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 ...
Tell you what; let's go hang out at your house and get magic gold teeth. If you were Mormon, we could get some magic underwear as well and complete the evening.
Given your group's penchant to FALSELY accuse the Church of worshiping Mary can you imagine the shrine they would have at her grave if she hadn't been assumed by the power of Jesus. By questioning the Assumption you are in effect limiting the power of God.
Has your type no shame in deprecating Our Savior.
LOL, DOn't give up your day job. The Magisterium is not hiring.
From ScripturCatholic.com
Gen. to Rev. - Scripture never says that Scripture is the sole infallible authority for God's Word. Scripture also mandates the use of tradition. This fact alone disproves sola Scriptura.
Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:15 - those that preached the Gospel to all creation but did not write the Gospel were not less obedient to Jesus, or their teachings less important.
Matt. 28:20 - "observe ALL I have commanded," but, as we see in John 20:30; 21:25, not ALL Jesus taught is in Scripture. So there must be things outside of Scripture that we must observe. This disproves "Bible alone" theology.
Mark 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to "preach," not write, and only three apostles wrote. The others who did not write were not less faithful to Jesus, because Jesus gave them no directive to write. There is no evidence in the Bible or elsewhere that Jesus intended the Bible to be sole authority of the Christian faith.
Luke 1:1-4 - Luke acknowledges that the faithful have already received the teachings of Christ, and is writing his Gospel only so that they "realize the certainty of the teachings you have received." Luke writes to verify the oral tradition they already received.
John 20:30; 21:25 - Jesus did many other things not written in the Scriptures. These have been preserved through the oral apostolic tradition and they are equally a part of the Deposit of Faith.
Acts 8:30-31; Heb. 5:12 - these verses show that we need help in interpreting the Scriptures. We cannot interpret them infallibly on our own. We need divinely appointed leadership within the Church to teach us.
Acts 15:1-14 – Peter resolves the Church’s first doctrinal issue regarding circumcision without referring to Scriptures.
Acts 17:28 – Paul quotes the writings of the pagan poets when he taught at the Aeropagus. Thus, Paul appeals to sources outside of Scripture to teach about God.
1 Cor. 5:9-11 - this verse shows that a prior letter written to Corinth is equally authoritative but not part of the New Testament canon. Paul is again appealing to a source outside of Scripture to teach the Corinthians. This disproves Scripture alone.
1 Cor. 11:2 - Paul commends the faithful to obey apostolic tradition, and not Scripture alone.
Phil. 4:9 - Paul says that what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do. There is nothing ever about obeying Scripture alone.
Col. 4:16 - this verse shows that a prior letter written to Laodicea is equally authoritative but not part of the New Testament canon. Paul once again appeals to a source outside of the Bible to teach about the Word of God.
1 Thess. 2:13 – Paul says, “when you received the word of God, which you heard from us..” How can the Bible be teaching first century Christians that only the Bible is their infallible source of teaching if, at the same time, oral revelation was being given to them as well? Protestants can’t claim that there is one authority (Bible) while allowing two sources of authority (Bible and oral revelation).
1 Thess. 3:10 - Paul wants to see the Thessalonians face to face and supply what is lacking. His letter is not enough.
2 Thess. 2:14 - Paul says that God has called us "through our Gospel." What is the fullness of the Gospel?
2 Thess. 2:15 - the fullness of the Gospel is the apostolic tradition which includes either teaching by word of mouth or by letter. Scripture does not say "letter alone." The Catholic Church has the fullness of the Christian faith through its rich traditions of Scripture, oral tradition and teaching authority (or Magisterium).
2 Thess 3:6 - Paul instructs us to obey apostolic tradition. There is no instruction in the Scriptures about obeying the Bible alone (the word "Bible" is not even in the Bible).
1 Tim. 3:14-15 - Paul prefers to speak and not write, and is writing only in the event that he is delayed and cannot be with Timothy.
2 Tim. 2:2 - Paul says apostolic tradition is passed on to future generations, but he says nothing about all apostolic traditions being eventually committed to the Bible.
2 Tim. 3:14 - continue in what you have learned and believed knowing from whom you learned it. Again, this refers to tradition which is found outside of the Bible.
James 4:5 - James even appeals to Scripture outside of the Old Testament canon ("He yearns jealously over the spirit which He has made...")
2 Peter 1:20 - interpreting Scripture is not a matter of one's own private interpretation. Therefore, it must be a matter of "public" interpretation of the Church. The Divine Word needs a Divine Interpreter. Private judgment leads to divisions, and this is why there are 30,000 different Protestant denominations.
2 Peter 3:15-16 - Peter says Paul's letters are inspired, but not all his letters are in the New Testament canon. See, for example, 1 Cor. 5:9-10; Col. 4:16. Also, Peter's use of the word "ignorant" means unschooled, which presupposes the requirement of oral apostolic instruction that comes from the Church.
2 Peter 3:16 - the Scriptures are difficult to understand and can be distorted by the ignorant to their destruction. God did not guarantee the Holy Spirit would lead each of us to infallibly interpret the Scriptures. But this is what Protestants must argue in order to support their doctrine of sola Scriptura. History and countless divisions in Protestantism disprove it.
1 John 4:1 - again, God instructs us to test all things, test all spirits. Notwithstanding what many Protestants argue, God's Word is not always obvious.
1 Sam. 3:1-9 - for example, the Lord speaks to Samuel, but Samuel doesn't recognize it is God. The Word of God is not self-attesting.
1 Kings 13:1-32 - in this story, we see that a man can't discern between God's word (the commandment "don't eat") and a prophet's erroneous word (that God had rescinded his commandment "don't eat"). The words of the Bible, in spite of what many Protestants must argue, are not always clear and understandable. This is why there are 30,000 different Protestant churches and one Holy Catholic Church.
Gen. to Rev. - Protestants must admit that knowing what books belong in the Bible is necessary for our salvation. However, because the Bible has no "inspired contents page," you must look outside the Bible to see how its books were selected. This destroys the sola Scriptura theory. The canon of Scripture is a Revelation from God which is necessary for our salvation, and which comes from outside the Bible. Instead, this Revelation was given by God to the Catholic Church, the pinnacle and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
I Corinthians 4:6, 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.
Then there is Luke writing in Acts that even the Bereans after listening to Paul and Silas were commended for even checking them out.
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Right after you said right? As far as tradition is concerned? I’ll let the words of Jesus about tradition speak for themselves as to what I think of tradition which is not supported by scripture.
That's quite an out. It is a well exercised routine by each would-be Pope of his own doctrines. We come up with all manner of silliness that way, including the Rapture, Judaizing, and Harold Camping.
Negative. The main reason why the Deuterocanonicals (there is no Apocrypha) are including the canon of Scripture is that they were in the Septuagint. This is the Greek language Bible used by Christ and the Apostles, and indeed by most of the Jewish world.
How does the Holy Spirit grade all these individual interpretations? Does He render a numerical or alpha grade every day to each one of you who has made interpretations for that day?.If so, do you bandy your grades about on some arcane or UFO blog to parade your spiritual progress. If I might be so bold to say the "bible quoten bible toten" self proclaimed geniuses on this board would be in need of remedial training or perhaps summer school
What besides ones own sinful pride allows your type to desecrate the Bride of Christ? Did you get an indwelling of the Spirit and if so share with us as to facilitate a proper evaluation.
Oh that's right it is all about you not Jesus. I understand now and finally understand who is operating the aforementioned UFO blog. It's Semple's buddy.
Certainly; when I attempted to explain that, I was met with a barrage of "that's not what you meant, this is what you mean" and words to to effect that I was attempting to say other than what I meant.
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.
I understand an initial assumption. I also understand a continuation of antiCatholic diatribe in spite of an explanation of the original post.
Thank you for stepping in, though. We shall see if your efforts are sufficient.
The footwork is becoming fast and furious. You claimed that Servetus was convicted by a Catholic court. Alex showed that that claim is false. The secular authorities convicted him.
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.
The name of the poster that I replied to who supplied the information and addressed it primarily to you at 2305. Do you not read posts addressed to you, or do you summarily dismiss and forget them when you disapprove of the content?
Or do you prooftext posts like Protestants do the Bible, selecting single out-of-context verses they like and simply blotting out entire chapters or books that they do not.
Have you noticed the pattern? We post from the Gospels. They post from Paul duelling verses (that they interpret). We post from the Gospels. They post from Paul duelling verses (that they interpret)....
The Magisterium at the Church of Iscool (population one) is fully staffed.
The self serving nature promulgated by those of the evangelical type rivals the absurdity of the LDS or New Agers.
Speaking of New Age do you ascribe to the "Ring of Fire" that is currently the rage after the dismal failure of fellow evangelical Harold Camping? I am not referring to Johnny Cash and his Ring of Fire but the rapture/dispensational types who are awaiting the rapture on 9/15.
The magic number is 188 days and so on (9/15 or 9/16) some earthly catastrophe perhaps even the rapture will occur
If the rapture happens, which one of your buddies is most likely to go and who will be left to mourn with the rest of the unwashed or will all your buddies on the board remain and just the Catholics be admitted or just a few of your type and Catholics and a few of the others or some other esoteric combo that only one like you with interpretative skill could fashion and conjure up for the uneducated.?
How do we address you if it is you who are left behind ? Does individual interpretation still reign supreme after the rapture or do we have new rules? Care to share any doubts with us before 9/15
Yeah, I didn’t think you could touch the bodily assumption of Mary. Buh bye.
You're right. Keep reading. I lacked the discipline to resist. lol.
Funny about that......
I have never said that the Bible is not God’s word, nor that it contains God’s truth nor that one does not need to study it.
http://www.spiritandtruth.org/questions/59.htm
I thought this was the meaning of that in the KJV.
Were you not aware of that, or did you think Paul meant that Timothy was to divide the Word? Divide it into what exactly?
You replied to it, search your posting history.
I have certainly heard enough odd theology out of many protestants, yet they are not held up to the same ridicule as the Catholics here.
Though you have been nothing but gracious with me.
I think we can pretty well conclude that those who wish to subjugate the Holy Scriptures do so because they know the Scriptures prove their own doctrines to be false.
Preview is your friend, this post is contradictory at best.
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.