Confidence

Originally posted by Conrau K
Well, in his post he simply said that Christians believe Jews and Muslims are wrong. The point is however that many Christians would say that Jews and Muslims share many basic beliefs and betrays the fact that many Christians acknowledge that Jews and Muslims can be saved (something he and rwingett did not seem to be aware of).

And Christians DO ultimately believe Jews and Muslims are wrong. You still haven't provided any evidence to the contrary from what I can tell.

Just as a matter of curiousity, any idea what the minimum requirements are for salvation for Jews and Muslims?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
And Christians DO ultimately believe Jews and Muslims are wrong. You still haven't provided any evidence to the contrary from what I can tell.

Just as a matter of curiousity, any idea what the minimum requirements are for salvation for Jews and Muslims?

And Christians DO ultimately believe Jews and Muslims are wrong. You still haven't provided any evidence to the contrary from what I can tell.

I guess it depends how you define 'ultimately'. I would think that since Jews share the same God, although differing in particular theological details, share in the covenant of Abraham, a Catholic could justifiably say that they are ultimately right. Lumen Gentium indicates a number of significant points of agreement with Muslims, such as their reverence for Jesus and devotion to Mary. That too would be ultimately right.

Just as a matter of curiousity, any idea what the minimum requirements are for salvation for Jews and Muslims?

Same as for everyone, baptism and death without mortal sin. Baptism of desire, their implicit desire to serve God, would substitute for sacramental baptism. Umm...hang on, I have already said that.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Please Conrau, that is simply an ad hominem par excellence!

I can't see how I have used any ad hominem. I have not in any way attacked you personally.

gave reasons why the Christian faith and those others that you mentioned are irreconcilable, reasons Conrau, as far as I am aware, you have provided no evidence to the contrary other ly say that the three Abrahamic faiths were reconcilable. Please, try to follow the thread.

yes but it state nothing of salvation, it simply mentions that they are reverent, hold Jesus as a prophet, view Mary as a virgin etc etc , the point is, that unless one accepts that propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, from a purely Christian perspective then salvation is not possible, indeed Paul in his writings states that unless one does, the 'wrath of God', remains upon the 'sons of disobedience'. I have seen nothing in your quoted text which even comes close to addressing these fundamental differences. Its one thing to state that there is common ground Conrau, quite another to state that salvation is open to those who do not accept the sin atoning sacrifice of the Christ.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes but it state nothing of salvation, it simply mentions that they are reverent, hold Jesus as a prophet, view Mary as a virgin etc etc , the point is, that unless one accepts that propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, from a purely Christian perspective then salvation is not possible, indeed Paul in his writings states that unless one does, the 'wrath ...[text shortened]... e that salvation is open to those who do not accept the sin atoning sacrifice of the Christ.

the point is, that unless one accepts that propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, from a purely Christian perspective then salvation is not possible, indeed Paul in his writings states that unless one does, the 'wrath of God', remains upon the 'sons of disobedience'.

Robbie, I am not sure why you have this mental block. It may be that millions of Christians are fundamentally mistaken when they believe that it is not necessary for salvation to accept the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ. You might have a point that they should. But I don't care! The issue is whether Christians do believe, whether rightly or mistakenly. This is not a theological debate.

Its one thing to state that there is common ground Conrau, quite another to state that salvation is open to those who do not accept the sin atoning sacrifice of the Christ.

The quote from Lumen Gentium says exactly that. Ergo, all Catholics are bound to accept, at least as possible, the salvation of Jews and Muslims. Now you obviously may think that the Catholic Church is wrong. The point, however, is that some Christians out there do not believe that Jews and Muslims are fundamentally wrong and condemned to hell.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]the point is, that unless one accepts that propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, from a purely Christian perspective then salvation is not possible, indeed Paul in his writings states that unless one does, the 'wrath of God', remains upon the 'sons of disobedience'.

Robbie, I am not sure why you have this mental block. It may be that millions of Chri t there do not believe that Jews and Muslims are fundamentally wrong and condemned to hell.[/b]

ok i understand now, its not about what is true, its about what some have come to accept, despite a plethora of Biblical references to the contrary! The mere fact that some common ground exists is not in any way to be construed as a basis for salvation. Christ himself states to the Samaritan women at the Well of Sychar, who incidentally shared some common ground with the Jews through a shared heritage, that the Samaritans 'worshipped what they did not know', and that God was looking for persons who would worship 'in spirit and truth' - John Chapters six i think from the top of my head, clearly showing that there was to be no such thing as an interfaith movement. Paul himself states, One God, One faith, One baptism, etc , but i see that you don't care and that i could quote Biblical verse until i was blue in the face.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]And Christians DO ultimately believe Jews and Muslims are wrong. You still haven't provided any evidence to the contrary from what I can tell.

I guess it depends how you define 'ultimately'. I would think that since Jews share the same God, although differing in particular theological details, share in the covenant of Abraham, a Catholic could jus ...[text shortened]... serve God, would substitute for sacramental baptism. Umm...hang on, I have already said that.[/b]

Only if a Catholic could justifiably say that they are right in all respects. If they cannot, then they are saying that they are wrong in those respects. I don't think that there's a reasonable way out of this.

As to the salvation issue, the real question is whether or not the RCC acknowledges the correctness of the standards for salvation recognized by Jews and Muslims. Do they? If they don't, then the RCC thinks that they are wrong.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Only if a Catholic could justifiably say that they are right in all respects. If they cannot, then they are saying that they are wrong in those respects. I don't think that there's a reasonable way out of this.

As to the salvation issue, the real question is whether or not the RCC acknowledges the correctness of the standards for salvation recognized by Judaism and Islam. Do they? If they don't, then the RCC thinks that they are wrong.

Only if a Catholic could justifiably say that they are right in all respects. If they cannot, then they are saying that they are wrong in those respects. I don't think that there's a reasonable way out of this.

Sure, a Catholic is bound to say that a Jew or Muslim is wrong in some respects. The point of controversy, however, is whether a Catholic would be bound to say that Jews and Muslims are ultimately wrong.

As to the salvation issue, the real question is whether or not the RCC acknowledges the correctness of the standards for salvation recognized by Judaism and Islam. Do they? If they don't, then the RCC thinks that they are wrong.

Now you have changed the terms of debate. The point under dispute was whether the Catholic Church teaches that Muslims and Jews can be saved, not whether the Catholic Church teaches that Jews and Muslims are correct in their standards of salvation. That's just bizarre. Firstly, the idea of salvation is uniquely Christian. It arose in a Christian theological context. Secondly, even if we were to interpret salvation quite narrowly as 'getting into heaven', this too is fraught with problems. Not all Jews accept the notion of heaven; for those that do, though, they may believe that adherence to the Talmud is necessary. Obviously a Catholic could not accept that as a standard for salvation. A Catholic would have to say that the Jew is, in that case, mistaken about God's requirements for 'salvation', at least as far as the Catholic understands the term. Even then though, the Catholic could not say that the Jew is ultimately wrong -- the Jew, in his observance of the Talmud, may still be saved; he would just be wrong in thinking it necessary for his relationship with God.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]Only if a Catholic could justifiably say that they are right in all respects. If they cannot, then they are saying that they are wrong in those respects. I don't think that there's a reasonable way out of this.

Sure, a Catholic is bound to say that a Jew or Muslim is wrong in some respects. The point of controversy, however, is whether a Catholic ches that Jews and Muslims are correct in their standards of salvation. That's just bizarre.[/b]

Go back to the OP:

Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong. Muslims think Christians and Jews are wrong. Jews think Christians and Muslims are wrong. They are all correct!

Actually the point of controversy is whether or not Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong.

This applies to the salvation issue as well.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Go back to the OP:

Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong. Muslims think Christians and Jews are wrong. Jews think Christians and Muslims are wrong. They are all correct!

Actually the point of controversy is whether or not Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong.

This applies to the salvation issue as well.

Actually the point of controversy is whether or not Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong.

I have not denied that Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong in some respects. What I have tried to point out, however, is that Christians do not necessarily think that Jews and Muslims are wrong in all respects. Now if 667Joe simply wanted to point out that there is disagreement to some extent, then fine. That's not particularly interesting. Even within churches there is disagreement. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI disagreed with one another too.

What I wanted to refute here was the argument in 667Joe's original post that the three Abrahamic faiths have 'no confidence' in one another and the implication that each believes the other to be seriously in error. I don't believe that is justified at all. Clearly some Christians do agree with Jews and Muslims on significant points of doctrine and do accept that Jews and Muslims can be saved. As I said before, 667Joe's original post simply lacks nuance.

This applies to the salvation issue as well.

The issue, raised later, was whether a Christian believes Jews and Muslims are ultimately wrong. In fact, that was the very word you used. The critical factor was whether a Christian believed that a Jew or Muslim can be saved, not whether a Christian believes that a Jew or Muslim is correct in their understanding of the standards for salvation. That last point is so obvious.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]Actually the point of controversy is whether or not Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong.

I have not denied that Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong in some respects. What I have tried to point out, however, is that Christians do not necessarily think that Jews and Muslims are wrong in all respects. Now if 667Joe simply want rect in their understanding of the standards for salvation. That last point is so obvious.[/b]

Seems you are confused. Seems likely the first post is regarding the various Christian denominations. The second is unrelated as it is regarding the three Abrahamic religions and is the one to which you responded. You seem just as confused about the "salvation issue" as well. It also goes back to the second post. The key statement is "Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong". They do.

I know how much you dislike for me to say it, but it seems you're once again arguing just to argue.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Seems you are confused. Seems likely the first post is regarding the various Christian denominations. The second is unrelated as it is regarding the three Abrahamic religions and is the one to which you responded. You seem just as confused about the "salvation issue" as well. It also goes back to the second post. The key statement is "Christians think Jew ...[text shortened]... ow much you dislike for me to say it, but it seems you're once again arguing just to argue.

The second is unrelated as it is regarding the three Abrahamic religions and is the one to which you responded.

Yes, I am quite aware of what I am responding to. My criticism remains the same. 667joe lacks nuance. He might well say that Christians, Jews and Muslims disagree with one another. That statement alone however fails to capture the important fact that there is significant agreement.

You seem just as confused about the "salvation issue" as well. It also goes back to the second post.

No. You don't seem to understand at all. The issue of salvation was voiced by rwingett:

Does salvation come through faith in the death and resurrection of Christ, or does it not? If so, then Jews and Muslims, despite any number of points of agreement, are ultimately wrong.

667joe then commented,

This is what I'm getting at.

I really have no idea how you got the idea that it was somehow about 'the correctness of the standards for salvation recognized by Judaism and Islam'. It really makes no sense because 1. salvation is a uniquely Christian idea, and 2. obviously even if a Christian were to acknowledge their standards of salvation it would ineluctably lead to contradiction. You are off on a tangent.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]The second is unrelated as it is regarding the three Abrahamic religions and is the one to which you responded.

Yes, I am quite aware of what I am responding to. My criticism remains the same. 667joe lacks nuance. He might well say that Christians, Jews and Muslims disagree with one another. That statement alone however fails to capture the impor ...[text shortened]... andards of salvation it would ineluctably lead to contradiction. You are off on a tangent.[/b]

If you are "quite aware of what [you] are responding to, you wouldn't have said, "What I wanted to refute here was the argument in 667Joe's original post that the three Abrahamic faiths have 'no confidence' in one another and the implication that each believes the other to be seriously in error" which conflates the first and second post.

Note that rwingett's post refers back to the statement "Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong" in the second post:

Does salvation come through faith in the death and resurrection of Christ, or does it not? If so, then Jews and Muslims, despite any number of points of agreement, are ultimately wrong.

As such what is at issue is whether or not "Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong" about "salvation".

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
If you are "quite aware of what [you] are responding to, you wouldn't have said, "What I wanted to refute here was the argument in 667Joe's original post that the three Abrahamic faiths have 'no confidence' in one another and the implication that each believes the other to be seriously in error" which conflates the first and second post.

Note that rwin is whether or not "Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong" about "salvation".

If you are "quite aware of what [you] are responding to, you wouldn't have said, "What I wanted to refute here was the argument in 667Joe's original post that the three Abrahamic faiths have 'no confidence' in one another and the implication that each believes the other to be seriously in error" which conflates the first and second post.

Who is arguing for the sake of an argument? Look, I did conflate the two. The fact that the thread was titled 'confidence' informed how I interpreted the second post, even though the first post was probably about Christian churches specifically. I was dealing with what I saw to be his implication that the three Abrahamic do not agree on significant points. But if 667Joe wanted only to convey that on some doctrinal points there is disagreement in some respect between these three religions, then I will retract my complaint -- but I really don't think he meant anything so innocuous as 'there is to some extent disagreement between the three Abrahamic religions'. 667Joe only a little later clarified that his point was about the fact that Christians supposedly exclude Jews and Muslims from salvation.

As such what is at issue is whether or not "Christians think Jews and Muslims are wrong" about "salvation".

Well, I think you have misinterpreted what rwingett meant. I do not think he was asking if Jews and Muslims themselves believe that salvation came through faith in Jesus Christ but whether Christians believe Jews and Muslims could be saved without faith in Jesus Christ. Many Christians would answer yes to the latter and therefore would probably not see Jews and Muslims as 'ultimately wrong'. You've gone completely off the rails here. Obviously a Christian would think Jews and Muslims to be ultimately wrong if their erroneous beliefs led to damnation -- but why would a Christian think them ultimately wrong if, while disagreeing on some obscure point of soteriology, Jews and Muslims could still be saved?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ok i understand now, its not about what is true, its about what some have come to accept, despite a plethora of Biblical references to the contrary! The mere fact that some common ground exists is not in any way to be construed as a basis for salvation. Christ himself states to the Samaritan women at the Well of Sychar, who incidentally shared some ...[text shortened]... see that you don't care and that i could quote Biblical verse until i was blue in the face.

ok i understand now, its not about what is true, its about what some have come to accept, despite a plethora of Biblical references to the contrary!

Yes, the issue is about what Christians believe, not what they ought to believe. If you wish to discuss this further, perhaps you can start a thread outlining what you believe are required for salvation.

i see that you don't care and that i could quote Biblical verse until i was blue in the face.

If you wish to discuss this, then do so in another thread. I think that the Catholic Church has a much more compassionate and charitable view and appreciates more the mercy and justice of God. Many Muslims and Jews are not exposed to the gospels or, if so, are introduced to scriptures with suspicion and derision. It seems fitting then that since 'God wills the salvation of all', that they too must be part of God's providential plan of salvation, provided that they follow the law 'written in their hearts' as St Paul says.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]If you are "quite aware of what [you] are responding to, you wouldn't have said, "What I wanted to refute here was the argument in 667Joe's original post that the three Abrahamic faiths have 'no confidence' in one another and the implication that each believes the other to be seriously in error" which conflates the first and second post.

Who is ar on some obscure point of soteriology, Jews and Muslims could still be saved?[/b]

YOU seem to be arguing just to argue which seems to be how most of our discussions to end up. It's obvious that you didn't understand the second post, yet you still seem bent on saving your argument however absurdly. What's more, based on your responses, it seems you still don't understand it. Not only that, it seems you didn't understand 667joe's subsequent comments nor where rwingett was going with his post. To make matters worse, you can't seem to wrap your mind around the simple fact that since Christians think Jews and Muslims don't acknowledge the correctness of the standards for salvation recognized by Jews and Muslims, Christians think they are WRONG and therefore all your other arguments are moot. It's as if you just chuck arguments out there in the hopes that one might stick. Comes a point where the only recourse one has is to walk away.