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 ...
INDEED.
Would love that. LOL.
Maybe in a corner of Heaven somewhere.
I understand your points and could go some of the distance with you on them.
I think I’ll stop there.
Absolutely INDEED.
God had lots of ways to protect and further His Word and purposes having nothing whatsoever to do with the Vatican Ishtar-Mary Goddess cult.
Why do Catholics seem to by default consider that anything a non-Catholic says is a lie?
... Catholics could not have certitude on the whole canon until 1400 years after the last book was written, ...
My quibble is with the "could not". My take is that the Church, as we see in Acts 15 and a lot of the Pauline corpus, responds to crisis. The persistent image seems to be that there is a perpetual group at the Vatican which continuously asks itself, "What shall we tell them they have to believe today?"
But the reason Trent "defined" the OT canon is that there was a controversy, what with the so-called "apocryphal" works being challenged and all. Before then, there wasn't enough dispute to call for a settlement. So it's not so much a matter of "could not" as "didn't think it needed to".
Thanks for the reply. The certitude aspect is based upon the certitude which requires assent of faith, which you need an infallible definition to do, and for which you have the right to know that it is an infallible definition (which can be an issue).
Acts 15 affirms the ecclesiastical magisterium to decide matters if needed, which we uphold, and as you appeal to your local and corporate one, so do we, but not as being assuredly infallible, or universal. The latter could be allowed if Scripturally established, which in the apostolic manner was by manifest spiritual power, including the spiritual “rod” not the rack, and evident Scriptural warrant such as we see for such judgments as were attested to by God's power. Yet, a common affirmation to core truths and a common front against them can be had without a centralized office (though that has its advantages) if the gospel that convicts and manifestly converts is held to.
As for there being not enough dispute to call for a settlement, while there was dispute which could have gone on unsettled, the reason a finalized canon was necessary for Rome was because it was related to the challenge of a part of Rome's doctrine, which was primarily based upon Tradition anyway.
Seriously, how do you cultivate such patience and forbearance without chemicals?
“Why don’t you find out and AGREE what the HOLY SPIRIT inspired Word says about the mother of Jesus. Don’t leave it to the ‘scholars’.”
That’s an excellent idea. To help in the study, here’s a keyword search link to everywhere in the NT that the name *Mary* appears. Not all are Mary, the mother of Christ, just to note.
http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=Mary&version1=47&searchtype=all&bookset=2&limit=bookset
Too thin-skinned means you cannot take the conversations without resorting to complaining when it gets too heated for your comfort. Trust me, complaining to an RM is the last thing I would do. I would rather point out the irony and hypocricy of those deserving the ridicule heaped upon them. But that’s me.
Heck, I was afraid you were here to demonstrate Christian witness, and then I’d have to REALLY apologize. Since you’re just here for accusation and blame, and ridicule heaping, feh!
Heck, I was afraid you were here to demonstrate Christian witness, and then I'd have to REALLY apologize. Since you're just here for accusation and blame, and ridicule heaping, feh! (Sorry, html correction, need coffee IV)
Probably because you people tell so many lies about us (we worship idols, put Mary above Jesus in importance, Constantine was the first Pontiff, etc, etc, etc...) - such statements after repeatedy being corrected can not be dismissed as ignorance but as willful lies. You also seem to have more than a few people in your peer group who seem to me to be flat out crazy.
And note - I don't need to ping a thousand people when I respond to others here. That, IMO, is a sign of a need for attention or an ego problem.
well, he was a product of his times and also do note that he didn't hate the Jews racially, but only had strong words to say about them when he couldn't convert them.
You can do better than that, like the one of Semple of Four Square infamy. That group like Amiee stand for nothing in the bible save for sin . Wasn’t she the classic biblical “Harlot of Babylon” as she was conversant with violating the the moral absolutes of God.
Jesse:
Jesse: “I’m going to say something that will knock your lights off. Go has the power to take life, but He can’t. He’s got the power to do it, but He won’t. He’s bound; He can’t. He says, “Death and life is in the power of” who’s tongue? Yours. You ready for this? You want something that’ll knock your lights off? You choose when you live; you choose when you die. Death and life is in the power of your tongue, not God’s.
If this is your group's version of 1000% congruent with scripture, then no wonder Protestants don't want to be included in your "Proddy" group.
Jesse:
Jesse: “I’m going to say something that will knock your lights off. Go has the power to take life, but He can’t. He’s got the power to do it, but He won’t. He’s bound; He can’t. He says, “Death and life is in the power of” who’s tongue? Yours. You ready for this? You want something that’ll knock your lights off? You choose when you live; you choose when you die. Death and life is in the power of your tongue, not God’s.
If this is your group's version of 1000% congruent with scripture, then no wonder Protestants don't want to be included in your "Proddy" group.
BWAHAHA!!!
I never realized that that our decor was so trendy.
What you said.
Thank You for answering my questions! I enjoy reading your perspective. Not much there for me to argue with BTW.
And if you called us Bible Believing Christians, you'd be even more correct...
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.