Posted on 04/14/2015 8:58:35 AM PDT by Salvation
The phrase “together with us” pretty much says it all D-fendr. I can understand that it’s uncomfortable for some of you but it is what it is.
You are claiming that the “KJV” was not as good representation of the Greek and Hebrew texts as the DR v? If that is your argument, you completely miss the point.
Here’s the full portion that shows the distinctions between the Church and non-Christians.
The Church and non-Christians
839 “Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.”325
The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 “the first to hear the Word of God.”327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”,328 “for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.”329
840 And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”330
842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:
All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331
843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as “a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life.”332
844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:
Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333
845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood.334
Just remarking on your "real deal" only requirement. Is KJV the real deal? Have any other "spurious documents" other than the KJV around for reference?
Your remarks are cryptic. I do not use the KJV because the King’s English is no longer the lingua franca. At the time, it was both useful and quite accurate. Some additional Greek manuscripts have sharpened the accuracy for modern translations making them a bit better, certainly more readable. Nevertheless, KJV was good for English speakers and helpful to root out Roman error. But, for Rome to put the Didache in Paul’s mouth is a propaganda move, not an attempt to provide accuracy.
I’m unclear on your position: you don’t consider the KJV the real deal? What is then?
The Didache is not part of the Church canon.
You will simply have to get your argument together better than this for anyone to discuss a topic with you.
Just wondering what your “real deal” in terms of the “Why do these people use a spurious document full of religiosity to substitute for the real deal?” comment.
I think it’s got a lot of holes in it both in “real deal” and substitute.
If the Didache is NOT Scriptural (in Roman language, not canonized), why waste a bunch of time on a spurious document and so little time on the letters of Paul?
why waste a bunch of time on a spurious document and so little time on the letters of Paul?
Who is doing this according to what metric?
Please...go read the entire thread. The Didache is a 2nd millennia product of Rome. Propaganda, at best...blasphemy, at worst.
The phrase “together with us” pretty much says it all D-fendr. The Catholic Church can’t even differentiate between the God of scripture and the god of Muslims. Not a good sign. So do you believe “together with us”? I your god the same god they proclaim?
You missed the “profess to hold the faith of Abraham” part.
Placed between 40 and 150is A.D., late first or early second by most scholars. So mid-second century is ok. Does the date make it false? It’s not Holy Scripture, but false?
Do you reject everything from that time frame that is a “product of Rome”? Is that your sole basis?
Impressive early Christian teaching that is still applicable, today.
Who is “Abraham” that they are talking about in the video?
No, I didn't. The Catholic Church made an official declaration "along with us". The Catholic Church obviously can't distinguish the difference between the god of Islam and the God of scripture so just went along with saying they both profess the same god.
I think I might overestimated your ability or desire to comprehend the full text.
We can start here: At the top of this section it says: “The Church and non-Christians”
Do you see that part? What might non-Christian mean?
Next is says “”Those who have not yet received the Gospel..”
Do you see that part?
Do you see that this means those who are not Christians and who have not received the Gospel?
What do you think that might mean in regards to the divinity of Christ and the Church teaching on the Most Holy Trinity, etc? Would these non-Christians who have not received the Gospel be those who are the same as Christians in this regard or different, do you think?
Your feeble attempts to justify the statement by the Catholic Church is sad. If you think you serve the same god so be it.
Your post indicates a lack of any attempt of a cogent reply to my post. When someone completely distorts another's position, it usually indicates a lack of confidence in their own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.