Catholic Documents Examined (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Church



Message

Fritzpw_Admin -> Catholic Documents Examined (7/3/2006 1:12:05 PM)

There are some people who claim Vatican II has created some contradictions with historic Catholic teachings.

The purpose of this thread is to examine the possible contradictions surrounding Vatican II and other Catholic documents.



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/3/2006 2:02:37 PM)

The foremost contention that I have with Vatican II is in the NOSTRA AETATE. There is a wrongful attempt to equate our Lord God Almighty with the deity of other religions.

quote:

3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(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.



bridgefin -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/3/2006 7:12:37 PM)

Wes,
The diety of Islam is the God of Abram who is the Lord God Almighty. Those are facts. Where is the problem?

In Christ, George



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 3:54:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bridgefin

Wes,
The diety of Islam is the God of Abram who is the Lord God Almighty. Those are facts. Where is the problem?

In Christ, George


How is their God the same? They claim a totally different god. Examine the Koran and then tell me the description of their god matches ours. An person of Islamic faith cannot even know salvation; they can only hope for it. We find comfort in God and know when we are one of His flock.



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 3:59:48 PM)

George,

By reading this post and comparing it to one on Catholic salvation, I think I see where we are having a problem. By your statements, I think you are telling me that you can only hope to be saved. Is this correct? I would think Christians have peace because they know they will be in heaven with God Almighty in the end. Do you also think only martyrs are guaranteed this status? I ask this because Christian people die everyday for God. What gives them the peace and strength to do this without knowing that they will see Jesus and be with Him afterwards? And if they do know, then they know they have salvation not just hope of salvation, which is what I said.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 4:39:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bridgefin

Wes,
The diety of Islam is the God of Abram who is the Lord God Almighty. Those are facts. Where is the problem?

In Christ, George


Come on George. The Muslims don't worship the God of the Bible. They worship a god who is the figment of Mohammed's imagination.

"4 For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough." (2 Cor 12)



JOHN6_54 -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 5:12:58 PM)

Actually, the only thing wrong with the documents of Vatican II is what we have done with them, not the documents themselves. Hopefully someday the pendulum will reach an equilibrium and stay there for more than one generation. I am currently finishing up a couple of Dr. Scott Hahn's books, but after that I plan to spend some time investigating all 16 documents from Vatican II. I simply wouldn’t feel right criticizing them until I've at least read them myself.



ukfan -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 5:33:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bridgefin

Wes,
The diety of Islam is the God of Abram who is the Lord God Almighty. Those are facts. Where is the problem?

In Christ, George

I think most non-Catholic Christians think that if people of another religion do not worship the fullness of the revealed God (Father, Son and Holy Ghost) that they must have a different God all together.

I feel it is simply semantics. Catholics and Vatican II acknowledge that Muslims do not worship the fullness of God or obey in the manner He asks but to refuse to recognise the roots of their God go back to Abraham is just wrong. Yes, the Muslim idea of God has perverted with time but the core being is the God of Abraham.



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 9:02:54 PM)

quote:

I feel it is simply semantics. Catholics and Vatican II acknowledge that Muslims do not worship the fullness of God or obey in the manner He asks but to refuse to recognise the roots of their God go back to Abraham is just wrong. Yes, the Muslim idea of God has perverted with time but the core being is the God of Abraham.


God is perfect. He is without sin, merciful, faithful, truthful, etc. If any of those attributes of God have been changed, then the god in question is no longer God. If they have perverted over time, how is our God still their God. I think the day Muhammed uttered the first word that he claimed was divine there was perversion of doctrine. The Muslims can say theirs is the god of Abram, but that is wrong. Our God is not in the Koran; read it. I can claim a different god that I define and say he is the god of Abram, but that does not make it so!



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/4/2006 9:04:52 PM)

Oh, and btw, the god of the mormons goes back to Abraham and further.



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 9:21:42 AM)

quote:

I simply wouldn’t feel right criticizing them until I've at least read them myself.


quote:

Actually, the only thing wrong with the documents of Vatican II is what we have done with them, not the documents themselves.


If you cannot criticize them, how can you defend them?



figmentPez -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 12:23:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace

Oh, and btw, the god of the mormons goes back to Abraham and further.


The "god" of the mormons is a fiction, a completely made up entity. How can such a nothing actually go back to Abraham?



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 1:36:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: figmentPez

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace

Oh, and btw, the god of the mormons goes back to Abraham and further.


The "god" of the mormons is a fiction, a completely made up entity. How can such a nothing actually go back to Abraham?


That is kinda my point. The LDS, JW, and Muslims all claim belief in God. The NOSTRA AETATE presented by Vatican II equates the Muslim god with our God, and that is not true. By the same token, the LDS also twisted our God to be a false god. JW did the same thing. My point was that all 3 of these religions started with God of Abram and warped into some fallacy born of satan. While it is true that the god of the mormons is made up, so is the god that these other religions espouse.



GoodME_II -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 1:58:30 PM)

You are likely to find a notable absence of we Catholic posters in this thread, in my opinion. Especially if this gets as silly as I am betting it is going to get.

In order to understand the position of "lack of conflict", one would have to understand the historical and temporal context of the statements examined, have a decent and practical command of Latin and have a grasp on the history and the settings that motivated some of what will be presented here.

It is with great irony that I see the sudden importance of examining extra-Scriptural documentation on a site where so many claim "Sola Scriptura". Is this now an endorsement by this site that "Sola Scriptura" is fundementally flawed and in error? That indeed the complete deposit of Faith is not only Scriptures but the entire deposit of tradition, history and context that is the Magisterium?

I claim victory here, then. My work here is a success, if this is the case.

As far as I am concerned, there is no one qualified to discuss this here - or moderate it.

Just a humble opinion from a long-time participant on this site and its predecessor.



GoodME_II -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 2:03:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
The NOSTRA AETATE presented by Vatican II equates the Muslim god with our God, and that is not true.

This is a strawman, with a "self-magisterium" kicker.

It is the type of thing that this is going to turn into....

Let's start with some homework. What does "Nostra Aetate" mean, and why do we refer to this document by this title?



Ps103 -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 2:04:15 PM)

quote:

As far as I am concerned, there is no one qualified to discuss this here - or moderate it.


Heaven knows I can't....



GoodME_II -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 2:15:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
The foremost contention that I have with Vatican II is in the NOSTRA AETATE. There is a wrongful attempt to equate our Lord God Almighty with the deity of other religions.

If there is but one God, and that one God is acknowledged by a person - is that a start towards the revelation of Christian Faith towards that person? By God?

Or - is the completeness and fullness of the total Christian Faith zapped immediately into our brains, before we are worshipping "the one true God"?

Is it not true that the coming to Faith is a path, and the first steps on that path might be the acknowledgment of one true God? And if a Muslim acknowledges one true singular all-powerful God, that he is acknowledging THE one true singular all-powerful God?

Or, because he is acknowledging this presence with a beard on his face and a covered head, that somehow his acknowledgement is tainted and flawed by that beard and head covering?

Doesn't this limit the sovereignty of God? Are you not saying that God cannot reach the Muslim, because God's arms aren't long enough?



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 3:51:33 PM)

quote:

In order to understand the position of "lack of conflict", one would have to understand the historical and temporal context of the statements examined, have a decent and practical command of Latin and have a grasp on the history and the settings that motivated some of what will be presented here.


quote:

As far as I am concerned, there is no one qualified to discuss this here - or moderate it.


Do you claim the excerpt I used is invalid? It came from a Catholic website. It is in English. You think Latin cannot be translated into English? How about Greek and Hebrew?

It says what it says. Read it. The position it takes is wrong!

quote:

It is with great irony that I see the sudden importance of examining extra-Scriptural documentation on a site where so many claim "Sola Scriptura". Is this now an endorsement by this site that "Sola Scriptura" is fundementally flawed and in error?


I would see our evaluation of these texts as necessary to form apologetics that will keep people from being misled. All people deserve the truth, not this white-washing of other religions in some effort to calm disagreements. If you claim this as a victory, then you are mistaken about why it is read.



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 3:55:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoodME_II

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
The NOSTRA AETATE presented by Vatican II equates the Muslim god with our God, and that is not true.

This is a strawman, with a "self-magisterium" kicker.

It is the type of thing that this is going to turn into....

Let's start with some homework. What does "Nostra Aetate" mean, and why do we refer to this document by this title?


On what basis is it "strawman". Read the biblical description of God, and then read the Koran's description of their god. Are they the same? No!

As far as changing the subject to translating the title, we'll get to that when you clarify your reasoning for me.

PS - I will go so far as to translate the title to prevent another unjustified accusation of ignorance: "In Our Time"



WesP -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/5/2006 4:02:08 PM)

quote:

And if a Muslim acknowledges one true singular all-powerful God, that he is acknowledging THE one true singular all-powerful God?

Or, because he is acknowledging this presence with a beard on his face and a covered head, that somehow his acknowledgement is tainted and flawed by that beard and head covering?

Doesn't this limit the sovereignty of God? Are you not saying that God cannot reach the Muslim, because God's arms aren't long enough?


First question: answer is no. See above posts.

Second question: changing my argument into a physical description does not address anything I stated. See above posts.

Third question: answer is no. There are 2 gods referenced: God and their god.

Fourth question: where did I say that it was impossible for a Muslim to become a Christian? Where did I limit God? You accuse me of strawman argumentation, ignorance, etc., but you completely ignore what I posted.



DaveW -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/6/2006 7:10:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bridgefin

Wes,
The diety of Islam is the God of Abram who is the Lord God Almighty. Those are facts. Where is the problem?
Actually the so called diety of islam is the moon god from pre-mohammed arabic polytheism. Hence the crecent moon symbol in most things islamic.

That is NOT the God of the bible. Period.



GoodME_II -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/6/2006 8:55:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace

quote:

And if a Muslim acknowledges one true singular all-powerful God, that he is acknowledging THE one true singular all-powerful God?/quote]

First question: answer is no.

Let's say that you meet a stranger on the street. He asks if you believe in God. You say - yes.

If you then ask him if he believes in God - and he says yes, do you then follow with twenty questions - just to make sure that he is professing believe in the God, who's scope is limited by your 20 questions?

God is God. And He has no bounds. Let's start there.

If I ask a stranger if they are a person of Faith, I am getting at ANY Faith; that for me is a starting point. The next questions might have to do with understanding their Faith relative to mine. If the answer is "great god of the sky", my next question will have to do with scope - what is the nature of this god that limits his sovereignty to the sky? One can lead a person to God - by questioning "god".

We are talking about tolerance here, not correctness. There's a difference. The Catholic Church is stating a tolerance for other Faiths (hey, we've been tolerating Protestants for 500 years now) - not espousing their validity or correctness.



GoodME_II -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/6/2006 8:57:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
Do you claim the excerpt I used is invalid? It came from a Catholic website. It is in English. You think Latin cannot be translated into English? How about Greek and Hebrew?

You have posted the quote - and then supplied your own meaning.

On what authority do you presume to know more than the people who wrote the material you are citing?



GoodME_II -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/6/2006 9:11:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace

The foremost contention that I have with Vatican II is in the NOSTRA AETATE. There is a wrongful attempt to equate our Lord God Almighty with the deity of other religions.

quote:

3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(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.



Getting back to this. What is it that you have a problem with again? Does Islam adore one God, merciful and all powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth? Or does it not?

What of the above statement is not correct? You said that the statement equates the Islamic God and the Christian God. What makes you think that they are not the same thing?

How is Islam not unlike Judaism - a God-centered Faith that does not acknowledge Jesus? In my mind, this makes Islam different than - Budhism, for example.



figmentPez -> RE: Catholic Documents Examined (7/6/2006 12:54:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoodME_II

Getting back to this. What is it that you have a problem with again? Does Islam adore one God, merciful and all powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth? Or does it not?


It does not. The "god" of Islam is not the creator of heaven and earth. They may believe it to be that, but their idol created nothing.

quote:

How is Islam not unlike Judaism - a God-centered Faith that does not acknowledge Jesus? In my mind, this makes Islam different than - Budhism, for example.


A "God-centered Faith that does not acknowledge Jesus" is a contradiction in terms. Those who deny the Son deny the Father as well. Judaism that denys Jesus Christ is not the Judaism that God started, it is a perversion that is following after idols. No one knows the Father except the Son, and those the Son reveals Him to. If someone does not worship Jesus Christ, they do not worship the Father and they do not worship the one and only God.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI