Posted on 09/02/2011 9:07:47 AM PDT by marshmallow
Minneapolis, Minnesota (CNN) –Prior to 2006, few people even knew that then-Minnesota state legislator Keith Ellison was a Muslim. Because of his English name, he said, no one thought to ask.
But five years ago, when he ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives - a race he would go on to win - word of his religious affiliation began to spread.
“When I started running for Congress it actually took me by surprise that so many people were fascinated with me being the first Muslim in Congress,” said Ellison, a Democrat now serving his third term in the House.
“But someone said to me, ‘Look Keith, think of a person of Japanese origin running for Congress six years after Pearl Harbor–this might be a news story.’”
Though Ellison's status as the first Muslim elected to Congress is widely known, fewer are aware that he was born into a Catholic family in Detroit and was brought up attending Catholic schools.
But he said he was never comfortable with that faith.
“I just felt it was ritual and dogma,” Ellison said. “Of course, that’s not the reality of Catholicism, but it’s the reality I lived. So I just kind of lost interest and stopped going to Mass unless I was required to.”
It wasn’t until he was a student at Wayne State University in Detroit when Ellison began, “looking for other things.”
(Excerpt) Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com ...
Well explain it then so we may come into the light...
Thanks for the reply. I find it very interesting that the MAIN reasons why some accept the Apocryphal books is that they have a few verses in them that seem to speak of prayers for the dead. This is then used to develop the doctrines of both indulgences and Purgatory - things definitely NOT taught in the rest of the commonly accepted books of the Bible.
Actually, do you know why there are the 4 Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?
Everything God wanted man to know about reconciling the world unto Himself, He gave. New doctrines, improved traditions or new revelations add NOTHING to the perfect word of God. They are an insult to the Creator. He knows how much information man needs. And man always demands more. Just one more miracle. Just one more revelation. That is not faith. Faith tells you that if God says it's enough, then it's enough.
Hopefully one of these times your pope will get it right...
the Trinity and Sola Scriptura are explicitly found in the scripture by looking at the body of the Revealed word, a totality in which the individual elements enlighten each other and open the way to understanding...
This so-called Assumption can not be found anywhere in the scriptures, explicitly or implicitly...
Your pope knows you guys won't check the scriptures to see if he is telling you the truth...
That's the difference...You study the scriptures, you become a Pastor...You study Aristotle's pagan philosophy, you become a priest...
Oh stop it...There are not...
Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. - John 21:25
And John is telling you that you won't know what these other things are that Jesus did...If you should know, John would have written them down...But he did write down the things you should know...
1Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
You in all your Biblical knowledge and wisdom asked: “According to who, the wiki? That is really reaching (and reinforces the tragedy of not having your own teaching authority).”
Now here is the source of the quote I posted: I Corinthians 4:6, Paul says, “Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us you might learn not to go beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other.”
Let me explain further for you. 1 Corinthians 4:6 is in scripture. That obviously comes as a surprise to you.
Your snarky comment that it “reinforces the tragedy of not having your own teaching authority” is evidence of your lack of knowledge of scripture. Can we all agree now that you are not a person to be debated on anything having to do with scripture with any sort of seriousness?
I'm not going to bother to ping your posse on my response, but you are all a bunch of hypocrites. You all blather on about "Only Scripture" but Protestantism doesn't walk the walk.
If Scripture was all that was needed there would be nothing more than Scripture associated with Protestant education and worship, but it isn't. Protestants have their own authors, their sermons, their catechisms, their websites, and their FReeper caucuses and then rage on about the Catholic Magisterium and Liturgy. The only "Sola" you guys really believe in is Only without the Catholic Church.
I can't believe this "conversation" has been ongoing since the beginning of the week. Just for grins, I went back to where the subject of generations and Scripture was first raised. It was here:
To: CynicalBear
>>Paul was sent to teach and preach with the authority of God. The others did not have the authority to teach anything else other than what the Church taught.<<
Huh??? You mean the other Apostles had no authority directly from Jesus? Even Peter? >>2 Thessalonians 2: 15Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.<<
The others are the ones to whom Paul addressed his letters (from which I excerpted). Paul and the Apostles had the authority to teach and to quantify the Faith (as did those to whom they appointed as successors). Individual presbyters and deacons do not.
That’s right, and would be the reason I insist everything be proven in scripture unlike the RCC which “makes things up as they go along”.
Where does it say that Scripture is the only source of belief? NT Scripture did not even start getting written down until a generation after the Ascension of Jesus. What do you think that the Church relied on until the Canon of Scripture was approved? Flash cards?
649 posted on Monday, September 05, 2011 1:03:52 PM by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move m to do so.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 582 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what started the argument about how long a generation was. Can you possibly understand that your comment was interpreted to mean more than 20 years past before the Scriptures were first written? CB posted a table that showed the years of writing of each NT book, and he was further challenged. You have, in the past numerous times, expressed your beliefs that some books were not written until the second century, so I don't think you can blame anyone for reading your comment as more of the same. As of now, you can continue to assert whatever you want because I'm done talking about this nonissue.
Go away and please don’t ping me again. You have already proven your lack of knowledge of scripture.
Yes, we do. I join you in that prayer even though we don't actually see people here, we just read them. ;o)
Oh come on, the mudslugging is fun. :)
My point exactly. Thank you for repeating it.
Wow, just wow. No Jesus, just Paul. It is what we keep saying you guys do, and you guys keep denying it.
Did you skip over the verse??? And the all important "In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to MY GOSPEL". (Paul's gospel) Rom. 2:16.
You guys interpret this as open season on creating your own doctrines based on your own interpretations of Paul (usually wrong) and ignoring the words of Christ, or worse, contradicting them. You ask if I skipped over a single verse. I do not. I understand that Paul preached Christ. It is you guys who do not. You guys think that with this snippet, that Paul is the successor of Christ, supplanting Him as the Ultimate source of revelation and taking snippets out of context to create ever increasing and ever more novel doctrines.
Do you have any idea why Paul calls it his Gospel??? It's because Jesus revealed that Gospel to Paul (and not the others, not even Peter) to give to us...
Just when I think that you have posted the most boneachingly wrong interpretation of Scripture, up comes an even better example. I should try to get you a job travelling from parish to parish so that we can tell the faithful that either you believe in Christ or else here is a good example.
Are you saying that man's attempt at writing down the revelation of God is greater than God?
There was only one thing written about the head of Jesus on the Cross. What was it? With Scriptural proofs, please.
The civil court, without waiting for the judgment of the spiritual tribunal (which was not given until six months afterwards), sentenced Servetus on the 17th of June...
Thank you, Alex, for showing the untruth of CB's statement. Schaff is definitely not a Catholic sympathizer, so for him to say this as clearly as he did is a pretty good indicator of truth.
Christianity is founded by and has its foundation in Christ. The Church existed for more than 20 years before Paul began writing his Epistles and existed for more than 350 years before the canon of NT Scripture (including the versions of each book) was chosen.
The Berean searched the Septuagint. Which includes the dreaded Deuterocanonicals that are shunned by Protestants. They had no NT. Are you a Judaizer who only studies the OT now?
By the way, the Septuagint, the Greek OT used by Christ and most of the world, predates the hypothetical Council of Jamnia by centuries.
Better go back reread Alex's pertinent post. It was the secular authorities.
Before you try to excoriate someone else you really need to know the facts or you really look ignorant.
Bet your face is quite red now.
You mean as opposed to Catholics who quickly show Biblical proof of the bodily assumption of Mary?
I will defer to Mad Dawg who defends our Lady much better than I.
At least you have the wisdom of the centuries; think of the alternative.
Well, I don't believe he had ever heard of the Holy Spirit unless it came in a bottle of Jack Daniels.
Yeccch. Horrid stuff. Alberta Premium Rye Whiskey - the 25 year old version, now that's the ticket...
Not so much.
On 4 April 1553 Servetus was arrested by Roman Catholic authorities, and imprisoned in Vienne. Look it up.
Btw who is Alex? I wasn’t responding to anyone named Alex and whoever that is had nothing to do with who I was first responding to.
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.