadvantage, resulting in their reliance on name-dropping as a means to initiate conversation regarding the individual in question. This approach of name-dropping serves to safeguard the congregation against false teachers among us who advocate destructive heresies. Did Lapiz publicly retract his statement? What about those individuals whom he misled? Is the public informed that Lapiz was responsible for the unbiblical teachings? It is probable that the most recent events will gradually recede into obscurity. The blood of those who were led by Lapiz will be in the hands of those who sought to protect him but were not considerate of the congregation that was misled by his false doctrine.  

Is Lapiz’s Doctrine “Erroneous” or Heretical?

It’s unfortunate to learn that such highly regarded theologians will simply call Lapiz’s false doctrine “erroneous,” as if he just misinterpreted certain biblical texts. The early church fathers examined and disproved heretical doctrines. Indeed, numerous false teachers originated from inside their own ranks.14 Arius was called to Nicea, where 318 bishops from both the eastern and western regions gathered to engage in a theological discussion regarding his views. They openly shared them for public examination. The doctrine of Arius disseminated rapidly, generating discourse even in the marketplace. Today, disseminating erroneous doctrines can be accomplished without physical relocation. Lapiz’s controversial sermon spread rapidly, not only among Filipinos in the Philippines but globally. The TheoCom engaged in clandestine discussions with Lapiz privately, without openly addressing the doctrines.15 They will undoubtedly be held accountable to the Lord for failing to expose this deed of darkness.16 They also claimed that Lapiz’s ideas are “new and honest theological inquiries and statements… that differ from ours,” as if they were minor doctrines that divided Christians.17 What he taught was more than just a non-essential doctrinal distinction among evangelical Christians. It is not mere soteriological or eschatological theological difference. However, this is a complete attack on Jesus Christ’s identity, as he claims to be Yahweh in the flesh.18 The fact that Lapiz interpreted Old Testament texts about Yahweh by calling him darkness is disturbing.19 While it is apparent that he did not entirely adhere to Marcion’s doctrines, the simple designation of Yahweh as distinct from Jesus raises a significant concern. It is not necessary to adhere completely to the entire heretical doctrine of any past false teachers to be categorized as such. The Iglesia Ni Cristo and Jehovah’s Witnesses are regarded as adherents of Arius due to their belief that Jesus is a created being. They do not need to fully subscribe to all the erroneous teachings of Arius to be categorized as Arians. The Lord’s Recovery is categorized as Sabellianist due to Witness Lee’s interpretation that Jesus is the Father, as derived from Isaiah 9:6.20 Consequently, Lapiz’s belief that Yahweh is the God of the Pharisees and Sadducees who administers punishment in the Old Testament, while identifying Jesus as distinct from Yahweh because of His grace and love sufficiently qualifies him for the designation of being a Marcionite. It is perplexing that TheoCom asserts Lapiz is not a Marcionite solely due to his lack of adherence to full-fledged Marcionism. A person asserting that Jesus’ Father is El Elyon rather than Yahweh must concede that the Son Himself is not Yahweh. Clearly, Lapiz will not disavow the Father, as he continues to recognize the Father as El Elyon; nevertheless, does he believe that the Father and Jesus are Yahweh? Must we await Lapiz’s complete transformation into a Marcionite before designating him as such?21   

Heretic Today Can Be A Hero Tomorrow? 

It is extremely astonishing that the theologians at TheoCom have made the comparison between Lapiz and Martin Luther, a prominent figure in the Christian Reformation, and that they have explained that the Roman Catholic Church was mistaken in labeling him as a heretic. Are they implying that Lapiz, like Martin Luther, has the potential to become a “hero” one day?22 Are they the only ones who have studied theology while we struggle to distinguish between truth and error? It is a fact that pastors occasionally make mistakes in their preaching. This minor mistake may arise from an incorrect interpretation of the Scripture passages during Sunday sermons. It appears that Lapiz’s teaching represents a significant doctrinal error that undermines the identity of Jesus Christ, suggesting that He is not Yahweh. Lapiz meticulously differentiates between Yahweh and the Father of Jesus Christ, identified as El Elyon, highlighting the significance of this distinction. It is inappropriate to draw comparisons between Lapiz and any Protestant Reformer whose objective is to return to the truth of Scripture, as they have observed and experienced the divergence of the Roman Catholic Church from that truth.  

Conclusion

Unless Ed Lapiz publicly acknowledges and corrects his doctrinal mistake, similar to the leaders of the Worldwide Church of God in the past, many believers may remain unaware of the significant implications of the false teachings he has propagated.23 If this issue is not addressed promptly, it may lead to the emergence of a new cult of Christianity. It is essential that we uphold and defend the Christian faith that has been passed down to us by the apostles. It is essential to approach the truth of God’s word without bias or favoritism. May the Lord provide us the spiritual discernment to defend the faith from both the outside and the inside.             

Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding irreverent, empty speech and contradictions from the “knowledge” that falsely bears that name. By professing it, some people have deviated from the faith. Grace be with all of you. – 1 Timothy 6:20-21 CSB

Dear friends, although I was eager to write you about the salvation we share, I found it necessary to write, appealing to you to contend for the faith that was delivered to the saints once for all. – Jude 1:3 CSB

justyn@thebereans.net

End Notes:

1 Despite their efforts to avoid naming the individual involved, they were able to include a link to his YouTube in the first footnote of their position paper. If this is the case, it is safe to conclude that the position paper is a direct response to the “erroneous” teachings of Pastor Ed Lapiz, the founder of Day By Day Jesusness Ministries. 

2 Dr. Aldrin Peñamora leads the Theological Commission, a group of distinguished Evangelical theologians who provide doctrinal guidance to the organization’s ministries. 

3 Dr. Peñamora explains, “Kumbaga magkakaroon ka rin ng puso dito dahil alam naman natin na we also want to treat na he is a brother in Christ. Ang tagal natin siyang nakasama, more than 40 years siya ay nagtuturo, maraming na-bless sa kaniya. At sa biglang ito, maybe, I will just ahh… hindi naman direct quote ang dating eh after many years na nagtuturo siya nagkamali ng kaunti, ang sabi nga eh, honest theological inquiry, agad parang na mob-attack siya. Talagang sa  pananaw niya ay masakit din itong pangyayaring ito so we are also reaching out in a more gracious manner. Dahil sabi nga niya he is in the process, in the middle of really sorting out this very thorny and difficult issues na niri-raise niya.” See Expositors Edition, “Dealing with Doctrinal Issues,” November 9, 2024, YouTube video, 9:47-10:47 accessed December 10, 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4ozU3nw67A&t=214s

4 See Gal. 4:16.

5 Matthew 18:15-17 addresses a transgression perpetrated by one believer against another, necessitating individual correction, rather than discussing theological mistake. The TheoCom erroneously applies this in the context of Ed Lapiz, as if he only offended an individual within the church.

6 Dr. John Piper shares how to call out false teachers within the body of Christ. He explains, “And here are five factors perhaps to consider when deciding whether to name a false teacher publicly. 1. The seriousness and deceitfulness of the error. 2. The size of the audience. Is it growing? 3. The duration of their ministry. Did they make one blunder or are they constantly doing it? 4. The vulnerability of the people for whom you are responsible. 5. The role you have in influencing shepherds who really need to be discerning for who the false teachers are. When you do name a false teacher, it’s best to do it in a setting where you do more than name-drop. You explain the error, you give reasons for rejecting it, you communicate complexities, you set a tone of longing for truth and love — you’re not just slinging mud.” Desiring God, “Should We Call Out False Teachers or Ignore Them?” accessed December 10, 2024, https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/should-we-call-out-false-teachers-or-ignore-them.

7 Dr. Jason Hallig explains, “At doon namin napag-alaman na he was actually doing some honest inquiry or theological inquiry into the issue that he was trying to address. Nga lang parang napamadali na kung saan ay naituro niya agad on the internet at naipangaral niya kaya medyo naging sensational siya. Kasi ang conclusion niya ay medyo lihis doon sa traditional and evangelical position regarding yung issues na tinatalakay po natin ngayon. Pero hindi namin inaalis ang dahilan na maaaring ginawa niya talaga ito na very honest naman.” Even his colleague Dr. Peñamora concurs, “We are just coming from the perspective, na noong sinasabi niya [Ed Lapiz] ito at para bang nasa gitna pa rin siya ng pagsisiyasat, pagsusuri, hindi pa siya ganuon ka-form doon sa mga ideya na ito, ay yung intention niya is not like the heresies of a… sabihin na nating si Marcion ano.” Expositors Edition, “Dealing with Doctrinal Issues,” November 9, 2024, YouTube video, 5:54-6:06 accessed December 10, 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4ozU3nw67A&t=214s

8 As Dr. Jason Hallig says, “Kaya yung brotherly approach ay talaga pong binigyan namin ng pansin so following the biblical principles of correcting a brother then we have to reach out first and foremost sa concern. At iyan po ay ginawa ng PCEC na bago kami mag-come up to a position paper that we will first discuss the matter with the very person concerned.” Expositors Edition, “Dealing with Doctrinal Issues,” November 9, 2024, YouTube video, 4:58-5:27 accessed December 10, 2024  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4ozU3nw67A&t=214s

9 There was an interview conducted by Pastor Eyriche Cortez in his YouTube vlog called Expositor’s Edition wherein Dr. Aldrin Peñamora and Dr. Jason Hallig, were notably cautious in refraining from mentioning the name of the prominent pastor of Day By Day Jesusness Ministries. See Expositors Edition, “Dealing with Doctrinal Issues,” November 9, 2024, YouTube video, 3:29-3:30 even all throughout the interview accessed December 10, 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4ozU3nw67A&t=214s

10 Ed Lapiz’s teaching that Yahweh is Satan is a direct attack on the identity of Jesus Christ, who claims to be Yahweh Himself according to various Johannine passages (e.g., John 8:24, 10:30, and 8:58). 

11 See 1 Tim. 1:19-20; 2 Tim. 2:16-18.

12 “Whatever the occasion, the naming of notorious people in Scripture largely falls into two basic categories — people who publicly teach something outside of orthodox doctrine and belief, and people who unrepentantly do something outside orthodox practice and faith.” Anne Kennedy, “Naming Names: Why It’s OK (and Necessary) to Call Out False Teachers and Fugitives from Church Justice by Name,” Christian Research Institute, (Feb. 6, 2020). 

13 Kennedy, “Naming Names,” Christian Research Institute, February 6, 2020.

14 Arius, a former Alexandrian presbyter, taught Jesus was a created being. Nestorius, a former archbishop in Constantinople, taught Jesus to be two persons. Apollinaris of Laodicea, a former Syrian bishop and theologian, denied the full humanity of Jesus Christ. 

15 Notwithstanding TheoCom’s discussion with Ed Lapiz, he did not retract his controversial YouTube video addressing his teachings about Yahweh; instead, he restricted its visibility by limiting access solely to his followers.This indicates he is utterly earnest in disseminating his heretical message among his adherents. Lapiz continues to refuse to renounce the heretical beliefs that have brought him so much criticism. Ed Lapiz, “Ed Lapiz – Of Legal Age Na Sya – Pastor Ed Lapiz Official YouTube Channel 2024,” accessed December 10, 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCQwFrGO4Ew&t=61s. 

16 You may want to read Arius: Heresy and Tradition by Rowan Williams. 

17 See PCEC position paper, accessed December 10, 2024 <https://www.facebook.com/pcecph/posts/readposition-paper-on-biblical-gospel-god-the-father-jesus-christ-and-the-lawpce/973632184806047/>

18 See John 1:1,14; 8:24; 58.

19 You may want to listen to his explanation of Amos 5:18 and tell us who is truly being referred to in that passage. Did Lapiz portrayed Yahweh in that passage as good or evil? See Lapiz, Ed, “Of Legal Age Ka Na Ba?” July 10, 2024. YouTube video, 12:38-12:59 accessed December 10, 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfgSfNYApOU

20 “THE SON IS THE FATHER, AND THE SON IS ALSO THE SPIRIT…. and the Lord Jesus who is the Son is also the Eternal Father. Our Lord is the Son, and He is also the Father. Hallelujah!” Witness Lee, “Concerning the Triune God,” (Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 1973), 18-19.

21 “Yung Marcionism ay isang heresy na sinulat nga namin sa papel na ito’y isang heresy na kinondena na noong second century ano dahilan sa si Marcion ay naniniwala na iyong Diyos ng Old Testament na katulad ng tinuturo ng itong maling katuruan na aming inaddress na ang Diyos ng Old Testament ay hindi maaaring Ama ni Cristo sapagkat ito’y punong-puno nga galit, punong-puno ng violence. Ganiyan ano, so that the God of the Old Testament and the New Testament cannot be the same ano. Pero ang sabi namin doon sa papel, may aspeto ng Marcionismo yung katuruan na ngayon na aming ina-address. Sapagka’t si Marcion ay hindi mas malalim ang pagkondena ni Marcion doon sa pag-divide niya ng Old Testament God and NT God. Katunayan ni-reject niya ang buong Old Testament even the New Testament marami siyang ni-reject na mga documents sapagka’t pinili niya talaga. He does not accept all the Puline letters, all the general letters. Namili siya even the gospels pinili niiya so iyon ang Marcionismo at marami pa. At ang address Gnostisismo. Ngunit itong ating inaadress maling katuruan kaya sabi namin aspeto lamang ng Marcionismo yung kaniyang tinuturo sabi nga ng iba anti-Trinity pa nga daw ang maling katuruan na ito. Nguni’t sa aming pagtingin, yung kaniyang pag acknowledge kay El Elyon ay hindi niya nire-reject ang Diyos Ama. Ang nire-reject niya ay yung karakter na nakikita niya katulad nung kay Marcion ay masamang Diyos si Yahweh ng Old Testament. Ngunit si… itong katuruan natin na tinatalakay hindi naman ganuon ka-solid, ganun-kalalim ang kaniyang shade of Marcionism.” See Expositors Edition, “Dealing with Doctrinal Issues,” November 9, 2024, YouTube video, 24:07-26:37 accessed December 10, 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCQwFrGO4Ew&t=61s. 

22 “And we also warned everybody na let us be very careful on labelling people na heretiko. Kasi what may be heretic today can be a hero tomorrow. You have to understand that in the history of the church marami na tayong dineclare na heretiko pero in the future ay na-reverse naman just like Martin Luther was pronounced heretic, judged heretic by the Catholic Church then. Pero later on sila mismo na-realize nila na tama naman at hindi naman talaga heretiko. There were so many personalities even in the history of the Church that were declared heretics pero later on proven to be na hindi pala naman heretics. Tama nga ang mga itinuturo. So we are trying to be very careful and learning from history na hindi natin dapat ginagawa iyon. Not acting as inqjuisitors na talagang gusto nating husgahan ang tao dito. So we were in dialogue. We need dialogue actually. May mga informal dialogues, informal discussions, with people na who can help us address the issue.” 

23 See GCI: Open Arms: Welcoming the Worldwide Church of God accessed December 10, 2024 https://archive.gci.org/articles/open-arms-welcoming-the-worldwide-church-of-god/