Protestant? right

[Godfollower]

Even from the Catholic position, Christ would own the keys. He did not give the keys of Heaven for St. Peter to own, but rather for St. Peter to use (and so on for his successors). And the successors of St. Peter would still use these only under the direction of Christ through the Holy Spirit.

After all, the Pope would be an instrument for the teaching of Truth, not the object from which Truth originates.

A speculation from a non-Catholic as to the orthodox Catholic response.

That’s absolutely correct!

 

[Godfollower]

But if it were the real Body and Blood of Christ, Paul and the other apostles could not eat it for they were Jewish. Jesus spoke in Parables through out the NT for he knew that the true believers in him would understand. He even says it himself when asked why he speaks this way. In John 6, Jesus was trying to get the religious leaders to see beyond the physical aspects of His teaching to the real issue, that if you believe in him, you would have everlasting life. Because the did not believe, many of the disciples did not follow Jesus any longer. Many did not believe because it was not granted to them by the Father (Romans 11)

But Paul didn’t treat the Eucharist as a merely symbolic event:

Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

1 Cor. 11:27-29 (KJV).

The phrase Paul used, to be guilty of the body and blood of Jesus, meant to be guilty of His murder. That wouldn’t make sense if it were merely a symbolic gesture. It only makes sense if the understanding taught by the Church from the very beginning* is true: the Eucharist becomes Christ’s body and blood.

This was the only time I know of in the New Testament when people who were already following Jesus abandoned Him because of His teachings (various Pharisees, Sadducees, etc. refused to follow Him in the first place, but here for the only time we see Jesus’ disciples leaving Him).

As for the idea that Jesus couldn’t tell His disciples to do something that was forbidden by the Old Testament, see generally the Gospels. Jesus frequently changed our understanding of what was allowed and what was required. You keep saying that the Old Testament prohibited eating blood; but it also prohibited eating a lot of different types of animals, and that was changed by the New Testament. Remember Paul’s warning: if you’re going to subject yourself to part of the Old Testament law, you have to obey all of it. That’s not the point of being a Christian.

---

• I know you only want to hear things from the Bible, so I’ll spare you the Patristic citations; just rest assured that every Christian writer in the early days of the Church understood Christ to have been speaking literally, not figuratively. So, for your theory to be correct, the Church had to go wrong on this while the Apostles were still alive.

 

[lak611]

But if it were the real Body and Blood of Christ, Paul and the other apostles could not eat it for they were Jewish. Jesus spoke in Parables through out the NT for he knew that the true believers in him would understand. He even says it himself when asked why he speaks this way. In John 6, Jesus was trying to get the religious leaders to see beyond the physical aspects of His teaching to the real issue, that if you believe in him, you would have everlasting life. Because the did not believe, many of the disciples did not follow Jesus any longer. Many did not believe because it was not granted to them by the Father (Romans 11)

There were a lot of other things that could not be eaten by Jewish people besides blood. In fact modern Jews still follow the dietary laws in Leviticus 11. Do you follow these dietary laws? I’m sure you do not because you are not an Orthodox Jew. The whole point is that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant by establishing the New Covenant. The Church no longer sacrifices animals to symbolize forgiveness of sin because we have the Sacrifice of the Mass, which Jesus gave us at the Last Supper. The people who did not believe that are mentioned in the Bible, the disciples who left because they were scandalized by eating Jesus’ Flesh and drinking His Blood went back to the Jewish religion. They did not have enough faith to become Christians.

 

[Zooey]

Here we go again. Could you please answer the question I pose. Or maybe the inability to answer the question is that you don’t have an answer. Well how can that be possible? I do not that the Jews couldn’t eat things with its life blood in it for God forbid it in several locations in the OT. I know that the apostles were Jewish also. And Jesus in the NT said to drink this for this is my blood, the blood of a new and everlasting covenant.
I know you being a good Catholic know that the NT did not do away with the OT.

Shawn, read the context here!! It says that many went away from Jesus after He told them this!! If He was being figurative, He could have called them back & said, “Look, I was just using a figure of speech!!” Why didn’t He? Because He meant it literally.
And yes, the apostles were Jewish to start with! They were moving beyond that, into becoming Christian. That is why Scripture says that this was a “hard saying”!! It was hard for these Jewish people to leave that behind, to follow Christ!!

Protestants believe it is only symbolic.

Nay, laddy! Some believe this, but over here in the Methodist Amen Corner, we believe in the real presence. My Catholic brethren here, will say we don’t have it, but we all still love each other…

 

[shawn34_a]

Shawn, read the context here!! It says that many went away from Jesus after He told them this!! If He was being figurative, He could have called them back & said, “Look, I was just using a figure of speech!!” Why didn’t He? Because He meant it literally.
And yes, the apostles were Jewish to start with! They were moving beyond that, into becoming Christian. That is why Scripture says that this was a “hard saying”!! It was hard for these Jewish people to leave that behind, to follow Christ!!

Nay, laddy! Some believe this, but over here in the Methodist Amen Corner, we believe in the real presence. My Catholic brethren here, will say we don’t have it, but we all still love each other…

Now this was Jesus’s answer to why he speaks in parables. But it’s exactly the same answer.

Matthew 13:10-17
V10 And the disciples came, and said unto Him, Why speakest Thou unto them in parables?
A great multitude had gathered to listen to Jesus Christ teach. But He was speaking in parables and the disciples wanted to know why.

V11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
The ones that receive this knowledge are called God’s elect or the saints. In Romans 11:4-10 it tells us that the election have received eyes to see and ears to hear and the rest have been blinded.

V12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
This is talking about understanding the deeper truths of the Bible. God opens the eyes and ears of the elect and they have more understanding of the Bible.

I believe it’s the real presence too. However it’s the spiritual manifestation of the physical body and blood of Christ. It’s his spiritual body and spiritual blood. It’s not symbolic.

Because the apostles were Jewish, they were forbidden by God to drink anything with its life blood in it. I know they were being Christians, but that doesn’t mean that they were not Jewish too.

A key point to notice in John 6, many did not understand and left. These were the non-believers (Romans 11). The fact is we do not know which disciples had difficulty understanding. THis information is not given. We do know that some disciples were able to understand apparently. Apparently the 12 disciples did understand Jesus for they eat the Lord’s Supper in Matthew, Mark, and Luke also. This does not mean that they didn’t have difficulties understanding too. Notice in Matthew 13, it was one of the disciples that asked Jesus why he speaks in parables.

 

[shawn34_a]

There were a lot of other things that could not be eaten by Jewish people besides blood. In fact modern Jews still follow the dietary laws in Leviticus 11. Do you follow these dietary laws? I’m sure you do not because you are not an Orthodox Jew. The whole point is that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant by establishing the New Covenant. The Church no longer sacrifices animals to symbolize forgiveness of sin because we have the Sacrifice of the Mass, which Jesus gave us at the Last Supper. The people who did not believe that are mentioned in the Bible, the disciples who left because they were scandalized by eating Jesus’ Flesh and drinking His Blood went back to the Jewish religion. They did not have enough faith to become Christians.

Animal sacrifices stopped with the destruction of the temple in 70 ad by the Romans. They are prepared to start them back up once the temple is rebuilt. Notice that in Daniel (7 or 9), the antichrist will cause the animal sacrifices to stop for when he stands in the holiest of holies, claiming to be God, he will cause the animal sacrifices to stop.

If you need me to go on, let me know. I believe it’s in Revelations also.

 

[MrS]

I was baptized into the Baptist church at 16 in 1988 (I think). But I never practiced any faith until I converted in 2001. However in bootcamp I went every Sunday. I had to get away from the DI’s anyway possible. But over the past year I’ve just been consumed by scripture whether reading the Bible, listening to the Bible on CD when driving, or litening to EWTN, Catholic channel, or Christian Talk.

That is kind of what I think about a good RCIA program… a bootcamp to get you ready for active duty:thumbsup:

 

[MrS]

I hope my rollling heads weren’t offensive either. The image just hit my laugh switch: Jesus standing at the gate of heaven because he gave away the key and locked himself out. I was laughing at Godfollowers word-picture.

I have seen that picture… Jesus outside the door, knocking for us to let Him in…

Now it all makes sense what there is no lock/handle on the door

 

[mercygate]

Now this was Jesus’s answer to why he speaks in parables. But it’s exactly the same answer.

Matthew 13:10-17
V10 And the disciples came, and said unto Him, Why speakest Thou unto them in parables?
A great multitude had gathered to listen to Jesus Christ teach. But He was speaking in parables and the disciples wanted to know why.

V11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
The ones that receive this knowledge are called God’s elect or the saints. In Romans 11:4-10 it tells us that the election have received eyes to see and ears to hear and the rest have been blinded.

V12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
This is talking about understanding the deeper truths of the Bible. God opens the eyes and ears of the elect and they have more understanding of the Bible.

I believe it’s the real presence too. However it’s the spiritual manifestation of the physical body and blood of Christ. It’s his spiritual body and spiritual blood. It’s not symbolic.

Because the apostles were Jewish, they were forbidden by God to drink anything with its life blood in it. I know they were being Christians, but that doesn’t mean that they were not Jewish too.

A key point to notice in John 6, many did not understand and left. These were the non-believers (Romans 11). The fact is we do not know which disciples had difficulty understanding. THis information is not given. We do know that some disciples were able to understand apparently. Apparently the 12 disciples did understand Jesus for they eat the Lord’s Supper in Matthew, Mark, and Luke also. This does not mean that they didn’t have difficulties understanding too. Notice in Matthew 13, it was one of the disciples that asked Jesus why he speaks in parables.

Shawn, I think you are confusing two different things here.

Your description of the spiritual presence of Christ in the Eucharist in no way contradicts Catholic doctrine even though it does not connect all the dots exactly. Your analysis works because Jesus is God; God is Spirit; and God is real. Nevertheless, all this wrangling about eating flesh and drinking blood is another matter altogether. Catholic understanding of the Real Presence involves the neat Scholastic distinction between substance (what is really there) and accident (what is there to our senses). This allows for “Real” presence which is at the same time “Spiritual” and “not symbolic” yet explains why what we eat and drink is not bone, sinew, plasma and platelets.

Also your point about Jesus’ speaking in parables needs to come out of this particular discussion, especially relating to John 6, because in this one place Jesus did not take the 12 aside and tell them: OK, this is what I really mean, and it’s for you to know, not for the crowd . . . In John 6, instead of the usual post-mortem explanation, Jesus says, “Do you also wish to go away?”

You propose that at least *some *of the disciples understood what Jesus meant by eating his flesh and drinking his blood. That could well be, but I think it more likely, given Peter’s response: “to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” that they stuck with him because they trusted him; they trusted what they had seen and heard. They had a personal relationship with him that enabled them to carry on despite their uncertainty.

 

[Church_Militant]

Let’s not base any understanding of the Eucharist on anything but the Bible. According to your belief a Christian-Jew would have to sin against one of the two presense of God, God of the OT, or Jesus in the NT. Jews were prohibited, by God, from drinking anything that contained it’s life blood. Even when they did sacrifices in the OT, they cut the throat of the animal, drained it off its life blood on the alter, and then cooked it up. This would be a contradiction of God’s own commandments. The NT did not void the OT.

Really? Let’s see exactly what the New Testament says about eating.

"10: And he called the people to him and said to them, “Hear and understand:
11: not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” and further, "16: And he said, “Are you also still without understanding?
17: Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and so passes on?
18: But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a man.
19: For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander.
20: These are what defile a man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.” (Matthew 15)

and yet again, 10: And he became hungry and desired something to eat; but while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance
11: and saw the heaven opened, and something descending, like a great sheet, let down by four corners upon the earth.
12: In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air.
13: And there came a voice to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.”
14: But Peter said, “No, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.”
15: And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has cleansed, you must not call common.”
16: This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven. (Acts 10)

and, 27: And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you;
28: for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Matthew 26)

and, 23: And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it.
24: And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. (Mark 14)

and, 23: For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
24: and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
25: In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
26: For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
27: Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
28: Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29: For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
30: That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. (1st Corinthains 11)

Now, you can continue to argue, but my question to you is, who will you obey? The teachings of modern men who have already been shown to deny that which the New Testament and the early church held so sacred (that they would not associate with anyone who denied it), or will you obey Our Lord Himself when he looks you in the eye and hands you the cup and says to you, “Drink of it, all of you; 28: for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Pax domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[shawn34_a]

Really? Let’s see exactly what the New Testament says about eating.

"10: And he called the people to him and said to them, “Hear and understand:
11: not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” and further, "16: And he said, “Are you also still without understanding?
17: Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and so passes on?
18: But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a man.
19: For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander.
20: These are what defile a man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.” (Matthew 15)

and yet again, 10: And he became hungry and desired something to eat; but while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance
11: and saw the heaven opened, and something descending, like a great sheet, let down by four corners upon the earth.
12: In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air.
13: And there came a voice to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.”
14: But Peter said, “No, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.”
15: And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has cleansed, you must not call common.”
16: This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven. (Acts 10)

.

What is the point here? So you think he’s suppose to eat everything raw. (In this dream, a little sushi bar dropped from heaven).

PLEASE READ THE REST OF THE CHAPTER AND YOU’LL UNDERSTAND THE PASSAGE.

Acts 10:28 Then he said to them, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. 29Therefore I came without objection as soon as I was sent for. I ask, then, for what reason have you sent for me?”

“The vision was a sign from heaven that Jews were no longer to call Gentiles unclean. God was breaking down Peter’s prejudices.” Nelsons Compact Commentary The vision was a prelude to verse 28 to teach Peter that there is no distiction between Jew and Greek now.

 

[JoeyWarren]

What is the point here? So you think he’s suppose to eat everything raw. (In this dream, a little sushi bar dropped from heaven).

PLEASE READ THE REST OF THE CHAPTER AND YOU’LL UNDERSTAND THE PASSAGE.

Acts 10:28 Then he said to them, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. 29Therefore I came without objection as soon as I was sent for. I ask, then, for what reason have you sent for me?”

“The vision was a sign from heaven that Jews were no longer to call Gentiles unclean. God was breaking down Peter’s prejudices.” Nelsons Compact Commentary The vision was a prelude to verse 28 to teach Peter that there is no distiction between Jew and Greek now.

You are starting to sound like an SDA now.

Go here and browse this thread.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=126973

We covered this issue there.

But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean( **because what they eat **(Pork and other things that once was an abomination) does not make them unclean anymore.

 

[shawn34_a]

You are starting to sound like an SDA now.

But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean( **because what they eat **(Pork and other things that once was an abomination) does not make them unclean anymore.

You’ll have to let me know what post your talking about. I’m not going to read everything.

What is SDA (Seven Day Adventist)?

The first post I laughed at for the Sabbath day is actually Saturday. Jesus died on Holy Thursday, but the Jewish day does begin at sunset.

Day 1 Holy Thursday - Thursday night to Friday night.
Day 2 Good Friday - is Friday night to Saturday Night. Jesus rested. Preached to the Spirits in prison 1 Pet 3:19
Day 3 is Saturday Night to Sunday Night. Jesus rose on the 3 day in fulfillment of the Scripture. Matt 28:1

Notice that in John 20:1, it was the first day of the week. On Jewish calendars, Sunday is the first day of the week. Matthew 28:1 1Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. 2And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone £from the door, and sat on it. 3His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. 4And the guards shook for fear of him, and became like dead men. 5But the angel answered and said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6He is not here; for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7And go quickly and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you.”

Not sure what the SDA’s believe. Sorry.

 

[rciadan]

shawn34I’m drawing my conclusion from what your fellow Catholics are posting. Don’t shoot the messenger.

This applies both ways. Don’t get upset if some "draw conclusions from what your fellow Protestants post.

How can the Catholic Church believe the Muslims will be saved when Jesus says that in the end time, the word will be heard everywhere.

If you are going to state a belief or teaching of the Church, then do so accurrately. The Church teaches that “Muslims” may **be **saved if… (not “the Muslims will be saved”)

if you don’t accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, you are dead in your sins, do these sound familiar?

This is only familiar as coming from Protestants such as yourself.
GET IT RIGHT! If you are going to state what the scriptures say, then do so accurately. Where in scripture do the words"accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour" appear?

Don’t misunderstand me. I **know **He is Lord and Saviour! I also know that he is Lord and Savior of all, whether they “accept” him or not! A wall being a wall does not depend on my “acceptence” of that simple fact. I can refuse to “accept” it and sooner or later I will come up against that hard reality when I try to treat that wall as a door! Christ is the same.

But Jesus will judge (according to the Father’s will) fairly everyman according to their deeds fathers will in the end

You are correct here and if you want to be judged to have been righteous, then listen to and obey the Church. Christ himself said, “And if he will not hear the church, let him be to you as the heathen and publican.”

 

[believers]

This applies both ways. Don’t get upset if some "draw conclusions from what your fellow Protestants post.

If you are going to state a belief or teaching of the Church, then do so accurrately. The Church teaches that “Muslims” may **be **saved if… (not “the Muslims will be saved”)

This is only familiar as coming from Protestants such as yourself.
GET IT RIGHT! If you are going to state what the scriptures say, then do so accurately. Where in scripture do the words"accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour" appear?

Don’t misunderstand me. I **know **He is Lord and Saviour! I also know that he is Lord and Savior of all, whether they “accept” him or not! A wall being a wall does not depend on my “acceptence” of that simple fact. I can refuse to “accept” it and sooner or later I will come up against that hard reality when I try to treat that wall as a door! Christ is the same.

You are correct here and if you want to be judged to have been righteous, then listen to and obey the Church. Christ himself said, “And if he will not hear the church, let him be to you as the heathen and publican.”

That’s not what the Vatican says. This was taken directly from the Vatican’s website. So, I suppose from the statement below, we can officially group the faith of Catholics and Muslims in the same category.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."

Someone needs to tell the Vatican to believe John 14:6

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

 

[MrS]

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Someone needs to tell the Vatican to believe John 14:6

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

I guess you would have to deny that the one God of the Muslims is the same as the Triune God of Catholicism. I don’t think you are suggesting that.

I also guess you might have to deny that God wishes all men to be saved… even those who reject Him for whatever reason and whatever time period in their earthly lives. We all have, until our last breath, the opportunity to imbrace God. I don’t think you are suggesting that.

Also, do you see that there are many of **those who acknowledge the Creator ** as an the indication that there are many who do not. And of the groups who do,
**in the first place amongst whom ** the Muslims could be included… but only for that criteria mentioned.

Do they believe the rest… Jesus is God, etc… No. And that is their problem. However, there are many “christian” communities who claim one Creator, but have departed from the Words of Jesus in Scripture… more seriously those of John 6. The believe in God, they love the Lord, but they too have walked away.

 

[shawn34_a]

I guess you would have to deny that … The believe in God, they love the Lord, but they too have walked away.

Couple points.

Muhammad believed that he was the greatest prophet of all and no other prophets were to come after him. Farewell address: O People, NO PROPHET OR MESSENGER WILL COME AFTER ME AND NO NEW FAITH WILL BE BORN. Reason well, therefore, O People, and understand words which I convey to you. I am leaving you with the Book of God (the QUR’AN*) and my SUNNAH (the life style and the behavioral mode of the Prophet), if you follow them you will never go astray.
Occording to Muslim faith, Muhammad was the greatest prophet. This would be exhalting himself above Christ, making him greater then Christ himself.

God wishes for all men to be saved, but not all men will be saved for there would be no Hades or Lake of Fire then. Rev 20: And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.

Matthew 24:14
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. So emphatically you cannot deny that people will be exposed to the Word. It’s also mentioned in Mark.
I’ve made mention several times to unless you accept Jesus Christ, your dead in your sins. There are several other passages that say the same concept.

Romans 2
1Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 2But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who practice such things. 8but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11For there is no partiality with God.

12For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13(for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

People will not be able to repent til their last breath. They will only have to the 7th (last) bowel to repent. Once that bowel (God’s wrath) begins to be poured out, it’s too late. Revelations is quite clear. Revelations 16: 15“Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame.” (2nd coming of Christ). 16 And they gathered them together to the place called in Hebrew, £Armageddon. 17Then the seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, “It is done!”

In John 6, your referring to the Jews. Here’s Romans 11:7What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded. 8Just as it is written: “God has given them a spirit of stupor, Eyes that they should not see And ears that they should not hear, To this very day.”£9And David says: “Let their table become a snare and a trap, A stumbling block and a recompense to them. 10 Let their eyes be darkened, so that they do not see, And bow down their back always.”£11I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.
In the OT, a couple prophets reference the return of Christ, stepping foot on the Mt Olives, revealing himself to the Jews, and they repent.

Judge not, less you be judge. By whatever standards we judge others, so we should be judge. I’m not judging them. I believe their faith is wrong according to the Christian faith. I wish the would repent and accept Christ. If they don’t, it’s up to the man upstairs to cast judgement.

Many other faiths believe in one Almighty God. Why does the Catechism neglect them. Doesn’t God wish for all men to be saved?

 

[Church_Militant]

That’s not what the Vatican says. This was taken directly from the Vatican’s website. So, I suppose from the statement below, we can officially group the faith of Catholics and Muslims in the same category.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims

; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."

Someone needs to tell the Vatican to believe John 14:6

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.So you’re the final arbitrator of all that God is dong huh?

Properly understood (as opposed to misconstrued as you have done) the statement means that by profession, these people confess that they believe in the God of Abraham just a the Jews do…and just as every Christian faith does. If you can show me a Catholic statement that says that we do not believe that all men must come to salvation in Christ then you might have a case…but you can’t because no such foolishness exists.

The only error here displayed is your (probably deliberate) misrepresentation of the passage of the CCC. The issue here is that I don’t think you really wish to understand anything about our most holy faith or you wouldn’t have made this remark to begin with.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[believers]

I guess you would have to deny that the one God of the Muslims is the same as the Triune God of Catholicism. I don’t think you are suggesting that.

I also guess you might have to deny that God wishes all men to be saved… even those who reject Him for whatever reason and whatever time period in their earthly lives. We all have, until our last breath, the opportunity to imbrace God. I don’t think you are suggesting that.

Also, do you see that there are many of those who acknowledge the Creator as an the indication that there are many who do not. And of the groups who do,
**in the first place amongst whom ** the Muslims could be included… but only for that criteria mentioned.

Do they believe the rest… Jesus is God, etc… No. And that is their problem. However, there are many “christian” communities who claim one Creator, but have departed from the Words of Jesus in Scripture… more seriously those of John 6. The believe in God, they love the Lord, but they too have walked away.

NO, Muslims are not Christians. They don’t believe that Jesus is the Messiah. THEREFORE, are not saved.

Now, here’s the rule for Muslims and their faith. Once a Muslim, always a Muslim, or die leaving it. They will NEVER accept Christ as Lord and saviour.

Your Catholic religion is teaching something that is not in the Bible… again.

 

[believers]

So you’re the final arbitrator of all that God is dong huh?

Properly understood (as opposed to misconstrued as you have done) the statement means that by profession, these people confess that they believe in the God of Abraham just a the Jews do…and just as every Christian faith does. If you can show me a Catholic statement that says that we do not believe that all men must come to salvation in Christ then you might have a case…but you can’t because no such foolishness exists.

The only error here displayed is your (probably deliberate) misrepresentation of the passage of the CCC. The issue here is that I don’t think you really wish to understand anything about our most holy faith or you wouldn’t have made this remark to begin with.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

Let’s see… the Jews believe in the God of Abraham and are not saved. What about them? They profess the same god too. See how your reasoning makes absolutely no sense? The problem here is that you CANNOT get to God if you don’t believe in His son, Jesus. That’s Christianity 101.