Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

OUR LADY AND ISLAM: HEAVEN’S PEACE PLAN
http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/OLISLAM.HTM ^ | September - October 2001 | Fr Ladis J. Cizik, Blue Army National Executive Director

Posted on 10/09/2001 8:21:36 PM PDT by Diago

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 361-379 next last
To: Aquinasfan; the_doc; CCWoody; RnMomof7; Uriel1975
"In fact, the only Churches that have been around since Pentacost are the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches."

This is what you want to believe. However, the fact that your ilk did their best to wipe out any "Baptist like" competitors does not negate the fact that they have always been there. That must really stick in your craw. 1,600 years of persecution, and those danged Baptists are still here.

261 posted on 10/17/2001 6:11:49 AM PDT by Jerry_M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
"..the only common base we have is scripture.."

Are you sure?

262 posted on 10/17/2001 6:14:16 AM PDT by Jerry_M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
841 The Churches relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; those profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day,"

Christ's Church has no relationship with those who deny that He is God. Since I can assume from this statement that the Creator is also the Judge, and since the Bible affirms that Jesus Christ is Creator and Judge, I can conclude that this is just more twisting of scriptures. If this is a twisting of Scriptures, it is not on my part (plus this is not from scripture, but from the book Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994). It is still current. http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm#III takes you to the Vaticans own web pages. Scroll down until you find 841. The whole Catechism is online there, so you can read the whole thing if you want to see how it relates in context with the rest of the Catechism.

263 posted on 10/17/2001 6:28:11 AM PDT by The Bard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Then, why do you think I am or would have difficulty with the Trinity?
264 posted on 10/17/2001 6:38:11 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox
And what part of Luke 1:26-35 do you not understand?

Luke
1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

I don't see God asking Mary anything. It looks to me like the angle was sent to explain what was going to happen.

265 posted on 10/17/2001 6:38:43 AM PDT by The Bard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: TrueBeliever9
Well how insulting! How small! How unequivocally unsly! I posted exactly what the King James says and you don't like it so you call me names! I hope Mary is listening (or reading your posts)!

Keep with the King James!!!

266 posted on 10/17/2001 6:40:50 AM PDT by The Bard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Funny, that can means one of many things.
And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints.
I have my full armor today. What else does the sword of the Spirit mean?
267 posted on 10/17/2001 6:41:30 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: peabers
#175. If the King James Version of the Bible were inaccurate and loaded with typos, as you claim, then how did America become so great using it? No. The KJV is THE accurate version of the Bible.

There are a number of books on the accuracy of the KJV, a few of which are: "Which Bible?", edited by David Otis Fuller, D.D., 2nd edition, 1971, Grand Rapids International Publications, Grand Rapids, Mich.; "Let's Weigh The Evidence: Which Bible is the REAL Word of God?", Barry Burton, 1983, Chick Publications, Chino, Calif.; "The Men Behind the King James Version" (formerly published under the title "The Learned Men"), Gustavus S. Paine, 1977, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mich.

Read the last book about the men who did the translations for the KJV; read the first two books about the revisions to the KJV and the inaccuracies that have resulted.

268 posted on 10/17/2001 6:45:03 AM PDT by miss print
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: The Bard
I couln't exist with my King James! I love it! The King James speaks TRUTH!
269 posted on 10/17/2001 6:49:33 AM PDT by TrueBeliever9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Joshua
I don't see Rome our Catholic in there...

I can only recall 1 time in history where the visible church and the Spiritual (or invisible) Church were the same thing. And then, it was a church of only 2....

270 posted on 10/17/2001 6:51:08 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: The Bard
If this is a twisting of Scriptures, it is not on my part...

I didn't mean to imply that you were doing it.

271 posted on 10/17/2001 6:55:19 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: miss print
#175. If the King James Version of the Bible were inaccurate and loaded with typos, as you claim, then how did America become so great using it? No. The KJV is THE accurate version of the Bible. Bwahahahaha! Show proof that the KJV Proddy comic book bible contributed to the making of America. Go to ebible.com, and see what they say about the KJV (cult-like following full of typos) and the New American Bible (Roman Catholic - very accurate).

On Judgement Day you KJV advocates will find out you have been duped by a spiteful and ignorant Proddy king.

272 posted on 10/17/2001 6:59:25 AM PDT by peabers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
(Note also that Peter is exercising his infallible interpretation of scripture here. No one objects to Peter's unilateral exercise of authority.)

Except God!

Note that the Apostles cast lots to see who would be "chosen". Note also that this is before Pentecost. Note also that it is Jesus who a few chapters later Regenerates Saul to be his Apostle.

Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle and separated unto the Gospel of God,

1 Corinthians 1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

2 Corinthians 1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints who are in all Achaia:

Galatians 1 Paul, an apostle (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead),

Ephesians 1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, To the saints who are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

1 Timothy 1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Savior, and Lord Jesus Christ, who is our hope,

2 Timothy 1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus,

Titus 1 Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is according to godliness,

And they cast their lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. Word search on the Apostle Matthias: 0. Seems like God had something different in mind than casting lots; namely Paul, an apostle (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father...).
273 posted on 10/17/2001 7:11:21 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: nmh; Aquinasfan
Catholicism is not Christian so the beliefs etc. will not reflect the teachings of God and later Jesus.

To be any more ignorant in expressing your knowledge of Catholicism, you would have to be standing around wearing sheets and drinking too much beer, in the flickering light of a burning cross in some hayseed's back yard.

And the beat goes on, AF...*sigh*

274 posted on 10/17/2001 7:26:33 AM PDT by Wm Bach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: CT
I wouldn't waste my breath on the bigots. That's all their interested in. No dialog, just anti-catholic monologue.
275 posted on 10/17/2001 7:26:37 AM PDT by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Wm Bach
Touche!!!!
276 posted on 10/17/2001 7:31:39 AM PDT by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Jerry_M
the fact that your ilk did their best to wipe out any "Baptist like" competitors does not negate the fact that they have always been there. That must really stick in your craw. 1,600 years of persecution, and those danged Baptists are still here.

Where's your historical proof. Let's see documentation.

277 posted on 10/17/2001 7:35:25 AM PDT by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Jerry_M
In addition to above, the more I read this kind of anti-catholic bashing rhetoric, the more I realize who you guys resemble. OSAMA When catholics start a thread which contains faith beliefs that you don't share, why is it that you guys are there ready to pontificate your subjective beliefs and interpretations of the Bible and the faith handed down to us? It would be much more courteous to go and rant on a different thread. Maybe a different forum. I see nothing free about your republic.
278 posted on 10/17/2001 7:41:05 AM PDT by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: The Bard; RnMomof7; reformjoy; ALOHA RONNIE
#265. Luke 1:26 needs a little explanation.

God promised in the Old Testament that the Saviour/Messiah would come through the house of David. Isaiah 7:14 says "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." This is echoed in Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." One has to look, too, at the genealogies of both Joseph and Mary. Mary wasn't picked just because she loved God, she was picked because she was from the house of David, as was Joseph. Joseph's genealogy is given in the very first chapter of the very first book of the New Testament, Matthew 1. Matt. 1:6 "And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias (Bathsheba);" Matt. 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." Matt. 1: 20 "...Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."

Luke (who didn't get around to Mary's genealogy till the 4th Chapter), Luke 4:23 begins with "And Jesus himself gegan to be about thiry years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son[-in-law] of Heli [Mary's father]." Luke 4:31 gives us this key: "...which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David."

All this to say that Joseph and Mary were both descendants, (distant cousins) of David the king. II Samuel 6:14 says "And these be the names of those that were born unto [David} in Jerusalem: "Shammoah, and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon."

As far as Mary being the perpetual virgin, that doesn't appear in the Scriptures. Luke 2:21-24 reads: "And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcision of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. And when the days of her purification according to the laws of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written the in the law of the Lord. Every male that openeth the womb shall be called hold to the Lord;) And to ofer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord. A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons." This was done according to Leviticus 12:8 (in fact, read all of Lev. 12, 1-8). The sacrifice of the two turtledoves only appears in Lev. 12:8 and Luke 2:24.

God had promised Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David that the Saviour would come through their lines. Everyone thought that the Saviour would come through the line of Solomon but God cut off that passage because evil that Solomon's descendants did. God thinks of everything. In the days of the Roman occupation of Jerusalem and, therefore, under Roman law, if a child were adopted, he inherited the man's lineage in toto. Therefore, when Jesus (son of Mary, descendant of David) was adopted by Joseph (son of Jacob, descendant of David), the line of Solomon was restored and Jesus could rightfully claim the line of David and all of God's promises were kept.

This makes a very interesting chart done in FamilyTree Maker. It is something to behold when printed out.

279 posted on 10/17/2001 7:58:05 AM PDT by miss print
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: ThomasMore; the_doc; CCWoody; RnMomof7; Uriel1975
To compare Baptists to Usama bin Laden due to the fact that we don't like the fact that the established heirarchy attempted to stamp us out of existence for over 1,600 years is absurd. You ask for proof? Try Foxe's Book of Martyrs" for a start. I would offer to loan you one of my two copies, but you might just burn it, much like your forefathers burned my forefathers and their writings.

I guess that my words are "Catholic bashing", whilst your ancestor's actions cannot be considered "Baptist bashing"?

280 posted on 10/17/2001 8:08:09 AM PDT by Jerry_M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 361-379 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson