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 ...
How do you explain the myriad of Concordances, Catechisms, Sermons, books, treatises, lectures, radio and television programs, sermons, web pages, dictionaries, translation guides, and store front preachers who provide "guidance" to Protestants in the understanding of Scripture?
I don't think your problem is with the concept of a magisterium that provides expert insight and opinion. It is with a Magisterium that acts as a theological Supreme Court. Protestants cannot deal with the concept of authority. The entire Protestant movement is one in which each is his own pope and magisterium.
"Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that IN ME FIRST JESUS CHRIST MIGHT SHEW FORTH all longsuffering, FOR A PATTERN TO THEM which should HEREAFTER BELIEVE ON HIM to life everlasting." 1 Tim. 1:16.
Paul states that HE is the pattern to follow, given by Jesus Christ to them who should, after Paul, believe on Him to life everlasting.
It is not Peter, it is not Mary, it is not St. Cadburry of Boise. It is Paul who is the pattern to follow. If you want to know what God is doing in this age of grace, you won't find it in Exodus, or Amos, or Matthew. You will find it where the age of grace began. That would be from Romans through Philemon. Paul was given the dispensation grace, we are in the dispensation of grace, so our pattern to follow is located there. That is per Jesus Christ, as you read above.
That is precisely why you are a Paulian and not a Christian. A Christian is a follower of Christ.
I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.” - John 8:12
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
He that does not believe but is still baptized is DAMNED.
Reading into Scripture what is not there.
That is not what this passage is saying and it quite clearly calls for the believer to be baptized.
Both/And
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” John 3:5
Turn your Bible back to MMLJ, and show God where the gospel of your judgement is. Point to it and demand that He use the gospel YOU want as your judge and jury. I think that you really believe you will be able to do this one day. Of course, Judith Anne, that is IMHO, only. But you certainly do seem to have an aversion to what God clearly states. That He is going to judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to Paul's gospel. Good luck!
Metmom: “”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)”
Natural Law: “That is a completely uncalled for characterization of Catholics”
Indeed, since 2008 to 2009 was dedicated as the Year of St. Paul on the bimillennium celebrations.
http://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/en/anno_paolino/anno_paolino.htm
Whose word do we have that Christ intended us to follow Paul? Paul’s.
The minute they accept John 6, and Christ's words as recorded in Holy Scripture by a REAL APOSTLE, I'll take that comment seriously.
“Peter and the 11 could NEVER have said that. Because their commission included Repent and be baptized..for the remission of sins.
Something changed between Peter and the 11’s commission and Paul’s commission. It’s called the Dispensation of the grace of God. And it has to do with the Cross. And the shedding of Christ’s blood FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS.”
Please correct me if I am misunderstanding what you have written here.
You seem to be saying that Jesus spent three years with the Apostles, teaching them and preparing them for the New Covenant told them one must be born of water and the Spirit to enter the Kingdom of God and sent them as the Father sent Him, anointed them with the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, but then changed everything when He called Saul and converted him from persecutor to apostle.
So, Paul was given a different gospel, known only to him which negated all that Jesus had said and taught the other twelve?
What does Paul say in Galatians?
2 1 After fourteen years I again went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and Titus came with us. 2 Following a revelation, I went to lay before them the Gospel that I am preaching to the pagans. I had a private meeting with the leaders—lest I should be working or have worked in a wrong way. 3 But they did not im pose circumcision, not even on Titus who is Greek and who was with me. 4 But there were some intruders and false brothers who had gained access to watch over the way we live the freedom Christ has given us. They would have us enslaved by the Law, 5 but we refused to yield even for a moment; so that the truth of the Gospel remain intact for you.
6 The others, the more respectable leaders—it does not matter what they were before: God pays no attention to the status of a person—gave me no new instructions. 7 They recognized that I have been entrusted to give the Good News to the pagan nations, just as Peter has been entrusted to give it to the Jews. 8 In the same way that God made Peter the apostle of the Jews, he made me the apostle of the pagans.
9 James, Cephas and John acknowledged the graces God gave me. Those men who were regarded as the pillars of the Church stretched out their hand to me and Barnabas as a sign of fel lowship; we would go to the pagans and they to the Jews. 10 We should only keep in mind the poor among them. I have taken care to do this.
Paul went to the pillars of the Church to be affirmed by them that he was teaching the same Gospel as they.
We have many dozens of instances within the Synoptic Gospels that Jesus called people to follow him. It is later confirmed in both the Letters of Paul and 1 Peter 2:21. When Paul tells others to follow his Gospel, he is not claiming the authorship of the Gospel he is telling people to follow the Gospel that he (Paul) is preaching which is the Gospel of Jesus.
St. Paul is not the loon, it is those who have twisted his teachings into the mantra of a self-centered heretical cult who are the loons, crackpots, mentally unbalanced, and their dupes.
"Be ye followers of me". (1 Cor. 4:16, 11:1). Was he being conceited or carnal for saying this? No, we know that Paul was the CHIEF sinner, saved by grace. We know that Paul was nothing in himself, while Christ is EVERYTHING, for "In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9). But it WAS to Paul that Christ committed the revelation of His message and the dispensation of the grace of God.
It is NOT the person but the POSITION of Paul that we magnify, as the Scriptures also do;"For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles; I MAGNIFY MINE OFFICE." Rom. 11:13. He was given a commission by the risen Lord Jesus Christ, and he was the pattern to follow as he followed Christ's direct revelations to him concerning the dispensation of grace, the body of Christ, the One New Man, etc.
This may seem at odds with the commission that was given by Christ to Peter and the 11, but they were NOT working in opposition to or competition with each other. It was a question of changes in dispensations, from the Kingdom message, concerning a kingdom of believers, to a Grace message, concerning a body of believers.
The same risen Lord who had sent Peter forth to proclaim His kingdom rights, later raised up Paul (Acts 9) to go forth with the message of grace.
Peter and the others at Jerusalem had RECOGNIZED THIS, and, rather than OPPOSING Paul, they had solemnly and PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGED Paul's position by extending to him the right hand of FELLOWSHIP. (Gal. 2:7-9).
By this acknowledgement there was full agreement between them as to the FURTHER REVELATIONS COMMITTED TO PAUL. (Acts 18:26; 1 Cor. 3:6; 4:6; 16:12).
It was NOT a question of personalities, but of a DIVINE REVELATION and a GOD-GIVEN POSITION.
This is why I make NO apology for acknowledging the spiritual authority of the Apostle Paul over believers today. We follow Paul as he followed Christ because Paul was a pattern for us who would hereafter believe on Christ.
Please read my post 3231 so I don’t have to re-post it. Then if you have questions, post to me again.
Turn your Bible back to MMLJ, and show God where the gospel of your judgement is. Point to it and demand that He use the gospel YOU want as your judge and jury. I think that you really believe you will be able to do this one day. Of course, Judith Anne, that is IMHO, only. But you certainly do seem to have an aversion to what God clearly states. That He is going to judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ
This is what your faith in Paul has led you to? Pathetic. Christ is already aware of the secrets of my heart. What will you do about the expression on your face when I don't go to hell? Do you think I have some secret sins that you will delight in seeing exposed and that Christ will allow you an "I told you so, Judith Anne" moment? Sick.
“That would be from Romans through Philemon. Paul was given the dispensation grace, we are in the dispensation of grace, so our pattern to follow is located there. That is per Jesus Christ, as you read above.”
Are you saying here that grace did not come until the conversion of Paul?
I am honestly confused by this so forgive me if I seem obtuse in what I say next.
As a Catholic Christian I believe that grace came to us as Jesus Christ, who took the form of man, died for our sins on a cross and rose again victorious over death so that through this grace(Jesus), with this grace(Jesus) and by this grace(Jesus) we might have everlasting life in the Kingdom of God.
If grace only came through the conversion and revelation of Paul’s gospel, why do we have the other Gospels? What purpose do they serve if the true gospel is that of Paul? Did the original Apostles no receive the grace of Jesus until Paul gave it to them? Why didn’t Jesus appear to Paul and then have Paul call the others?
So you are saying that John was a REAL Apostle and Paul was NOT a REAL Apostle? Is that right? lol! Another day in Judith Anne’s Book of Life begins.
I am saying Christ gave John the words of eternal life. We only have Paul’ testimony about himself. Feel free to follow Paul. I follow the Savior, the living Son of Almighty God. You follow the other guy. He cannot save you.
And protestants say that Catholics twist protestants’ words....
And what are you going to say when He asks how you followed His new Decalogue, the Two Greatest Commandments and the Eight Beatitudes?
Peter is preaching on the day of Pentecost a restoration. For Jew and Gentile? No, for the NATION ISRAEL. Acts 2 and 3 mark the beginning of the harvest FOR ISRAEL. Please read them. It is the preparing of the Jewish people for the times of restitution when Christ will return to earth the second time. (Acts 3:19-21). Pentecost was an all Jewish feast day. It was the beginning of the restoration of Israel, not the beginning of the Church the Body of Christ. This is why Peter's gospel is called the GOSPEL OF THE CIRCUMCISION. It concerns prophetic things concerning a Nation, Israel. But why does Peter never mentions the good news that Christ diedfor our sins? Because you can read his Pentecost sermon until your eyes cross, and you won't find it. It isn't there. And it isn't there for a reason.
"Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to MY GOSPEL, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY, which was KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN, but NOW is made manifest, and BY THE SCRIPTURES of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith." Rom. 16:25,26.
So what is the "MY GOSPEL" Paul refers to?This is why Peter does not mention Christ dying for our sins at Pentecost. Paul said HE was given this gospel to preach and it was KEPT HID IN THE SCRIPTURES until HE RECEIVED IT FROM THE LORD. Paul does not get saved until Acts 9, so the body could not have begun before then.
That Paul didn’t write Hebrews 13? Just guessing...
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.