Intro To Budge

[Budge]

Hi Kenn:)

I was surprised to see William here too!

[Brother Adam]

Wait? You all know each other. Give me backround on what doesn't bare repeating.

[Hananiah]

[quote name='Budge' date='Jun 12 2004, 01:30 PM'] I have read Vatican II documents from Nostra Aetate (disagree whole heartedly about what is said about Islam in that document) and many others. [/quote]
I'm not prepared to accuse Nostra Aetate of formal heterodoxy, but I do believe that the phrase "Muslims adore with us the one true God" was a very stupid and scandalous thing to say. The statement can only be true in the most limited sense possible. Muslims are monotheists, so they do acknowledge that there is one God, and they can also properly identify that God in history, for example in Abraham's test of faith and other events recorded by the Old Testament, so in some limited sense they do adore the "one true God." But on the other hand their conception of Him is so distorted that they can never have any real intimacy with Him. They have no covenant relationship with him, and they cannot be saved if they persist in their errors up to the point of death. Nostra Aetate is badly in need of qualification and clarification.

[quote]It would be foolish to remain in a church where I do not agree with the doctrines nor the direction the leadership is going.[/quote]
I agree with the first part. It would be foolish to remain in a Church where you didn't agree with the doctrines.

[quote]I dont even believe in listening to rock music.[/quote]
Interesting article for you: [url="http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/remnant/rock.htm"]http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/remnant/rock.htm[/url]

[quote]As for the bishops being spineless, dont take this wrong,,,,but I find them to very weak, I have seen an air of pure compromise. Even these arguments about letting Abortion politicans having Eucharist is silly.[/quote]

[color=red][edited by littleflower+JMJ: LackofRespect/Criticism of Religious][/color]

[quote]I found many things that didnt add up with Catholicism, so I came to opposite conclusions that you did.[/quote]
Did you search out Catholic interpretations of verses in question? The same thing has happened to me many times, but as soon as I read a scholarly, Catholic exegesis of the text the problem is usually solved.

[quote]Phrases such as fullness of truth bother me. Something is either truth or lie. It is not inbetween.[/quote]
Individual propositions are either true or false. However, belief systems consist in a multitude of propositions, and can contain any combination of true ones and false ones. When Catholics contrast religions which contain "part of the truth" with our own, we are simply saying that only some of the propositions which make up the other belief system are true, whereas all of the propositions which make up our own are true. So, since Muslims believe there is only one God, but deny the divinity of Christ and transubstantiation, they have a small part of the truth. Since Protestants believe there is only one God and acknowledge the divinity of Christ, but deny transubstatiation, they have a larger portion of the truth. But it still ain't the fullness.

[quote]On another message board, I found a document by American bishops that called literal belief in the Bible to be *intellectual suicide*.[/quote]
That's quite sad. But as you can see from the quotes in my previous post, total biblical innerancy is an integral part of the authentic patrimony of the Catholic Church.

[quote]I love the Word of God and three readings a week not in context just wasnt enogh.[/quote]
No one said you could only go to mass once per week. Besides,the Catholic Church does not forbit its members from buying Bibles and reading them privately.

[quote]I cannot believe they are anointed. They show no sign of charisma.[/quote]
Do you think King Saul showed any signs of charisma?

[Brother Adam]

[quote]I'm not prepared to accuse Nostra Aetate of formal heterodoxy, but I do believe that the phrase "Muslims adore with us the one true God" was a very stupid and scandalous thing to say[/quote]

It wasn't stupid or scandalous. It isn't their responsibility to ensure each one of us goes and asks for clarification. It is our responsibility. Plain fact is, Muslims indeed do, worship and adore the God of Abraham. We also worship and adore the God of Abraham. They may not be in a state of grace, but there isn't anything stupid about the statement.

[quote]I love the Word of God and three readings a week not in context just wasnt enogh.[/quote]

Yet no other Church has an official established reading plan. 3 readings a week isn't enough? I hope not. Those readings are ONLY for Sunday's Mass. Pick up the Divine Office with it's daily readings and prayers and TRY to get bored. You won't be able to do it.

[Hananiah]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Jun 12 2004, 09:13 PM'] It wasn't stupid or scandalous. It isn't their responsibility to ensure each one of us goes and asks for clarification. It is our responsibility. Plain fact is, Muslims indeed do, worship and adore the God of Abraham. We also worship and adore the God of Abraham. They may not be in a state of grace, but there isn't anything stupid about the statement. [/quote]
Yes, because modernists have used the verse as justification for teaching that Muslims have a covenant relationship with God and can be saved [i]as Muslims[/i]. People who write authoritative documents of the Church should have the foresight to see that certain statements might lend themselves to grave misuse, and thus avoid making them.

[Budge]

[quote]I'm not prepared to accuse Nostra Aetate of formal heterodoxy, but I do believe that the phrase "Muslims adore with us the one true God" was a very stupid and scandalous thing to say. [/quote]


I beleive they are flat out wrong.

Ever read the Koran? I would suggest it for both of you. Muslims are even told they can beat their wives in the Koran as long as the stick is smaller then ones thumb. There is a DIRECT denial of Jesus Christ in the Koran too which makes the book ANTICHRIST according to Biblical precepts rather then a product of God. There are more bad things how women are more destined to hell, are dogs etc. How people should kill infidels. (I will bring up these verse in a thread on this subject later on)

I believe Muslims worship a demon. It is a demonic religion of bondage. its fruits are seen worldwide. they do not know God. I can show links proving that Islam worships a pagan God it is related to that cube they march around.

Even Ishmael in the Bible is spoken of a wild man....NOT Godly at all.
[quote]Did you search out Catholic interpretations of verses in question? The same thing has happened to me many times, but as soon as I read a scholarly, Catholic exegesis of the text the problem is usually solved.[/quote]

I read Dave Armstrongs site full of most scholarly knowledge before leaving for two years.

[quote]When Catholics contrast religions which contain "part of the truth" with our own, we are simply saying that only some of the propositions which make up the other belief system are true, whereas all of the propositions which make up our own are true. So, since Muslims believe there is only one God, but deny the divinity of Christ and transubstantiation, they have a small part of the truth. Since Protestants believe there is only one God and acknowledge the divinity of Christ, but deny transubstatiation, they have a larger portion of the truth. But it still ain't the fullness.[/quote]

The problem is in a nutshell si that the Catholic church teaches that all religions are going to towards the SAME GOD. I believe Satan is the author of many religions including Islam.

[quote]That's quite sad. But as you can see from the quotes in my previous post, total biblical innerancy is an integral part of the authentic patrimony of the Catholic Church.[/quote]

If you cant even trusts todays bishops, who figures out what is authentic. Ive seen Trads and Novus Ordos argue about this. No one really knows.

[quote]Do you think King Saul showed any signs of charisma? [/quote]

There is a difference between those who repent of corruption and those who do not.
[quote] Plain fact is, Muslims indeed do, worship and adore the God of Abraham. We also worship and adore the God of Abraham. They may not be in a state of grace, but there isn't anything stupid about the statement. [/quote]

I disagree. see above. I will do an entire thread on Islam later on. Ive writte about this subject extensively online.

[quote]Yet no other Church has an official established reading plan. 3 readings a week isn't enough? I hope not. Those readings are ONLY for Sunday's Mass. Pick up the Divine Office with it's daily readings and prayers and TRY to get bored. You won't be able to do it. [/quote]

Now I have the Bible and read it daily.

I dont need to have sections chosen, I can read it all in context.

Why dont Catholics use concordances?

[Theologian in Training]

Why all the editing of Haniah's posts? I am curious as to what he is saying that is disrespectful and critical of religious....

[Quietfire]

[quote]I dont need to have sections chosen, I can read it all in context.[/quote]

"Sections chosen" as you put it, allow one to read and reflect. I can read a book in a day, but it doesnt automatically mean I will 'get it', but often go back to certain chapters and paragraphs to reflect on what the author was trying to state or get across. No one 'chooses' anything for you. Everything is free will. But since I dont claim to be the most learned person in the world, I would most assuredly accept any offer to help me understand my Lord better.


[quote]Why dont Catholics use concordances?[/quote]


They do.

Edited June 13, 2004 by Quietfire

[Brother Adam]

[quote]Now I have the Bible and read it daily.

I dont need to have sections chosen, I can read it all in context.

Why dont Catholics use concordances?[/quote]

Good. You should have been reading it daily if you were a Catholic.

Of course, you don't need any church right? The Bible is all you need right? That is what Jesus said wasn't it? "I'm going to give you the Bible and that is all you will ever need to discern truth".

Can you read the Bible on your own? Yes. Does reading the Bible ensure that you will be free from error when interpreting it? Hell no. Or we wouldn't be left with thousands of divisions among Christians. 2000 years of wisdom beats what some intellectual (such as MacArthur) thinks any day.

Many Catholics do use concordances. What's your point? I'm looking at my Strong's Exhaustive Concordance (KJV) right now. Using one doesn't gaurantee that you won't stumble into error.

Reading it through a reading plan allows you not only to get the Bible in context, through the Pillar and Foundation of Truth, but allows you to go deeper than the cursory secularized Bible studies places like Zondervan and Harvest House are coming out with today. And certianly will keep Americans away from thinking that looking into news headlines will unlock the keys to the end times.

If Satan knows the scriptures better than I do, and is by far craftier and wiser than I am, I myself alone do not dare to think I can interpret the scriptures on my own. This however doesn't mean that one cannot tell truth from a lie. With the wisdom the Lord will grant us, when we earnestly seek His will, we can seek truth through the scriptures, checking them daily to see if what those teaching us say is true. We must however properly understand what the Bereans were doing. They did not search the scriptures to formulate their own doctrines based on what the scriptures said. They heard truth orally handed down and spoken and checked to be sure the message they heard was contained in the scriptures. They themselves did not do the dividing.

[Quietfire]

so much better put than me. Thanks bro.

[Hananiah]

[quote name='Theologian in Training' date='Jun 13 2004, 01:33 PM'] Why all the editing of Haniah's posts? I am curious as to what he is saying that is disrespectful and critical of religious.... [/quote]
Perhaps my wording was too strong in the first two instances. In the third, I didn't say anything that Mark Shea doesn't say ten times per day on his "Catholc and Enjoying it" blog. I suppose he's too much of a traddie by Phatmass standards.

[cmotherofpirl]

Actually we quote Mark Shea a lot here.

[Apotheoun]

The Magisterium of the Church can only define matters of faith and morals when the topic in question pertains to the [i]depositum fidei[/i], or to those truths which are necessarily connected to revelation, or to the [i]natural moral law[/i]. This being said, the statements of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council about the Islamic religion, which can be found in the Dogmatic Constitution [u]Lumen Gentium[/u] [cf., no. 16] and the Declaration [u]Nostra Aetate[/u] [cf., no. 3], are of the prudential order, and so they are not the proper subject matter of a definitive teaching. Nothing in sacred scripture or in the sacred tradition of the Church, nor even in the natural moral law, speaks directly about Islam; a religion, I would add, that was founded more than 600 years after the advent of our Lord. Clearly, when the Fathers of the Council were speaking about Islam, they were simply focusing on the [i]good[/i] of monotheism present within that religion. Monotheism is one of the [i]semina Verbi[/i] (i.e., the seeds of the Word) that can be found through the study of natural theology. Now, although the statements of the Council about Islam cannot be in anyway definitive, they should nevertheless be respected by the faithful as an expression of the mind of the Council Fathers at that time; but it should be noted that this does not preclude the possibility of a Catholic pointing out the many theological and moral errors present within Islam. As an example, one can look at the Pope's own views on Islam, which can be found by reading his book, [u]Crossing the Threshold of Hope[/u]. In reference to Islam the Holy Father said:

"Whoever knows the Old and New Testaments, and then reads the Koran, clearly sees the process by which it completely reduces Divine Revelation. It is impossible not to note the movement away from what God said about Himself, first in the Old Testament through the Prophets, and then finally in the New Testament through His Son. In Islam all the richness of God's self-revelation, which constitutes the heritage of the Old and New Testaments, has definitely been set aside. Some of the most beautiful names in human language are given to the God of the Koran, but He is ultimately a God outside of the world, a God who is only Majesty, never Emmanuel, God-with-us. Islam is not a religion of redemption. There is no room for the Cross and the Resurrection. Jesus is mentioned, but only as a prophet who prepares for the last prophet, Muhammad. There is also mention of Mary, His Virgin Mother, but the tragedy of redemption is completely absent. For this reason not only the theology but also the anthropology of Islam is very distant from Christianity." [Pope John Paul II, [u]Crossing the Threshold of Hope[/u], (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1994), pages 92-93]

From this, it is quite clear that the Pope sees the many deficiencies present in Islam, but this does not mean that we must forget about the [i]semina Verbi[/i] present in that religion; instead, we must always bear them in mind, because the [i]seeds of the Word[/i] are a [i]preparatio evangelica[/i] (i.e., a preparation for the Gospel) intended by God; and so we should use those [i]seeds[/i] in order to bring the fullness of truth to those struggling in error and darkness. It is on the basis of the monotheism of Islam, that a Christian can witness to a Muslim and help to bring him, by God's grace, to faith in Christ.

[Budge]

I do not buy the concept of the Seeds of the Word being in false religions. This means Catholicism at the core would teach the same as Universalists do that all religions are trying to get to God--all religions lead to the same thing. I do not agree. I believe most of the false religions of the world repeat the lie of the garden. "Ye shall be as Gods" Islam has its own lies and presents god in an evil fashion. They follow the demon that Mohammed was messing with.

This is a religion of nothing but evil fruits. The people are in bondage. How is the Catholic church telling them the truth by telling them they already *know* God?(even if there are defiencies admitted?)

This is the EVIL religion that Pope promotes at every turn instead of saving the poor people in bondage to it or trying to lead them to Christ.

And still those in liberal deceived churches preach that the Islamic Allah equals God. There are Protestants that teach these lies also. The Islamic people should be treated well but THEY ARE IN BONDAGE.

[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_council...-aetate_en.html[/url]

[quote]3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. [b]They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth[/b],(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. [/quote]



Remember too marrying more then one wife is commonplace. Women are treated like chattel in Islam. All we have to do is remember all those pictures of women forced to wear burqas. They treat their women like garbage. >: >: I knew about this wife beating stuff...I had posted verses in Koran on post that aged on on this board. There was one verse in the Koran where it said women had far less chance of going to heaven.

[url="http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/womenstatus.htm"]http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/womenstatus.htm[/url]


[quote]Talq b. `Ali reported God's messenger as saying, "When a man calls his wife to satisfy his desire [b]she must go to him even if she is occupied at the oven." [/b](Mishkat Al-Masabih, p. 691: Tirmidhi)

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet (p.) said, "if a man invites his wive to sleep with him an she refuses to come to him, [b]then angels send their curses on her till morning."[/b] (Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 7, hadith 121, p. 93)

Call in two male witnesses from among you, but if two men cannot be found, then[b] one man and two women[/b] whom you judge fit to act as witnesses. (Qur'an 2:282, Dawood)

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet (p.) said, "Isn't the witness of a women equal to half that of a man?" The women said "yes". He said [b]"This is because of the deficiency of the women's mind." [/b](Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 3, hadith 826, p. 502

MORE WOMEN IN HELL:

Ibn Abbas reported that Allah's Messenger said: I had a chance to look into paradise and I found that majority of the people was poor and [b]I looked into the Fire and there I found the majority constituted by women.[/b] (Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, hadith 6597, p. 1432).

Imran b. Husain reported that Allah's Messenger said: [b]Amongst the inmates of Paradise the women would form a minority.[/b] (Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, hadith 6600, p. 1432)

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! [b]Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)."[/b] They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." (Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 1, book 6, no. 301)[/quote]

I havent even gotten to the parts where they deny Christ DIRECTLY yet. Ill put that its own thread.

[Apotheoun]

Clearly you misunderstood the nature of my post on Islam. Nowhere in that post did I assert that the Islamic religion as a whole was true and good, but what I did point out was that, like everything else on earth, it is not totally evil. In other words, based on the truthful proposition that there is only one God, a Christian can use this one truth held by Muslims, in order to bring a Muslim, with the help of God's grace, to faith in Christ. To say that everything that Islam believes is by definition evil, is to fall into the logical error of saying that monotheism itself is evil, since Muslims are monotheists. Hopefully you will reread my post more carefully, because if you had read it carefully to begin with you would have seen that I do not endorse Islam as a true religion, in fact quite the opposite, for as I said in the post, "we should use those [i]seeds[/i] [i.e., that Muslims are monotheists] in order to bring the [b][i]fullness of truth[/i][/b] to those [b][i]struggling in error and darkness[/i][/b]." But it is by building on the monotheism of Islam, that a Christian can witness to a Muslim and help to bring him, by God's grace, to faith in Christ; and in doing this the modern day Christian is acting in much the same way that St. Paul did in the Acts of the Apostles, where he used the altar dedicated to the unknown god at the pagan Areopagus in Athens in order to preach the Gospel of Christ to the Greeks. [cf., Acts 17:16-34]

Now, here is a post that I wrote in a different forum on the nature of conversion, and how conversion is always and primarily positive in nature, i.e., that it is essentially centered on the acceptance of the truth, and only indirectly focused on the rejection of error. Perhaps this will clarify things for you.

[quote]
My conversion from Methodism to Catholicism was not so much a rejection of error as it was an acceptance of the fulness of truth, and this is the very substance of a real conversion. The process of conversion must always be positive in nature, and so it is never directly the rejection of error; rather, it is the acceptance of truth. As Venerable John Cardinal Newman pointed out in his book, [u]An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine[/u]:

"[The] gradual conversion from a false to a true religion, plainly, has much of the character of a continuous process, or a development, in the mind itself, even when the two religions, which are the limits of its course, are antagonists. Now let it be observed, that such a change consists in addition and increase chiefly, not in destruction. True religion is the summit and perfection of false religions; it combines in one whatever there is of good and true separately remaining in each. And in like manner the Catholic creed is for the most part the combination of separate truths, which heretics have divided among themselves, and err in dividing." [John Cardinal Newman, [u]An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine[/u], (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1989), page 200]

Clearly then, when one focuses on what is true and good in Protestantism, he is not endorsing [i]in toto[/i] the theological presuppositions underlying that religion; instead, he is concentrating on those particular goods, which if taken to their logical conclusion will lead Protestants into the bosom of the Church. Some Catholics center so much on anti-Protestant polemics that they run the risk of reducing conversion itself to a negative experience, i.e., into a rejection of error rather than an acceptance of truth, and in doing this they fail to grasp the true nature of religious conversion. Cardinal Newman eloquently explained the error of reducing conversion to a negative experience, when he wrote:

". . . if a religious mind were educated in and sincerely attached to some form of heathenism or heresy, and then were brought under the light of truth, it would be drawn off from error into the truth, not by losing what it had, but by gaining what it had not. . . . That same principle of faith which attaches it at first to the wrong doctrine would attach it to the truth; and that portion of its original doctrine, which was to be cast off as absolutely false, [i]would not be directly rejected, but indirectly, in the reception of the truth which is its opposite[/i]. True conversion is ever of a positive, not a negative character." [John Cardinal Newman, [u]An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine[/u], (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1989), page 200-201]

Admitting that certain doctrinal propositions within Protestantism are true is not an endorsement of that religious system as a valid alternative to Catholicism. Instead, it is simply the recognition of what the Second Vatican Council called the [i]elementa ecclesiae[/i] present in the communities that separated from the Catholic Church in the 16th century. [cf., [u]Lumen Gentium[/u] 8; [u]Unitatis Redintegratio[/u] 3-4] Thus, the proper way to bring Protestants into the fullness of truth, which is found only in the Catholic Church governed by the Successor of St. Peter, is to build on those truths that they already possess.[/quote]