Posted on 04/12/2014 9:30:55 PM PDT by Rashputin
When you speak of another Freeper, be sure to ping him/her.
Yes ... you already informed me of that. :-)
I don’t need links thanks, I have my bible and I’m well aware what’s biblical and what isn’t.
Heck, Catholics don’t even think Jesus had siblings, or that Mary had spousal relations with her husband.
It’s all in the New Testament if you’re looking for those.
I’m out for the evening, God bless you all and may we turn our countries back to him and be blessed once more.
together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day
Just pointing that out. I am aware of the attempt to rectify the two conflicting statement, as if the second statement is premised upon the same condition as the first, as if it said " they profess to adore the one, merciful God together with us," but that is not what it says. If that was what was meant - and RCs argue against the magisterium and the CCC as being ambiguous - then that would easily be made clear by saying
"whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham and to adore the one, merciful God together with us, who on the last day will judge mankind."
But that is not what it says, and instead what it possibly takes away with one hand it more clearly gives with the other, as it plainly affirms that "together with us they adore the one, merciful God." That is the stronger statement, as it can be said that "Catholics profess to hold to the faith of Abraham," without saying this is a mere claim. Obviously that would not go over well with Muslims, and thus the affirmation statement is stronger.
This is evidently due to V2 being a compromise document, being the result of a doctrine by committee of two opposing factions - with the more liberal winning, resulting in confusion among RCs and making work for her lay apologists who seek to explain what the ambiguity and compromise documents mean.
While sedevacantists basically uphold the same errors as Rome, they do make a valid case from a historical perspective regarding V2:
"The definitive texts are for the most part compromise texts. On far too many occasions they juxtapose opposing viewpoints without establishing any genuine internal link between them. Thus every affirmation of the power of bishops is accompanied in a manner which is almost tedious by the insistence upon the authority of the Pope... It is then the ambiguity of the Conciliar statements which allows for any interpretation one wishes.
Let us not forget that almost all the changes in the post-Conciliar Church are either "blamed" on the Council, or said to derive from it as a "mandate from the Holy Spirit". Conservative Novus Ordo Catholics who object to the drastic changes call them "abuses" that result from the "misinterpretation" of Conciliar teachings. They point to many fine and orthodox statements in support of their contention. Those on the other hand who are on the forefront of the Revolution - the Liberal post-Conciliar Catholic - can justify almost anything they wish by recourse to the same documents.
The much debated issue as to whether the Council is only an "excuse" or in fact the "source" of the "autodemolition" of the Church is entirely beside the point. Whatever the case may be, as the Abbe of Nantes has pointed out, "there is not a heresiarch today, not a single apostate who does not now appeal to the Council in carrying out his action in broad daylight with full impunity as recognized pastor and master" (CRC May 1980). - VATICAN II Rama Coomaraswamy, M.D.; http://www.the-pope.com/wvat2tec.html
Why do you, a non-Catholic try to tell Catholics what they believe?
Your statements are not true.
Let us not forget that you creatively edited the original quote.
Whereas, a muslim who follows the First Half, but does not practice the Second is an apostate and so must be killed by any muslim practicing the 2nd Half.
To further complicate matters, a muslim from one sect is often bound to kill another from a different sect. Worse still, a muslim from one sect who follows on cleric/imam can be bound to kill another from the same sect for following a different cleric/iman. An illustration follows:
A Comparative Tale of Two Religions
Christian vs. Christian
A man was despondent. His life seemed worthless. He decided to end it all and climbed up onto a bridge railing high above a raging river.
Just as he was leaning forward to make his final plunge, a man happened by and said, “Wait. Let me help you.”
“How can you help me? My life is over?”
“Are you a Christian, Jew, Hindu or Muslim?”
“A Christian”
“So am I! What denomination are you?”
“I used to be a Catholic, but have not been to mass in decades.”
“I’m a Protestant. Let me help you find your way back to life.”
“What can you possibly tell me?”
“I can tell you that Jesus loves you and for His sake and His love of you, you cannot take your life. There is so much more to live for.”
“Like what?”
“Children.”
“I don’t have any.”
“Neither do I. But there are still children in need of adults to guide them. Would you deny some child your wisdom and experience?”
“No, of course not!”
“Then step back and come with me.”
So the two men walked off.
Muslims vs. Muslim
Far away in a distant land, another man stood on a different bridge.
A man was walking across a bridge one day, and he saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off and commit suicide.
He immediately ran over and said, “Stop! Don’t do it!”
“Why shouldn’t I?” the other replied.
The man said, “Well, there’s so much to live for!”
“Like what?”
“Well… are you religious or atheist?”
“Religious.”
“Me too! Are you Muslim, Christian or Jewish?”
“Muslim.”
“Me too! Sunni or Shi’ite?”
“Sunni.”
“Me too! Hanafi, Hanbali, Shafi or Maliki?”
“Hanafi.”
“Wow! Me too! Do you follow Sheikh Fulaan al-Fullani or Sheikh Kaza Kazah?”
“Sheikh Fulaan al-Fullani.”
To which the first man said, “What?!! Die, heretic scum!” and pushed him off.
From: Spengler’s The Devil’s Sourdough and The Decline of Nations
Which was made clear. Let us not forget what that illustrated, that this is what is needed to support your creative interpretation, that "together with us they adore the one, merciful God" is supposed to be read as i edited it to say, that "these profess to adore the one, merciful God together with us."
Take up this carefully nuanced ambiguous statement with the authors of this compromise statement, which type of thing is also shown in deeds.
An Alien, listening in from space; would think that MARY is the object; since HER name is continually droned.
They think they own it.
Didja ever hear about this book they've compiled?
I can say for a fact; no.
But the few times they ARE; really tends to color anything else they might say.
"Sorry, Joe, but this dang headache will NOT go away.
The defensive may cross examine...
Your Honor; I'd like to hear, from this witness, to which 'statements' they are referring.
I want the jury to be absolutely sure of the charges made.
The Muslims will take over from within, similar to what’s happening in England and Sweden.
What’s that old saying about flattery and imitation?
Indeed you did.
When you have an argument let me know.
And we have this from ewtn.com:
In the Koran, the holy name of the Blessed Virgin Mary is mentioned no less than thirty times. No other woman's name is even mentioned, not even that of Mohammed's daughter, Fatima. Among men, only Abraham, Moses, and Noah are mentioned more times than Our Lady. In the Koran, Our Blessed Mother is described as "Virgin, ever Virgin." The Islamic belief in the virginity of Mary puts to shame the heretical beliefs of those who call themselves Christian, while denying the perpetual virginity of Mary. Make no mistake about it, there is a very special relationship between the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Moslems!
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.