Christian-Muslim Relations. CCC 841;LG 16; NA3

[Columcille]

If you look at his audience, "this ignorance" is the worshipping of idols made of gold, silver, etc. "This ignorance" does not apply to Romans 1 and 2, since they seeing the invisible God through his creation and living a law unto themselves where their conscience is clean, they are not worshipping idols and already live in a fashion a repentant life similiar in manner as perhaps after John the Baptist but prior to the knowledge of Christ. His audience were pagans who worshipped idols crafted out of things... Islam does not have any craven images that they worship.

[Leslie]

Originally Posted by Columcille

If you look at his audience, "this ignorance" is the worshipping of idols made of gold, silver, etc. "This ignorance" does not apply to Romans 1 and 2, since they seeing the invisible God through his creation and living a law unto themselves where their conscience is clean, they are not worshipping idols and already live in a fashion a repentant life similiar in manner as perhaps after John the Baptist but prior to the knowledge of Christ. His audience were pagans who worshipped idols crafted out of things... Islam does not have any craven images that they worship.

Islam does worship a false god though. Wouldn't you agree?

[Columcille]

Originally Posted by Leslie

Islam does worship a false god though. Wouldn't you agree?

Leslie, let us go line by line through the LG16.

Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*)

This is the thesis statement. It has several scriptural p***ages that is used as examples to support the thesis.
125 Cf. Rom. 9, 4-5
126 Cf. Rom. 1 l, 28-29.
127 Cf. Acts 17,25-28.
128 Cf. 1 Tim. 2, 4.
129 Cf Rom. 1, 21, 25.
130 Mk. 16, 16.
It also gives
Supplemental quotes referenced:
(18) Cfr. S. Thomas, Summa Theol. III, q. 8, a. 3, ad 1.
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4008.htm#article3

(19) Cfr. Epist. S.S.C.S. Officii ad Archiep. Boston.: Denz. 3869-72.
(20) Cfr. Eusebius Caes., Praeparatio Evangelica, 1, 1: PG 2128 AB.


Now I have laid down the primary sources, both the LG, NA, and CCC in my first initial post. But I have also given, for the purpose of going line-by-line, the summa reference so we can start with the thesis and progress. Here is the reply to objection 1 in article 3 of question 8 in part III:

Reply to Objection 1. Those who are unbaptized, though not actually in the Church, are in the Church potentially. And this potentiality is rooted in two things--first and principally, in the power of Christ, which is sufficient for the salvation of the whole human race; secondly, in free-will.

Firstly, what we are talking about here applies to those who have not received the Gospel. A lot of Muslims have not received the Gospel, so in essence we have to look at their potential to be recieved by Christ as St. Thomas Aquinas has given answer. If you are following what I am saying, then we can continue on with the next sentence where the supporting statements and examples are given.

[Leslie]

I will reply to the scriptural sources you have given, the others I will not reply to right away as they are not from Inspired sources, and thus do not represent what is God-Breathed, but are the opinions of men. I just can't do it at the moment hehe.



I do enjoy reading Aquinas though ^_^

[Columcille]

Originally Posted by Leslie

I will reply to the scriptural sources you have given, the others I will not reply to right away as they are not from Inspired sources, and thus do not represent what is God-Breathed, but are the opinions of men. I just can't do it at the moment hehe.



I do enjoy reading Aquinas though ^_^

I think you should at least comment on it. After all, the whole purpose of the forum is to defend's one faith. As is, I am defending mine. It seems to me, even when I was a Protestant, that there abounds a lot of misunderstanding of what the Catholic Church actually teaches. If you are going to say my Church teaches some sort of unitarian salvation, then what Aquinas says here in support of the Lunem gentium is the appropriate place to start.

So the next line is the follows:

In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.(125)
(125) "They are Israelites; theirs the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises;
5
theirs the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, is the Messiah. God who is over all 3 be blessed forever. Amen. " Romans 9. 4-5.

3 [5] Some editors punctuate this verse differently and prefer the translation, "Of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all." However, Paul's point is that God who is over all aimed to use Israel, which had been entrusted with every privilege, in outreach to the entire world through the Messiah.



Relating back to the thesis, the potentiality of salvation extended to the Jews first with all the benefits that was given to them in both the verses... the patriarchs, the law, the worship, and the promises. In essence, they were looking forward to the Messiah. As such God's covenant is real and benificial and does not p*** away... but in Christ is fulfilled. In potential, there are many Jews today that have not encountered the Gospel meaningfully, and who in the worship of God in the old covenant as it is adapted, are in potential under Christ's salvation. Once the Gospel is presented where the misconceptions are removed and understood, at that conjecture does the Jew meet at the crossroad of decision. If he was in reality within the potential, he will naturally gravitate to the Gospel and growing will recognize the fulfillments of Messiah. However, if he rejects it... then whatever potential existed would be removed.