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 ...
Sorry for the formatting on that, don’t know what happened.
What you have proved is a total lack of understanding of what Jesus meant when He said I AM the Bread of Life.
Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word which proceeds from the mouth of God.
Jesus is the Word
Hey, you have company though, many of those who had walked with Him left because of this hard saying.
Do you think his sacrifice was a tragedy too ?
He was no victim , he chose the time and place to fulfill prophecy . He laid down his life and it is no tragedy .
IT’S A TRIUMPH !
A tragedy? No. Where did you get that?
His is the victory, ours the reward.
Yeah, I noticed that Paul, the loon and crackpot and mentally unbalanced one, suddenly rates when they have a doctrine they want to support from Scripture (for a change).
All of a sudden, he’s now authoritative, that is SOME of what he says.
When you point out that it’s the very same Paul who repeatedly tells us that we are sealed with the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption, meaning OSAS, it’s *Paul who?*.
When it’s that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone,.....*Paul who?*
Cafeteria style Bible interpretation.
Those observances have their place as we tend to be a forgetful ungrateful bunch, we humans.
It’s a great picture and reminder of what Christ has done for us. It’s an outward profession to the great cloud of witnesses which encompasses us and an outward testimony to a lost and unbelieving world of the inward faith we exercised and inward reality we have experienced.
And if God breathed Scripture is not reliable enough on its own to be true to itself and able to be interpreted, what on earth makes anyone think that some random group of men claiming to speak for God is?
What are their credentials? I don't ever recall Jesus saying that He'd sent a magesterium to interpret Scripture for us, nor do I see anywhere in the Gospels where He gave instructions for said magisterium.
On the contrary, what He DID promise us was.....
John 16:13-14 13When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Hello....... vinegar can be made from wine when it ferments, or *sours*. Ever hear of *sourdough* bread? Natural fermenting process.
There is no contradiction there.
Christ states........John 16:13-14 13....”When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. ....He will glorify me,.... for he will take what is mine and declare it to you”.... John 16:13-14
Men state..... “we Catholics call upon the Magisterium”
What a contrast!.... thus the conflict between men and God continues.
Why? We don't have any definitive dates for any of Scripture. We're still not sure when Jesus was born. Why does Peter arriving at Rome matter to you?
And yes, it matters to me. I don’t want to ASSUME that it was in 61-65 A.D., when 2 Peter was written. But I would rather ask someone who has a very approximate date than guess.
You still haven't told me why you consider 2 Peter to have been written by Peter.
Mark 16:16.
(Quibble: Actually, it is yeast that ferments grape juice into wine. It does so anaerobically.)
Which by not doing so is exactly why people are targeted by the enemy of mens souls...."who seeks whom he may devour."...and why so many people today swallow the bait and fall into these various cults and false religions...
To whom was Jesus speaking? What is the antecedant of “you”?
Really? Then why the comment in post 2844? And why all the speculation here? You might be able to convince us of that if you'd drop the subject and stop asking twisted questions.
I'm not speculating and I'm not the one who posted a whole thesis on the subject without even being involved in the conversation, or indeed on the thread at all.
Why not ask Rnmomof7 why she posted what she did rather than go after me who merely commented on the Protestant horrid fascination with the subject.
I don't shut my wife away for a week each month. Do you know anyone who does?
Have I? Let us see.
You must know very well that they have made declarations of the infallible, God-inspired, error free Holy Scriptures and assert exactly that in the Catechism you "say" you uphold.
I have been corrected twice here on FR where I differed from the Catechism and have thankfully and publically posted that acknowledgement.
You apparently are stuck on the problem you think you see in differing accounts of the resurrection morning and, in truth, it is no more mysterious than voicing the viewpoints of the different people who gave their own accounts to the writer. No retelling of a real event is ever in perfect sync between various people and, if they were, it would prove a prior conspiracy between them to all tell the exact same thing. This, by the way, is a good way police investigating a crime can judge the truthfulness of the witnesses. No one person sees everything it exactly the same was as another especially not when they happen upon a scene at different times.
There is a difference between infallibility of interpretation and infallibility of text. You claim infallibility of text. Well, let's have it. What is written, infallibly, over the head of Jesus on the Cross? No waffling this time, please.
Your own Magesterium holds that the Holy Spirit "breathed" the very words to the hearts of the writers of Scripture, yet you state time after time that you STILL cannot come to terms with what you say are "discrepancies", which is only a slightly nicer way to say errors or contradictions.
Inspiration is not dictation. Scripture is only as good as fallible men have received and acted upon the inspiration. We are not the robots of the Reformed who can only do what is programmed. God does not dictate; He inspires. He breathes; we receive and interpret what is breathed. Unless we are perfect (we Catholics are not), then we receive imperfectly. Do you claim personal infallibility?
On this point I am closer to the doctrine of Scriptural integrity of your Magesterium than you are. How did THAT happen?
In the light of day, I don't think so.
If we are talking about a "gift" from another person, then of course. Can a person refuse to accept the gift of eternal life that God offers the world through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, yes they can and many do, especially those who prefer to earn it themselves.
Nobody can earn it themselves. Why would you throw that in unless you sense that the argument is already lost?
Can we "give it back"? Ummm....NO. First of all, why would we knowing the priceless worth of the gift? Secondly, with the indwelling Spirit of God, we won't want to forsake it.
I see. You have no argument.
And, in anticipation of your next challenge, if a Christian dies in a state of unconfessed sin, will he STILL go to heaven? The answer is YES. We are not saved by our good works and sinless living and that means we are not kept saved by those same deeds.
Anticipating God again? Or merely gainsaying Him? How do you know what God will Judge? Or have you moved over to the non Judgement camp of those who claim to be Christian?
Not a change. Paul is subordinate to Christ, though. Not vice versa.
Paul tells us of our final Judgement any number of times - denied by the Paulians, interestingly enough.
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.