What makes you certain that you're doing the right thing, and they are not?

[cho_pilo]

I would like especially Catholics to discuss this topic.

If I’m understanding Chapter 2, Section 16 of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church correctly, it seems that, a follower of Islam or Judaism (for example) can achieve salvation as long as they have a genuine faith and a desire to do God’s will to the best of their ability? But once exposed to the more comprehensively “correct” teachings of the Catholic Church, one can only achieve salvation by embracing them (which I am sure you would argue would be a natural thing for someone who had genuine faith in the first place)?

Followers of Islam and Judaism (for example) would typically reject the authority of the Catholic church on such matters and continue to embrace their own beliefs instead. What makes you certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not?

Trust me when I say that my intention here is not to take cheap shots at any answers your provide. I might ask further questions and present other arguments, but this really is designed to be an exploration rather than an inquisition.

Thank you.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

First, I have to ask, what exactly is the definition of," a genuine faith"?

 

[praxising]

Followers of Islam and Judaism (for example) would typically reject the authority of the Catholic church on such matters and continue to embrace their own beliefs instead. What makes you certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not?.

What makes you think I think that?

For this thread, I’d like a link to the doc and a quote of the relevant passage, not a paraphrase.

 

[JRKH]

The very short answer and this applies to ALL faith walks - is how closely those following it adhere to Love as the core source and goal of their faith and their actions.
This is the “touchstone” that gives hope that those in other faiths might be saved, and it is the core of our own faith as well.

Theologically speaking, and simply addressing the “teachings” of the two groups you mention (Jews and Islam) is the idea of the culmination we find in Christ and how Christ completely sources back to the critical core of Love.
The Jewish faith missed this at the time, and I guess still looks for a temporal messiah which I guess for them will be realized in the second coming…
Islam strikes me as a reversion from the NT covenant based on Love and faith and a “Loving Father God”, to more of an OT covenant “Law based, Judge God” concept.
So in neither of these do I see the growth toward a 'Love" relationship, a “unitive” relationship with God that I see in Christianity through Christ in His Church.

Peace
James

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I would like especially Catholics to discuss this topic…

Thank you.

Because Christianity is the result of mathematical certainty because of the fulfillment of Messianic Prophecy. Here is a more eloquent explanation than I can write. From allabouttruth.org/messianic-prophecy.htm

Messianic Prophecy: What Is It?
Messianic prophecy is the collection of over 100 predictions (a conservative estimate) in the Old Testament about the future Messiah of the Jewish people. These predictions were written by multiple authors, in numerous books, over approximately 1,000 years. Messianic Prophecy is so dramatic today, because with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the reliability of the Septuagint version of the Old Testament (both of which have been proven to exist prior to the time Jesus walked on the earth) you can be assured that these prophecies were not “conspired” after-the-fact.

Messianic Prophecy: Fulfillment by Jesus Christ
Messianic prophecy was fulfilled by the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Although many Jews did not accept Jesus as their Messiah, many did, and they became the Jewish sect later known as the Christians. Christianity, based in dramatic part on the fulfillment of historical prophecy, spread rapidly throughout the Roman Empire of the 1st Century. Examine the prophecies yourself, and calculate the probability of one man fulfilling just a handful of the most specific ones, and you’ll be amazed.

“Jesus said to them, ‘This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.’” Luke 24:44 (NIV)

The Old Testament verses are the prophecy; the New Testament verses proclaim the fulfillment. Check them all out for yourself!

* Born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:21-23)
* A descendant of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3; 22:18; Matthew 1:1; Galatians 3:16)
* Of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10; Luke 3:23, 33; Hebrews 7:14)
* Of the house of David (2 Samuel 7:12-16; Matthew 1:1)
* Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2, Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:4-7)
* Taken to Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:14-15)
* Herod´s killing of the infants (Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:16-18)
* Anointed by the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2; Matthew 3:16-17)
* Heralded by the messenger of the Lord (John the Baptist) (Isaiah 40:3-5; Malachi 3:1; Matthew 3:1-3)
* Would perform miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6; Matthew 9:35)
* Would preach good news (Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:14-21)
* Would minister in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1; Matthew 4:12-16) Would cleanse the Temple (Malachi 3:1; Matthew 21:12-13)
* Would first present Himself as King 173,880 days from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25; Matthew 21:4-11)
* Would enter Jerusalem as a king on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:4-9)
* Would be rejected by Jews (Psalm 118:22; I Peter 2:7)
* Die a humiliating death (Psalm 22; Isaiah 53) involving:
     1. rejection (Isaiah 53:3; John 1:10-11; 7:5,48)
     2. betrayal by a friend (Psalm 41:9; Luke 22:3-4; John 13:18)
     3. sold for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12; Matthew 26:14-15)
     4. silence before His accusers (Isaiah 53:7; Matthew 27:12-14)
     5. being mocked (Psalm 22: 7-8; Matthew 27:31)
     6. beaten (Isaiah 52:14; Matthew 27:26)
     7. spit upon (Isaiah 50:6; Matthew 27:30)
     8. piercing His hands and feet (Psalm 22:16; Matthew 27:31)
     9. being crucified with thieves (Isaiah 53:12; Matthew 27:38)
    10. praying for His persecutors (Isaiah 53:12; Luke 23:34)
    11. piercing His side (Zechariah 12:10; John 19:34)
    12. given gall and vinegar to drink (Psalm 69:21, Matthew 27:34, Luke 23:36)
    13. no broken bones (Psalm 34:20; John 19:32-36)
    14. buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9; Matthew 27:57-60)
    15. casting lots for His garments (Psalm 22:18; John 19:23-24)
* Would rise from the dead!! (Psalm 16:10; Mark 16:6; Acts 2:31)
* Ascend into Heaven (Psalm 68:18; Acts 1:9)
* Would sit down at the right hand of God (Psalm 110:1; Hebrews 1:3)

Part 2.

Messianic Prophecy - What Are The Odds of Fulfillment Without God?
Messianic Prophecy is so powerful because of the statistical odds that one man would fulfill every single one of them. If we just analyze seven of the more specific prophecies in the Old Testament, that were later fulfilled in the Person of Jesus Christ, we are stunned by the statistical impossibility of such an historical reality. As an illustration, we have inserted some conservative “odds” alongside seven established prophecies. Please feel free to propose your own prophecies and your own odds - the dramatic point will still be made!
Messianic Prophecy

http://www.allabouttruth.org/common/images/messianic-prophecy.jpg

Messianic Prophecy - The Challenge
Messianic prophecy is phenomenal evidence that sets the Bible apart from the other “holy books.” We strongly encourage you to read the Old Testament prophecies and the New Testament fulfillments on the previous page. Better yet, get a Jewish Tanakh (the Hebrew scripture read in the Jewish synagogues) and read the Messianic prophecies from there. It is dramatic, eye-opening and potentially life-changing!

This is just an example of how Christianity is verified.

 

[Barbkw]

it seems that, a follower of Islam or Judaism (for example) can achieve salvation as long as they have a genuine faith and a desire to do God’s will to the best of their ability? But once exposed to the more comprehensively “correct” teachings of the Catholic Church, one can only achieve salvation by embracing them (which I am sure you would argue would

The key is the belief in Jesus as Savior (which neither Islam and Judaism believe in.)

However, the Church understands that their disbelief in Jesus as Savior is a product of their birth and their religious education.

The same goes for other non-Christian religions.

So the test is, are these peoples practicing their faith in their god or goddesses with love and are they loving toward other people.

Of course, this openness toward other religions will run into obstacles.

For instance, in Sharia law, they embrace parts of the Quran / various other books that bless militant actions against non-believers, Muslim apostates, Jews and Christians.

 

[cho_pilo]

First, I have to ask, what exactly is the definition of," a genuine faith"?

Genuine faith is just that; genuine. Someone who only practices their religion outwardly, but does not truly embrace it in their hearts, is not a person of genuine faith, for example.

The Jewish faith missed this at the time, and I guess still looks for a temporal messiah which I guess for them will be realized in the second coming…
Islam strikes me as a reversion from the NT covenant based on Love and faith and a “Loving Father God”, to more of an OT covenant “Law based, Judge God” concept.
So in neither of these do I see the growth toward a 'Love" relationship, a “unitive” relationship with God that I see in Christianity through Christ in His Church.

Are you saying then that it is less likely for a person to be “right” with God if they have not embraced the new testament teachings of Jesus, or if they instead embrace a doctrine that may recognize that it has some authority, but has been superseded by more recent prophecy? Of course you have already indicated that exceptions can be made for people of any religion who genuinely seek God, which seems fair.

Please enlighten me.

 

[JRKH]

Are you saying then that it is less likely for a person to be “right” with God if they have not embraced the new testament teachings of Jesus, or if they instead embrace a doctrine that may recognize that it has some authority, but has been superseded by more recent prophecy? Of course you have already indicated that exceptions can be made for people of any religion who genuinely seek God, which seems fair.

Please enlighten me.

I make no asserion as to how “right with God” ANYone is. That is between them personally and God.

The question you asked is, "What makes you (that would be me, personally) certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not? (in choosing to be a Catholic Christian as opposed to Jewish or Islamic)

But - as to the teachings of the two groups mentioned (Abrahamic traditions)
The Jews, as a faith, rejected the coming of the Messiah in Christ Jesus. So they find no authority at all in the NT.
Islam, on the other hand seems to accept some of the NT concepts, but likewise rejects the fullfilment that we see in Christ. So their prophet wrote a whole new book to set the record straight.
In this I see shades similar to the founding of Mormonism. The claim that the NT writers and the “pre-canon” interpreters got it wrong and so here is another book that gets it right…

Now these are my personal views. They are not to be taken as in any way reflecting official church teaching. If you’d like to see what the church says about our lrelationship to Islam, you could look it up in the catechism.

Peace
James

 

[Barbkw]

Are you saying then that it is less likely for a person to be “right” with God if they have not embraced the new testament teachings of Jesus, or if they instead embrace a doctrine that may recognize that it has some authority, but has been superseded by more recent prophecy? Of course you have already indicated that exceptions can be made for people of any religion who genuinely seek God, which seems fair.

Please enlighten me.

Catholics refer to it as the “fullness of Truth”.

The Catechism writes:

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333

845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood.334

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Followers of Islam and Judaism (for example) would typically reject the authority of the Catholic church on such matters and continue to embrace their own beliefs instead. What makes you certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not?

Trust me when I say that my intention here is not to take cheap shots at any answers your provide. I might ask further questions and present other arguments, but this really is designed to be an exploration rather than an inquisition.

Thank you.

I don’t know if my answer is as logical as you’re looking for, but its honest:

When I read the gospels I have a deep sense that I am hearing my creator’s voice. I’ve read holy books of other religions and don’t get the same thing. I am following my conscience to the best of my ability, and I have experienced very strong personal evidence that I have a relationship with my creator. I have faith that I’m on the right path, but I also have faith that if I’m not on the right path, at least God will be loving enough to forgive a sincere mistake. The same goes for people of good will who for some reason haven’t been able to find the truth.

 

[Joel_PF]

I would like especially Catholics to discuss this topic.

If I’m understanding Chapter 2, Section 16 of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church correctly, it seems that, a follower of Islam or Judaism (for example) can achieve salvation as long as they have a genuine faith and a desire to do God’s will to the best of their ability? But once exposed to the more comprehensively “correct” teachings of the Catholic Church, one can only achieve salvation by embracing them (which I am sure you would argue would be a natural thing for someone who had genuine faith in the first place)?

I would argue that the natural thing for a Muslim or a Jew to do when presented with Christianity would be to deny it; and that implies no bad faith in them. A Muslim who knows about Christianity and yet rejects it can, theoretically, be a spiritual member of the Catholic Church and thus be saved, if what’s keeping him from the Faith are psychological and cultural impediments to see the truth of Christ’s teaching, and also the ineptitude of those whose calling it is to give witness of the Catholic Faith to him.

Followers of Islam and Judaism (for example) would typically reject the authority of the Catholic church on such matters and continue to embrace their own beliefs instead. What makes you certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not?

I think reason is on my side (and how can we settle this? Well, by the only way we can settle everything else: by dialog, argument, exchange of ideas, etc.), and the more I consider the Catholic position on many issues and compare it with Muslim or Jewish positions (especially when it comes to their relationship with morality and divine law in general), it seems very clear to me that they have committed some serious blunders.

I cannot give you a proof that I am right and they are wrong, but I see many convincing reasons to reject Islam and Judaism in favor of Christianity, and I don’t see good reasons to do otherwise.

 

[cho_pilo]

I would argue that the natural thing for a Muslim or a Jew to do when presented with Christianity would be to deny it; and that implies no bad faith in them. A Muslim who knows about Christianity and yet rejects it can, theoretically, be a spiritual member of the Catholic Church and thus be saved, if what’s keeping him from the Faith are psychological and cultural impediments to see the truth of Christ’s teaching, and also the ineptitude of those whose calling it is to give witness of the Catholic Faith to him.

I think reason is on my side (and how can we settle this? Well, by the only way we can settle everything else: by dialog, argument, exchange of ideas, etc.), and the more I consider the Catholic position on many issues and compare it with Muslim or Jewish positions (especially when it comes to their relationship with morality and divine law in general), it seems very clear to me that they have committed some serious blunders.

I cannot give you a proof that I am right and they are wrong, but I see many convincing reasons to reject Islam and Judaism in favor of Christianity, and I don’t see good reasons to do otherwise.

My point is that you seem to be taking yourself out of the equation.
It’s as if you presume yourself to be objective and neutral, unaffected by any greed, anger and delusion that you might have.

You speak as if reasoning were something that happens automatically, without the person’s will and whatever conditioning they may have; as if reasoning were much the same as mixing chemicals - add premis 1, add premis 2, and there is conclusion C - no personal (name removed by moderator)ut or consideration necessary.

It’s as if you don’t own your statements, don’t take responsibility for them.

You don’t really make I-statements. While you will say “I think …” or “In my estimation …”, these seem to be mere formalities, not actually expressions of you considering yourself an epistemological and ontological instance.

 

[Joel_PF]

My point is that you seem to be taking yourself out of the equation.
It’s as if you presume yourself to be objective and neutral, unaffected by any greed, anger and delusion that you might have.

Not at all. I certainly am affected by all of these. That is one other reason why (name removed by moderator)ut from others is so important; to check these biases. Still, I think that a person’s intellectual maturing consists also of being able to check these and be able to achieve an ever greater objectivity.

It is always possible to move a level above our prejudices, or else any knowledge, and any rational discussion, would be completely worthless, because they would all be determined by each person’s personal biases.

 

[cho_pilo]

Not at all. I certainly am affected by all of these. That is one other reason why (name removed by moderator)ut from others is so important; to check these biases. Still, I think that a person’s intellectual maturing consists also of being able to check these and be able to achieve an ever greater objectivity.

It is always possible to move a level above our prejudices, or else any knowledge, and any rational discussion, would be completely worthless, because they would all be determined by each person’s personal biases.

Oh well. I am asking you questions or presenting a perspective to which there isn’t a regular answer.

 

[JRKH]

Oh well. I am asking you questions or presenting a perspective to which there isn’t a regular answer.

This is often the case with things like this.

It is impossible to completely and totlly divorce ourselves from all possible biases, influences, backgrounds, etc for we begin to aquire these things from the moment of our birth - and maybe even before…

As Joel says, the best we can do is to make comparison, attempt to ask the proper questions, not be afraid of pursuing truth by the path it leads us, and to keep God at all times in the forefront of our thoughts and desires.

For me - one of things that gives me certainty is that I am not particularly influenced by the actions of members of a given sect or belief system. If you wish to judge by example, then judge by those held up as the best examples of a given belief system. But since even these can be found to have flaws, it is the teachings, documented and approved (widely accepted) that are the foundation upon which to make determination.
Official teachings remain the same. Others might skew them - the the teaching ideals remain the same. And in seeking God - it is the ideal we should seek…

Peace
James

 

[YankeeRC]

Followers of Islam and Judaism (for example) would typically reject the authority of the Catholic church on such matters and continue to embrace their own beliefs instead. What makes you certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not?
.

I base this confidence on Jesus.
Jesus Christ established the Catholic Church and the succession of popes since Peter.
Jesus said I am the way the truth and the Light no one comes to the Father but by me.
Jesus also ressurected and ascended bodily intp heaven and no other person has done that.

To paraphrase from Karl Keating the other night on EWTN, “can non-catholics go to heaven, probably, but I can tell you this. Everyone in heaven is Catholic.”

 

[cho_pilo]

This is often the case with things like this.

It is impossible to completely and totlly divorce ourselves from all possible biases, influences, backgrounds, etc for we begin to aquire these things from the moment of our birth - and maybe even before…

That wasn’t my point.

My point is that you talk as if you already would be objective, as if you already knew all the anwers. As if you spoke from God’s perspective. Please help me understand about it.

As Joel says, the best we can do is to make comparison, attempt to ask the proper questions, not be afraid of pursuing truth by the path it leads us, and to keep God at all times in the forefront of our thoughts and desires.

One cannot keep God at the forefront of one’s thoughts and desires if one doesn’t know who and what God actually is. I don’t know…
So, help me because I wish to know as well.

 

[Tytus_de_Zoo]

Biases, influences and all the other things which affect our judgement and our view on the world cannot be separated easily from how we operate as human beings.

Personally, I think the matter of whether we are justified or right within our beliefs is not an issue to be raised. It is simply not within human understanding or ability to judge anyone. After all, in 2 Timothy 4:1, Jesus Christ will judge the Living and the Dead.

Just as in John 8:7, let he who be without sin cast the first stone.

Thus, we mortals are not capable of casting judgement on each other, simply because we cannot as fallible sinners and mere mortals. Our judgement in a large part is preconceived based on societal norms and upbringing.

To use rationale and reason to answer the question, I don’t think it matters whether ‘we’ or ‘they’ are right or wrong, so long as we strive to be the best individuals we can, both virtuous and morally sound with the maintenance of best intentions for ourselves and others and be humble before the Lord. Worrying about what Joe the Plumber thinks is right or wrong is ill conceived.

The concept of right or wrong is a fallible human matter of a coin toss subordinate to the side of the coin an individual belongs to.

I think anyone who is putting forth a large part of their time or life trying to prove whether we are right and they are wrong is missing the bigger picture. We are not placed on this Earth to waste it on trying to prove a point which can never be proven, we are here to better ourselves and to better the lives of others, with both the word and the love of God, Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary in our Hearts, Minds and Tongues. All else is inconsequential.

 

[JRKH]

That wasn’t my point.

My point is that you talk as if you already would be objective, as if you already knew all the anwers. As if you spoke from God’s perspective. Please help me understand about it.

Once one has reached a certain conclusion one speaks from a perspective of conviction. This may be why you see us as speaking “from God’s perspective”.
In Turht, no one can speak “From God’s persepctive”. We can only speak from the understanding of God’s perspective as revealed in Scripture and through the Teachings of His Church.

One cannot keep God at the forefront of one’s thoughts and desires if one doesn’t know who and what God actually is. I don’t know…
So, help me because I wish to know as well.

God is “Our Father” (Mt 6:9) - The creator of all things - (Isa 40:28)
Consider what it means to be “A Father”.
Consider what it means to be “The Creator” (not the destroyer) of all things.

God is Love (1 John 4:8)
All that God asks of us is based on Love (Mt 22:36-40)

Therefore Dear cho pilo, keep Love, foremost in your mind, and you will keep God foremost in your mind.
Read the Gospels with Love at the core and unerlying principle and you will find all connected.
Where Love is served, God is served.
Where Love is denied, God is denied.

Love builds up - Love creates - Love fathers - Love mothers and nurtures.

Hope this helps

Peace
James

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I would like especially Catholics to discuss this topic.

If I’m understanding Chapter 2, Section 16 of the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church correctly, it seems that, a follower of Islam or Judaism (for example) can achieve salvation as long as they have a genuine faith and a desire to do God’s will to the best of their ability? But once exposed to the more comprehensively “correct” teachings of the Catholic Church, one can only achieve salvation by embracing them (which I am sure you would argue would be a natural thing for someone who had genuine faith in the first place)?

I think you’re close to understanding Church teaching here, but I would like to clarify a couple of points:

First, we don’t know with any certainty that the unbaptized will be saved. We know that God is loving and desires that all be saved, but the Church has been instructed to baptize people for their salvation. We expect that a loving God would provide a way for people of good will who through no fault of their own do not know Christ, to be saved.

Second, knowledge of the teachings of the Church is not a black-and-white question. True complete knowledge will only come in heaven. On earth we can be blocked by our biases, by the bad behavior of those who teach something, and by our limited understandings. True, informed rejection of the Catholic Church would block one from salvation, but this isn’t necessarily what happens to most people who don’t convert to Catholicism.

Followers of Islam and Judaism (for example) would typically reject the authority of the Catholic church on such matters and continue to embrace their own beliefs instead. What makes you certain that you’re doing the right thing, and they are not?

To a large extent, this knowledge of truth is based on a supernatural calling.

Yes, Catholicism can be defended using reason. However, other faiths can be defended using reason too. I think Catholicism can be defended better than the others using reason, but that isn’t enough for most people, especially since most people aren’t that reasonable. It’s just not the normal human behavior to be completely reasonable.

God will speak to (at least some) people and call them. To reject that call, when it is known to the person, is very serious.