Allah

  • Thread starter Thread starter IGotQuestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I had a reference I’d like to offer Kathleen Gee regarding the conditions of Jews and Christians in an Islamic state… there’s an historical example offered in the following article which I think is fair… for your consideration:

bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/spain_1.shtml

🙂

During the “Reconquista” after the Christians returned to power the situation was reversed for Muslims… Jews were also expelled…

*The new Christian hierarchy demanded heavy taxes from non-Christians and gave them rights, such as in the Treaty of Granada (1491) only for Moors in recently Islamic Granada. In July 30, 1492, all the Jewish community — some 200,000 people — were forcibly expelled.[21] The very next year the Alhambra decree under Archbishop Hernando de Talavera (1492) dismissed the Treaty of Granada and now the Muslim population of Granada was forced to convert or be expelled. In 1502, Queen Isabella I declared conversion to Catholicism compulsory within the Kingdom of Castile. King Charles V did the same to Moors in the Kingdom of Aragon in 1526, forcing conversions of its Muslim population during the Revolt of the Germanies.[22] Many local officials took advantage of the situation to seize property.
*
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconquista#Muslim_decline_and_defeat
 
Now I remember…the Persian conquest…and the Byzantines fought back and regained the Holy Land…the land of Judeo Christianity, 5,600 recorded history, and the Jews the Chosen people to bring the Savior and Redeemer into the world.

Persia and Allah did not bring us the Savior and Redeemer for our sins.

Now…when do we see Israel or Christianity seeking to overtake and force our faith on Mecca and Medina?
 
HI Martin,

I got this idea while reading the following extract:

Hope that helps 🙂

.
You did try to show however you should read the continuing context:

Here the Council document brings us to the Far East-first of all to Asia, a continent where the Church’s missionary activity, carried out since the times of the apostles, has borne, we must recognize, very modest fruit. It is well known that only a small percentage of the population on what is the largest continent believes in Christ.

This does not mean that the Church’s missionary effort has lapsed-quite the opposite: that effort has been and still remains intense. And yet the tradition of very ancient cultures, antedating Christianity, remains very strong in the East. Even if faith in Christ reaches hearts and minds, the negative connotations associated with the image of life in Western society (the

so-called Christian society) present a considerable obstacle to the acceptance of the Gospel. Mahatma Gandhi, Indian and Hindu, pointed this out many times, in his deeply evangelical manner. He was disillusioned with the ways in which Christianity was expressed in the political and social life of nations. Could a man who fought for the liberation of his great nation from colonial dependence accept Christianity in the same form as it had been imposed on his country by those same colonial powers?

The Second Vatican Council realized this difficulty. This is why the document on the relations between the Church and Hinduism and other religions of the Far East is so important. We read: “In Hinduism men explore the divine mystery and express it through an endless bounty of myths and through penetrating philosophical insight. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition, either by way of the ascetic life, profound meditation, or by taking refuge in God with love and trust. The various schools of Buddhism recognize the radical inadequacy of this malleable world and teach a way by which men, with devout and trusting hearts, can become capable either of reaching a state of perfect liberation, or of attaining, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination” (Nostra Aetate 2).

Further along, the Council remarks that “The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. The Church has a high regard for their conduct and way of life, for those precepts and doctrines which, although differing on many points from that which the Church believes and propounds, often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men. However, the Church proclaims, and is bound to proclaim that Christ is ‘the way and the truth and the life’ [Jn 14:6], in whom men must find the fullness of religious life and in whom God has reconciled everything to Himself” (Nostra Aetate 2).

The words of the Council recall the conviction, long rooted in the Tradition, of the existence of the so-called semina Verbi (seeds of the Word), present

in all religions. In the light of this conviction, the Church seeks to identify the semina Verbi present in the great traditions of the Far East, in order to trace a common path against the backdrop of the needs of the contemporary world. We can affirm that here the position of the Council is inspired by a truly

universal concern. The Church is guided by the faith that God the Creator wants to save all humankind in

Jesus Christ, the only mediator between God and man, inasmuch as He is the Redeemer of all humankind. The Paschal Mystery is equally available to all, and, through it, the way to eternal salvation is also open to all.

In another passage the Council says that the Holy Spirit works effectively even outside the visible structure of the Church (cf. Lumen Gentium 13), making use of these very semina Verbi, that constitute a kind of common soteriological root present in all religions.

I have been convinced of this on numerous occasions, both while visiting the countries of the Far East and while meeting representatives of those religions, especially during the historic meeting at Assisi, where we found ourselves gathered together praying for peace.

Thus, instead of marveling at the fact that Providence allows such a great variety of religions, we should be amazed at the number of common elements found within them.

At this point it would be helpful to recall all the primitive religions, the animistic religions which stress ancestor worship. It seems that those who practice them are particularly close to Christianity, and among them, the Church’s missionaries also find it easier to speak a common language. Is there, perhaps, in this veneration of ancestors a kind of preparation for the Christian faith in the Communion of Saints, in which all believers-whether living or dead-form a single community, a single body? And faith in the Communion of Saints is, ultimately, faith in Christ, who alone is the source of life and of holiness for all. There is nothing strange, then, that the African and Asian animists would become believers in Christ more easily than followers of the great religions of the Far East.

As the Council also noted, these last religions possess the characteristics of a system. They are systems of worship and also ethical systems, with a strong emphasis on good and evil. Certainly among these belong Chinese Confucianism and Taoism: Tao means eternal truth-something similar to the “Word”-which is reflected in the action of man by means of truth and moral good. The religions of the Far East have contributed greatly to the history of morality and culture, forming a national identity in the Chinese, Indians, Japanese, and Tibetans, and also in the peoples of Southeast Asia and the archipelagoes of the Pacific Ocean.

Contd…

More to follow…

MJ
 
Contd…

Some of these peoples come from age-old cultures. The indigenous peoples of Australia boast a history tens of thousands of years old, and their ethnic and religious tradition is older than that of Abraham and Moses.

Christ came into the world for all these peoples. He redeemed them all and has His own ways of reaching each of them in the present eschatological phase of salvation history. In fact, in those regions, many accept Him and many more have an implicit faith in Him (cf. Heb 11:6)."

Thus St. John Paul II was not talking about Muslims. But championing Jesus Christ who is Redeemer of this group even though they are not of Abrahamic heritage ie Monotheistic.

Once I have more time shall be mentioning what JPII honestly spoke about Islam, from Crossing the Threshold of Hope.

MJ
 
Regarding the Byzantines regaining the Holy Land, remember most Jews were expelled from Israel by the Romans.

The Holy Land is the source of our culture of faith, of salvation history going back beyond 2000 years of Christ, to the overall history of Judaism, whose calendar, I believe, around 5600.

We as Catholic Christians are fulfilled Jews. Our worship is based on biblical roots, this liturgy whose structure, parts, tone and spirit are the same today as around 100 AD, celebrated the same throughout the ancient Christian world. St. Justin the Martyr wrote a letter to the Emperor of Rome in 154 AD explaining what happens at Mass.

The Pre Islamic conquest of Jerusalem was just that, another power base land grab.
furthermore, the Umayyids who came in to take over Jerusalem, made a false land claim saying Muhammed had ascended to heaven there. The truth is if Muhammed had ascended to heaven from that alleged spot, he would have risen to heaven next to the St. Mary Major of Justinian Catholic Church!!

This church extended from the south to the north end of Jerusalem and over time it was finally destroyed by the Muslims in 702 AD or so.

(Today we are getting news that this monastery 1,400 years old, St. Elijah in Mosul, was destroyed by ISIS, and the sex attack New Year’s Eve 2016 that happened next to the Catholic Cathedral in Cologne had all the appearances of being staged, considering similar attacks throughout Europe. This cathedral is the largest in Europe, there were shots fired into it. Muhammed stated their final conquest would be Rome (Romiyya).

When you speak further of Crusaders stealing this or that…you have to go almost a thousand years forward. And you are describing are Frankish Crusaders who were offered a stay in Constantinople and support, and when finding it not there by the Byzantine Church, when on a rampage desecrating sacred places, of which the Byzantines are beginning to forgive that was initiated by Pope John Paul II.

The piece that is missing is that when those rogue Crusaders returned home, they were all excommunicated. So the Church never backed such sacrileges!

No I don’t see as a Bahai how you are justifying a few snippets of the ongoing battle by Islam to eventually take over the world that is most inhumane.
 
Arthra,

St. James the greater apostle, a chosen witness by Christ, travelled to Spain to establish Christ’s Church there. It is stated he left, but that story of St. James has other parts I need to study more, as there were legends entertwined, and if I am incorrect, wish someone to better clarify.

Spain’s character is Catholic. I will paraphrase to you from my source I read some time ago, ‘Blood Drenched Altars’ by Monsignor Kelly.

For English speaking people, the history of Spain is not understood.

Spain was invaded by the Moors in 711 AD. It was not friendly but hostile. During the next 700 years, the Catholic faith survived and because of the yoke of oppression by Islam, the persecutions produced people we still recall today -the priests, conquistadors, and those who brought the faith to the New World.

Spain was a Roman province inhabited by Swabian, Vandal, and Goths, and the Goths were those primarily who made Spain Catholic. The Visigoths managed for 300 years but the prosperity of nobles and clergy corrupted it. When the Moors arrived, only Spain’s Catholic soul survived. The Spanish kings went to the north and hoped and planned for the rebirth of Spain.

When there was resistance to the Moors, and their loss, the battle of Algeciras. Tarek captured many Spanish resistance were dismembered, and their flesh boiled in front of other captives. In the meantime, the Romans help fight the Moors with Spain for 10 years. The Vandals came into Andalusia. The Visigoths were Arians, who believed Christ separate from God, the Father and Holy Spirit. But they accepted Catholicity in 585 AD.

In the meantime, the Moors attempted to gain France but Charles Martel defeated them in 732 AD. The Moors settled in controlling Spain from south of its mountains while the Christian Spaniards remained in barren areas of the north, and centered in Asturias.

‘The Moors focused on one form of warfare – raids for treasure and slaves for fields and harems. The Moors forced Islam in the south till all of Moorish territory was comprised of Christian renegades…The renegades supplied the means to gain luxuries for the Moors.’

‘Contrary to the stories of those who endow the Moorish Kingdoms in Spain with learning, they did not favor it. Of science, there was little, of singing there was much. The philosopher Averroes had to stand before the Mosque of Cordova to be spit upon by the passing throng of Mohammedans. It is little that modern writers in English have told the truth about Moorish learning.’

We hear today that the Moors treated the Spaniards mildly. But the opposite.

‘Even the renegades (who supplied luxuries to the Moors) were oppressed and held in constant supervision. The Arab…did not care for work. The renegades cultivated the land. From the East came artists of all kinds. It is a strong conviction of historian Betrand that even the Alhambra was the planning of artists from the East and of Spanish building.’

‘The whole history of Arab life in Spain is gradually being rewritten to tell a story other than the popular one.’

‘Greed was the outstanding military vice…but instead chose to live on riches won by their regularly timed raids.’

And the Spaniards themselves took on the behavior of their oppressor…there was greed demonstrated by both sides and this was a characteristic of the Conquistadors in Mexico.

But back to Cordova, Spain, and the plight of the Spanish and Jewish people under Muslim rule. They were second class people, they had to wear green badges to identify themselves, they had little voice or representation in court, could not carry a prayer book or bible, could not prosletyze their faith. The truth of Cordova was that the Spanish were dhimmis.

When King Ferdinand and Isabella had power over Spain, they did have intentions to allow Muslims to remain. But there was a settlement of Muslims who then were causing all sorts of disorders and trouble and so were expelled. We see such behavior today.

To this day, Islam mourns over the loss of Spain, still believing it belongs to them.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not bear false witness.
 
I had a reference I’d like to offer Kathleen Gee regarding the conditions of Jews and Christians in an Islamic state… there’s an historical example offered in the following article which I think is fair… for your consideration:

bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/spain_1.shtml

🙂

During the “Reconquista” after the Christians returned to power the situation was reversed for Muslims… Jews were also expelled…

*The new Christian hierarchy demanded heavy taxes from non-Christians and gave them rights, such as in the Treaty of Granada (1491) only for Moors in recently Islamic Granada. In July 30, 1492, all the Jewish community — some 200,000 people — were forcibly expelled.[21] The very next year the Alhambra decree under Archbishop Hernando de Talavera (1492) dismissed the Treaty of Granada and now the Muslim population of Granada was forced to convert or be expelled. In 1502, Queen Isabella I declared conversion to Catholicism compulsory within the Kingdom of Castile. King Charles V did the same to Moors in the Kingdom of Aragon in 1526, forcing conversions of its Muslim population during the Revolt of the Germanies.[22] Many local officials took advantage of the situation to seize property.
*
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconquista#Muslim_decline_and_defeat
A good understanding of the Inquisitions

ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100803202319AArykaj
 
Kathleen Gee ,

Thanks for your post above… Historically I’d have to say that the Jews seem to have faired better under Muslim rule than they did under Christian rule…

It’s true Christians and Jews under Muslim rule were second class citizens…but they had some rights and some served the Muslim court…

One example of carnage that comes to mind is what happened at the siege of Jerusalem…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(1099

and the fact that John of Damascus was in the court of the Umayyads so he was tolerated and so were others.

he is said by some sources to have served as a Chief Administrator to the Muslim caliph of Damascus before his ordination

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Damascus

But admittedly this is a side track to the original title of the thread “Re. Allah” and I’d have to say that the name of God is sacred to Jews, Christians and Muslims alike…

Allah (English pronunciation: /ˈælə/, /ˈɑːlə/ or /əlˈlɑː/;[1][2] Arabic: الله‎ Allāh, IPA: ʔalˤˈlˤɑːh] ( listen)) is the Arabic word for God (al ilāh, literally “the God”), referring to the God in Abrahamic religions.[3][4][5] The word has cognates in other Semitic languages, including Elah in Aramaic, ʾĒl in Canaanite and Elohim in Hebrew.[6][7]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
 
The siege of Jerusalem by Omar the Umayyid was outside the city and yes, quite bloody and brutal…when Islam first took over…and remember, it created a religious event that never happened.

Muhammed rode past Jerusalem but had no interest in it.

The Umayyids were known for using Islam to make land grabs. The nephew of Muhammed witnessed this in Jerusalem. And this was one of the incidents that led to the great split between the Sunni’s and Shi ites’.

About the First Crusade, likewise you have to take into context how Palestine, Syria, Egypt, once teeming Christian populations with the expansion of Arabic Islam.

These Christian peoples fell by the sword, or were forced into conversions, subsequent female/child sex slavery and concubines, dhimmitude by Muslims in these former Christian countries.

Once a country falls under Islam, most cannot liberate themselves. And with dhimmitude and tax, many fell into Islam to simply have a better living, because otherwise, to live as a second class citizen or less, was too much for average people.

These Christian peoples cried out to the Church for 400 years. Jerusalem had various Islamic leaders, some good and some bad. There was a very bad Muslim leader at the time of the first Crusade along with pilgrims being killed by Seljuk Turks.

So yes, greater force was justified by the First Crusades considering the tortures and destruction Islam always imposes on its conquests’ resistance.

I don’t know why you keep bringing up the Ba Hai perspective to support the actions of Islam’s expansion as it violates the 10 commandments.

When the quest for power takes over, the first casualty is the truth.
 
Kathleen,

Thanks for your post…

May I suggest a text for you to review that may include some perspectives by T.W. Arnold?

archive.org/details/preachingislama00arnogoog

Also Wikipedia has an interesting article on the spread of Islam:

*There are a number of historians who see the rule of the Umayyads as responsible for setting up the “dhimmah” to increase taxes from the dhimmis to benefit the Arab Muslim community financially and to discourage conversion.[15] Islam was initially associated with the ethnic identity of the Arabs and required formal association with an Arab tribe and the adoption of the client status of mawali.[15] Governors lodged complaints with the caliph when he enacted laws that made conversion easier, depriving the provinces of revenues from the tax on non-Muslims.

During the following Abbasid period an enfranchisement was experienced by the mawali and a shift was made in the political conception from that of a primarily Arab empire to one of a Muslim empire[16] and c. 930 a law was enacted that required all bureaucrats of the empire to be Muslims.[15] Both periods were also marked by significant migrations of Arab tribes outwards from the Arabian Peninsula into the new territories.[16]
*
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam
 
Yes the migration of Arabs into former Christian countries by conquest and dhimmitude. These are not the actions of the followers of a true prophet of God.

By their fruit we shall know them.

And I do not know the background of the author you have shared. Is he English? It is the English following the Reformation that were responsible for creating misconceptions about the Spanish Inquisition and many English speaking people still believe them.

The Christian countries overtaken were apostolic, not Protestant, so a Protestant apologist for Islam would not have much sympathy for the plight of Middle East Christians. There were followers of Calvin and Luther who would ‘prefer the turban’ to the pope, and some joined the Muslims in attacking Western Europe.

I would find more credence in an apologist from a universal church perspective, I mean, those of the patriarchs of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople or Rome – these comprising the Universal Church.

Why are the Ba’Hais defending militant Islam?? I thought Ba Hais were for peace and universal fraternity. I am understanding Allah to be an Islamic concept of God, the topic of this thread.
 
Thanks, Jimmy DFG.

I am aware of BBC’s exemplary exoneration regarding the Inquisition, and the two types. In the Spanish Inquisitions, those being investigated were placed in apartments and not in prison, and the Church did all it could to exonerate them.

The millions of deaths is attributed to I believe a particular Englishman who lived in the 1600’s without any scholarly research, but easily believed by some Christians.

We can see Muslims and Coptic Christians get along in various places in Muslim countries.

But, 1400 years later, there is no improvement. World Watch stated 2015 was the worst year ever for persecution against Christians, North Korea about the top, followed by Middle Eastern countries.

I look for consistency of belief and practice…and Islam consistently wants to dominate.

I remember Hasantas remarks that Islam is more powerful. Certainly not by God but by men imposing, force.
 
Why are the Ba’Hais defending militant Islam?? I thought Ba Hais were for peace and universal fraternity. I am understanding Allah to be an Islamic concept of God, the topic of this thread.
As Baha’i’s we separate what was Lawful of God/Allah and what is not. The basis we use for this is Baha’ullah’s Guidance on all these subjects.

Thus to the original question;

“Why do some people insist that Allah is not the same God Christians know? Christians who speak Arabic use the word Allah”.

All that was said above is offer that it is the Same God as Christians know, and the dispute that Islam does not have teachings from that same God, for this reason or that reason, is a dispute not based on facts and thus needs further consideration.

Regards Tony
 
I read somewhere that such usage by Christians is limited.

And there are articles out there that go back to the original meaning of Allah that imply the spirit of darkness.

Regarding Spain and a brief history I shared with you, just recently the ‘UK Express’ had a video by ISIS showing Muslim countries and Spain with the whole map including Spain slowly turning red. Then an ISIS member said in regards to Al-Andalusia, the Muslim name of Spain, ‘We will recover our land from the conqueror.’

Those who live in Europe are aware that Muslims throughout it have this constant sadness and longing to regain Spain.

Spain became Catholic before Islam. The country was consecrated to God, to Christ. It is a Christian country irregardless of its own sins.
 
Kathleen,

Thanks for your post!

Regarding the author of the Preaching of Islam you can learn more about him at

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Walker_Arnold

You ask above:

*Why are the Ba’Hais defending militant Islam?? I thought Ba Hais were for peace and universal fraternity. I am understanding Allah to be an Islamic concept of God, the topic of this thread. *

Baha’is accept Prophet Muhammad and the Qur’an… We believe that just as some have hijacked religion for their own purposes … this has regrettably been done in Christianity as well as Islam, we need to encourage people to appreciate the great contributions of both religions and appreciate the positive contributions of the revealed religions of the past!

Thanks for your continued interest!

😉
 
My problem, Athra, is that I can draw a good number of quotes from the Quoran that reveals its violent nature.

I have to step back, to our Catholic Catechism, CCC’s 222 to 227.

CCC222: Believing in God, the only One, and loving him with all our being has enormous consequences for our whole life.

Islam says their God is not the same. We agree.

CCC223: It means coming to know God’s greatness and majesty: “Behold God is great, and we know him not.” Job 36:26. Therefore we must serve God first.

Yet although Islam affirms the same, the focus is not serving Him, but submitting to him as slave.

CCC224: It means living in thanksgiving: if God is the only One, everything we are and have comes from Him: “What have you that you did not receive?” “What shall I render to the Lord for all his bounty to me?” Psalm 116:12. True religion does not go and plunder and overcome to dominate and enslave.

CCC225: It means knowing the unity and true dignity of all men: Everyone is made in the image and likeness of God.

How is that in Islam when all the rest of God’s non Muslim population is the world is considered as Kuffir???

Aren’t there curses towards the infidels in Muslim sacred places – instead of praying for their conversion?

CCC226: It means making good use of created things: faith in God, the only One, leads us to use everything that is not God insofar as it brings us closer to him, and to detach ourselves from it insofar as it turns us a away from him.

From the CCC: St. Nicholas of Flue, ‘My Lord and my God, take from me everything that distances me from you. My Lord and my God, give me everything that brings me closer to you. My Lord and my God, detach me from myself to give my all to you.’

Athra, there is a different situation between an indigenous people who have developed their own culture and beliefs vs the oppressor who overcomes them, plunders and enslaves them. And yes, such people have the right to fight to take back their land for their people. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.

And this quote from St. Nicholas of Flue also gives us a reflection of what heaven will be for us. How does our concept of heaven – communion with God of Whom we can now see vs the Muslim’s view of heaven? Isn’t it carnal and sexual, a continuation of life from below?

The fact that you are a Ba Hai and do not follow wrong is very good. But how many are there of you? It seems many Muslims do not represent the militant. And by the militant, a Muslim man comes to my mind. He is not a warrior, a soldier. But he is remarking on the population increase by Muslims in Europe. He appears typical of those coming to the West to Islamize it. He said that for the Europeans to catch up, the men need to have 4 wives. And yet polygamy is impoverishing. Muhammed said to have 4 wives, did he not?
In Western countries, then it is the societies’ obligation to support polygamous marriages?

We cannot say both religions are the same or both started out similarly and both used wars.

The big difference is that Christianity did not start out making war on mankind. It did not plunder. It did not do land grab. It did not come to dominate. Yes, there are those in history who have contradicted Christ’s teachings. But Christ said the chaff will always be with the wheat in this life and those who endure to the end will be saved. And as you pointed out, the Byzantines did successfully war…but defensively, against the PreIslamic forces who briefly held the Holy Land.
 
Kathleen,

Thanks again for your post!

While the thread as you know is on “Allah” I understand you have a lot of issues such as history of your faith and Islam…

As I’ve encouraged you to read about how Islam spread I think I’ve offered you several citations to show that Christians and Jews were tolerated at various times in Islamic history…

You would like to discuss polygamy as well… *He said that for the Europeans to catch up, the men need to have 4 wives. And yet polygamy is impoverishing. Muhammed said to have 4 wives, did he not?
In Western countries, then it is the societies’ obligation to support polygamous marriages?
*

Whatever gentleman you were talking to may have shocked you…
There’s an interesting article on Polygamy at

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy_in_Christianity

Baha’is believe that each dispensation has had it’s own laws and ordinances… including our own… Some earlier laws and ordinances of Islam were abrogated by Baha’u’llah in the KItab-i-Aqdas or “Most Holy Book”:

Know thou that polygamy is not permitted under the law of
God, for contentment with one wife hath been clearly stipulated
.
Code:
(The Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 205)
As to your question above:

“Muhammed said to have 4 wives, did he not?” You may be referring to the Qur’anic verse…

*If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.
*
— Qur’an, Sura 4 (An-Nisa), Ayah 3

Now of course most people see the part about “Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four…” and overlook the part where it says: “**but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one>…”
**

Also people forget that Prophet Muhammad was raised in a polygamous society and the revelation from the Qur’an set a limit on the number of wives and stipulated the wives should be treated equitably and justly…

And while Prophet Muhammmad lived in a polygamous society He had only one wife Khadijeh for twenty four years until she passed on.

I’d urge you to read the following article…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygyny_in_Islam
 
Kathleen also wrote above:

“… the Muslim’s view of heaven? Isn’t it carnal and sexual, a continuation of life from below?”

Again the theme of the thread is “Allah” but as you’ve raised the issue I’ll attempt to answer your question here…

You may be thinking of the Qur’anic verses found in the fifty sixth Surih…Here translated by A. Yusuf Ali:

*10. And those Foremost (in Faith) will be Foremost (in the Hereafter).
  1. These will be those Nearest to Allah:
  2. In Gardens of Bliss:
  3. A number of people from those of old,
  4. And a few from those of later times.
  5. (They will be) on Thrones encrusted (with gold and precious stones).
  6. Reclining on them, facing each other.
  7. Round about them will (serve) youths of perpetual (freshness).
  8. With goblets, (shining) beakers, and cups (filled) out of clear-flowing fountains:
  9. No after-ache will they receive therefrom, nor will they suffer intoxication:
  10. And with fruits, any that they may select;
  11. And the flesh of fowls, any that they may desire.
  12. And (there will be) Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes –
  13. Like unto Pearls well-guarded.
  14. A Reward for the Deeds of their past (Life).
  15. No frivolity will they hear therein nor any taint of ill –
  16. Only the saying, “Peace! Peace.”
*…

Did you catch the 25th verse above?
  • "No frivolity will they hear therein nor any taint of ill – "
Another translator has the following:

*They will not hear therein any vain or sinful talk, (25) only the words of peace and tranquillity. *

Have a wonderful day Kathleen!
 
No frivolity…but many companions. Texts I have read point to sexual gratification, drinking wine.

Going back … Islam came 600 years later. Muhammed put himself in conflict with all those who are not Muslim. There are contradictions in word and action in how People of the Book are treated. Muslims deny the crucifixion. But they are outside the event by hundreds of years, and really cannot comment on it because they had no witnesses of their own traditions living there and being at Calvary.

So Islam in how it defines God is not in the position to say what happened in Christianity because Islam did not exist.

Here is the prayer we are praying daily this year in the universal Year of Mercy. In it is the reflection of Who is God to us and how He manifests to us, and how we are to respond.

I hope by this prayer you may see the face of God as we know Him Who calls us to serve our neighbor in mercy, to free captives and the oppressed, and to help the blind, the sickness that was the most common and healed.

"Lord Jesus C hrist,
help us to turn our hearts towards you.
You have us to be merciful like the Heavenly Father,
and have told us that whoever sees you sees Him,
Show us your face and we will be saved.

You are the visible face of the invisible Father
who manifests his power above all by forgiveness and mercy.
Let each of us,
members of our Church.
be your visible face in the world.

Send your Holy Spirit to sanctify each one of us with his anointing,
so that the Jubilee Mercy may be a year of grace from the Lord,
and that we, your Church, with renewed enthusiasm,
may bring good news to the poor,
proclaim liberty to captives and the oppressed,
and restore sight to the blind.

We ask this of you, Lord Jesus
through the intercession of Mary,
Mother of Mercy;
you who live and reign with the Father and the Holy Spirit
forever and ever.

Amen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top