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 ...
Good and interesting reply. You share with us Catholics a notion of the hierarchy of truths, is that fair to say?
It’s important for a couple of reasons that I can think of. It’s given in scripture in both the Old and New Testament so must be of importance. Then there is it’s relationship to prophecy given Jesus statement that “this generation shall not pass”. Another would be the overall attempt to better understand scripture and what God is trying to teach us and tell us as it affects our lives. It would not have been included in scripture if it didn’t serve some purpose.
(Strangely, I've heard some peopel say that's a good thing.)
So I say the Muslims worship the same God asw we, but about all they get right about Him is that there is one and only one God and he has something to do with Abraham. That's why Dante considered Mohammed a heretic, as opposed to a follower/inventor of some entirely new religion.
But my G-d YHvH does not have a mother. YHvH is the creator of the time-space I'm not sure who your god is ,
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
continuum. The entire universe.
Clear? No. Your explanation is still in error, but I knew it would fall on deaf ears.
Had to try anyway, though. Prayers for you to come out of the Roman Catholic Church cult.
Hoss
Most all who call themselves Christian share some common beliefs. It’s where it becomes “extra Biblical” or against scripture that we part ways. For instance, you guys add to that basic requirement for salvation. I don’t.
Funny. Saw all kinds of mess about Mary...none about me.
which, I gotta tell you, is a relief, since Christ is the only intercessor foe man.
Hoss
God is one God in Three Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
God spoke and all was created from nothing. Jesus is the Word God spoke and through Him all things were created.
Mary is the Mother of Jesus who is God. Do you dispute that Jesus is God?
Who would have been followers of Paul during the first millennium?
"Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ." 1 Cor. 11:1.
Why?
"It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and REVELATIONS of the Lord." 2 Cor. 12:1 (Revelations-plural).
"And lest I should be exalted above measure through THE ABUNDANCE OF REVELATIONS, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh the messenger of Satan to buffet me, Lest I should be exalted above measure." 2 Cor. 12:7. (Revelations-plural).
Why all the revelations from the rise Christ to Paul?
"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.
For WHAT cause did Paul obtain mercy? "According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed TO MY TRUST." 1 Tim. 1:11.
So there were believers who followed Paul as he followed Christ's revelations, Paul being the pattern to those who would hereafter believe on Christ.
Are these the "Paulianity heretics" who were condemned during the first millennium? For following God's word concerning His commission of Paul?
Seems there were two groups of people. Those who followed Christ by following Paul's revelations from Christ. And those who set about to "corrupt the word of God". 2 Cor. 2:17. How exactly would they corrupt the word of God? Call followers of Paul heretics? Change God's word into a lie by denying the revelations by Christ Jesus to Paul to us? Attempt to build a religious system that denied God's work through the Apostle Paul in favor of a system that depended on adding to the Kingdom of God commissioned to Peter and the 11 by denying the commission given to Paul for the formation of the Church the Body of Christ? And which would have been closer in time to the actual truth? Those who followed Christ by following the commission He gave Paul for a pattern to those of us who would hereafter believe? Or those who had to deny Christ's revelations to Paul, try to squeeze one commission into another in order to form a religious system of works and doctrines and traditions of men?
Put you Pauline snippet hunting gear on. He was followed as he followed Christ. By DIRECT REVELATIONS FROM CHRIST.
"Heretic" should be used with caution. There was a group of heretics operating. They still are to this day. They deny God's word and exchange it for a lie.
You may believe the doctrine is in error, but you cannot dispute that what I said is the truth. The Immaculate Conception and Mary as Co-Redeemer are two different concepts.
We were discussing Mary’s preservation from sin, not her cooperation with God in salvation, but you posted quotes regarding the latter not the former.
Reread the posts if you care to see your error.
INDEED.
Much agree. Well put.
INDEED.
. . . likely to end up including virtually all organized, structured denominational Christianity.
Sometimes I wonder . . .
if we can even share the same notions of
up/down
left/right
front/back
in/out
with some of the RC’s.
I can’t recall such perverse obtuseness in any other group—certainly over such a long time—as with the RC rabid clique sorts here on FR.
Would you care to attribute this to its original source? Even with the Judaistic line breaks inserted, it clearly isn't of your authorship.
“Actually, no. Your claim was that the Roman Catholic Church teaches nothing other than Mary was a sinner in need of a Savior. My post disproved your claim; the RCC teaches Mary to be a co-redemptrix, a source of grace and other unbiblical falsehoods. “
Where in those quotes does it say that Mary is a source of grace? Mary is a conduit of grace, just as Scriptures are and the Apostles were and the Church is. The grace is from God through Jesus imparted to us in baptism.
The church teaches that grace comes from God and no one and nothing else.
It’s sure beginning to look that way. I have long ago severed ties with any organized religion. For those who wish to part of the “bride of Christ” it has become increasingly difficult to find any organized “religion” that adheres strictly to scripture.
She was in need of a Savior for what reason? Mary, "the All-Holy," lived a perfectly sinless life. According to your Catechism 411,493.
If her life was SINLESS, she had no need of a Savior. He would have saved her from what, exactly? Sin? She had NONE, according to your Catechism. A PERFECTLY SINLESS LIFE means exactly what it says.
Negative, unless you consider Luke to be Jewish. At any rate, they ceased to become Jews in Acts and became Christians.
That is before Nicea.
About 300 years before. Very perceptive of you to notice.
Negative, unless you consider Luke to be Jewish. At any rate, they ceased to become Jews in Acts and became Christians.
That is before Nicea.
About 300 years before. Very perceptive of you to notice.
Very well said.
I think most don't understand what the Council at Jerusalem was all about. There were one group of devout Jewish believers who insisted that all believers be circumcised (follow the law and traditions of Judaism). They called themselves the followers of The Way and continued in Temple worship. The other group that Paul had been given the revelation for, (the Gentiles), believed that Faith Alone in Christ Alone was all that was needed. Peter to his everlasting credit recognized the truth from his own experiences when the Holy Spirit came upon Gentiles he preached to. The second group were called Christians.
I know which group I am a member in and why. I pray that those who follow "The Way" open their eyes and see the Truth.
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.