Are Catholics allowed to refrute Islam?

[losh14]

Why do I ask this. Simple. Since we as Catholics agree that Islam claims to be an Abrahamic Religion. We have to acknowledge that there is some truth in Islam do to this. Does that mean we’re allowed to refrute it?

Yes, there is a spark of truth in that there is one God. Likewise, Protestants are sons and daughters of Abraham, but we refute the errors they proclaim.

Worse they don’t believe in sacred tradition and they accept only that sacred scripture which shares their views, that being the Didache, but the bulk of it they view as corrupted.

They also cite the Gospel of Barnabas. Oddly.

So this tends to lead me to believe that Islam and Christianity are not compatiable. They are opposed to each other.

They are not compatible. Salvation in Christianity requires faith in Jesus Christ as Lord, God, Savior and King. Salvation in Isalm is abrogated if you do this.

So how can I refrute them successfully? Or should I just let them believe as they believe and we believe as we believe?

“Should?” and “When?” are two different questions, though related.
Should? Yes. When? When can you?

Example - work is a bad place (even though a Muslim proselytized me at lunch today … grr… this is technically against our corporate policy which allows zero conversation about religion, but I’m mature enough to deal with him). Conversations in passing may or may not work. What I’ve found from Muslims is they tend to be very up-front about their faith and their objections to Christianity. Research the scripts (one is posted in the Catholic Answers article “The Call of the Minaret”) and have ready responses to them.

Note this is scarcely different from proselytizing by other Christians. Different substance, same need to be loving but speak correctly. Sidewalk evangelists are ready for a fight, and may even be looking for one. The more you know someone, the more the need to be gentle but firm.

 

[losh14]

Then by the same reasoning you must also believe that the Jewish people also worship a different God.

Think of it this way - if we (Catholics) believe there is only one God, then those who worship monotheistically must believe in the same God though via an errant concept of God. While they acknowledge God the Father, they miss God the Son and God the Holy Spirit - the same deity has revealed Himself to us in three persons. A poor comparison would be “I know J.T., he’s a dad” versus “I know J.T., he’s a statistician” versus “I know J.T., he’s married” and saying that only one of the three can be true.

Think of the most wretched example of Christianity - those funeral picketers from Wichita. Do they believe in the same God? Yes. But they’ve got Him all wrong.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Outstanding analogy and post, losh. Thank you.

Think of it this way - if we (Catholics) believe there is only one God, then those who worship monotheistically must believe in the same God though via an errant concept of God. While they acknowledge God the Father, they miss God the Son and God the Holy Spirit - the same deity has revealed Himself to us in three persons. A poor comparison would be “I know J.T., he’s a dad” versus “I know J.T., he’s a statistician” versus “I know J.T., he’s married” and saying that only one of the three can be true.

Think of the most wretched example of Christianity - those funeral picketers from Wichita. Do they believe in the same God? Yes. But they’ve got Him all wrong.

 

[rikkk1958]

Think of it this way - if we (Catholics) believe there is only one God, then those who worship monotheistically must believe in the same God though via an errant concept of God. While they acknowledge God the Father, they miss God the Son and God the Holy Spirit - the same deity has revealed Himself to us in three persons. A poor comparison would be “I know J.T., he’s a dad” versus “I know J.T., he’s a statistician” versus “I know J.T., he’s married” and saying that only one of the three can be true.

Think of the most wretched example of Christianity - those funeral picketers from Wichita. Do they believe in the same God? Yes. But they’ve got Him all wrong.

You got some logic in, how they miss the point who the Son and the Holy Spirit is. Were they not told about it? I believe they were. Do did they understand it? I don’t think so. My opinion on this is about the geographical history of the peninsula and how the people lived at that time. We have to remember that the peninsula was a lawless vast of land. Most people lived in folklore stories and were pagans.

We know that there were Christian Missionaries, and Jewish travelers during those times and they always rode on the caravans of merchants like Muhammed. If muhammed was really illiterate, then he heard the teachings of the Bible but could not get hold of the real truth by reading it. His memories served him with very limited scriptures.

I believe that Muhammed had the ambition to lead. He wanted to govern. With many different ideas he did not do well in the beginning and failed.

 

[Louie1983]

Ofcourse your allowed to refute islam!!!

Why wouldn’t you?

Listen, I’m all for dialogue and being charitable towards other faiths but the second they get something wrong about the catholic church or try to put their beliefs forward you have a responsibility to God and his church to correct them or at least try to - charitiably.

“preach the gospel, in season and out”

I once had a discussion about the faith with a muslim friend and he asked for my opinion on Islam, I gave it and he hasn’t spoken to me since.

 

[Contarini]

Why do I ask this. Simple. Since we as Catholics agree that Islam claims to be an Abrahamic Religion. We have to acknowledge that there is some truth in Islam do to this. Does that mean we’re allowed to refrute it?

I don’t follow this.

You can refute non-Catholic forms of Christianity.

You can refute Judaism.

You can even refute other Catholics.

So why not Muslims?

If you think people are wrong, say so, reasonably and respectfully. That applies pretty much across the board.

Of course Christians think Muslims are wrong on quite a few points.

People have this weird “all-or-nothing” attitude these days–either you condemn something as wholly evil or you have to say that it’s all A-OK. Why? This doesn’t seem logical at all.

But you need to be modest about just how sweeping and convincing an argument you are able to make, if you don’t know Arabic and aren’t deeply familiar with Islamic literature and with scholarly literature on Islam (not talking about anti-Islamic propaganda here).

I will argue with Muslims, but I recognize that there’s a lot I don’t know about Islam.

Edwin

 

[baylee]

Then by the same reasoning you must also believe that the Jewish people also worship a different God.

Peace!

Nope. The Jewish people know God through divine revelation. Muslims do not. Therein lies the difference. Divine, public revelation ended with the apostles.

As to the OP’s question, I am not surprised you feel the need to ask this question. It seems as if the perception in our church these days is that it doesn’t matter what religion you follow…as long as you are a good Jew or a good Muslim or a good Protestant. On the contrary, we should be evangelizing as best as we can.

 

[God_is_truth]

Why do I ask this. Simple. Since we as Catholics agree that Islam claims to be an Abrahamic Religion. We have to acknowledge that there is some truth in Islam do to this. Does that mean we’re allowed to refrute it? Why do I ask? They believe in God. Good so do we. But they don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus or the Trinity. In fact any who ascribe partners to God are unbelievers. To muslims Catholics are pagans. Worse they don’t believe in sacred tradition and they accept only that sacred scripture which shares their views, that being the Didache, but the bulk of it they view as corrupted. So this tends to lead me to believe that Islam and Christianity are not compatiable. They are opposed to each other. So how can I refrute them successfully? Or should I just let them believe as they believe and we believe as we believe?
sincerely,
gmcbroom

Just let them belive what they belive and vice versa. They have the rights to their beliefs and so do we. You can educate muslims and show them that Catholic christanity and other Christian dinominations are NOT pagan, though.

Their is a saying that goes like this:“preach the gospel, in season and out” . I love that saying. But i think that us as christians should preach to those who WANT to hear it.

 

[losh14]

You got some logic in, how they miss the point who the Son and the Holy Spirit is. Were they not told about it? I believe they were. Do did they understand it? I don’t think so.

This is a central mystery of evangelism. Why don’t people believe what is told them? The history of the peninsula has something to do with it, you can’t take people out of their culture. I know ex Catholics who still pray the rosary but haven’t been to Mass in years.

Then again, if I were to tell you something equally jarring to your idea of God - say that not only is God female but really two women, both named Janet, who will destroy the earth in a fierce cosmic tetherball match - you’d probably reject it prima facie.

It’s easier for Muslims to reject a Christian understanding of Jesus - and especially a Catholic understanding - because they have an alternate explanation. Jesus wasn’t divine, according to Islam, he was a prophet, second only to Muhammed. “There, look, we just honored Jesus. We’re not dissing him at all. Peace be upon him. Look, we even wrote an entire sura about Mary, his mother. We like her more than most Protestants do.”

So here the argument is against a false understanding of Jesus, and ultimately it goes back to which scripture are you going to believe. The Bible gives us a divine Jesus who died for our sins to open the doors of Heaven, an act that fulfills the Old Covenant and establishes the New Covenant, and God’s means of forgiveness in this world. The Quran gives us a really nice guy who God really likes but who never died, but that’s okay because there’s no Old Covenant or New Covenant to fulfill anyway.

Sorry for the snarkiness. I’m currently miffed at my lunchtime conversation having taken up more of my day than I had liked.

And Muhammed had aspirations to rule. How many Jewish or Christian religious leaders ever actually took up a sword?

 

[losh14]

People have this weird “all-or-nothing” attitude these days–either you condemn something as wholly evil or you have to say that it’s all A-OK. Why? This doesn’t seem logical at all.

You’re diplomatic to say this, so I’ll be impolite. People are wusses. We’ve let ourselves get watered down in discourse, which is problematic when the other guy is full of zeal. When you get buttonholed by someone with whom you disagree, I have no qualms with saying “I’m not in the mood to be proselytized today. Go away.”

But you need to be modest about just how sweeping and convincing an argument you are able to make, if you don’t know Arabic and aren’t deeply familiar with Islamic literature and with scholarly literature on Islam (not talking about anti-Islamic propaganda here).

I will argue with Muslims, but I recognize that there’s a lot I don’t know about Islam.

What helps when we’re put on the defensive is we at least have a topic on which we can be fairly knowledgeable. I may not understand the Islamic view of Jesus but I know my understanding of Him.

 

[losh14]

It seems as if the perception in our church these days is that it doesn’t matter what religion you follow…as long as you are a good Jew or a good Muslim or a good Protestant. On the contrary, we should be evangelizing as best as we can.

The massive corollary (and coronary perhaps) is that we’ve taken this lack of external zeal and sunk it internally. When we stop evangelizing ourselves we’re taking off our armor, dropping our swords and saying “HIT ME!”

 

[wwolverine]

Why do I ask this. Simple. Since we as Catholics agree that Islam claims to be an Abrahamic Religion. We have to acknowledge that there is some truth in Islam do to this. Does that mean we’re allowed to refrute it? Why do I ask? They believe in God. Good so do we. But they don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus or the Trinity. In fact any who ascribe partners to God are unbelievers. To muslims Catholics are pagans. Worse they don’t believe in sacred tradition and they accept only that sacred scripture which shares their views, that being the Didache, but the bulk of it they view as corrupted. So this tends to lead me to believe that Islam and Christianity are not compatiable. They are opposed to each other. So how can I refrute them successfully? Or should I just let them believe as they believe and we believe as we believe?
sincerely,
gmcbroom

I find it difficult to believe that Our God and Allah are same, Becuase Our God sent His Son to die on the cross for our sins. He lived an earthly life and did all that God wanted Him to do. He died and rose as was promised and as Jesus Himself said.

But Islamic Allah denies that all. So How can God and Allah differ on the same subject? According to Islam, Jesus was never crucified but someone else who was replaced and hence the people were fooled. Is our God a God of lies??? NO NEVER.

When I was questioned by a muslim on the subject, I asked him if Jesus was replaced at crucifiction, than why did God allow Him to endure all the punishments which came before the crucifiction, and he was unable to give me the answer.

God Bless

 

[wwolverine]

I’ve heard this argument before. Nope. If you read Genesis, God says “we” when he speaks, sounds trinitarian enough for me already. Then if you look, Catholics and Jews believe in the same salvation history up until Christ whereas the Muslims believe in an alternative route. The Fall is a different account and outcome, the situation with Abraham and Ishmael different, and Jesus is mischaracterized. In the Old Testament Christ is not present at all but we see Him in prophecy. So looking at the holy writings and character of God, we have common ground. Would I say that at this point Jews misunderstand the nature of God? You bet! If God is Trinity and they refuse to accept it and His Son, yes, then in effect, we do worship different gods. But as far as salvation history prior to the advent of our Lord, we have the same understanding of God. Muslims never did.

Peace back atcha!

You are absolutely right gurney, about WE, and it surprises me that even in Quran its mentioned upteen times yet they dont accept. All they come out with is the silly royal we.

God Bless

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

May Christ’s blessings be abundantly with you, too, Wolverine!

I seriously struggle with the catechism CCC 841 and just cannot understand how we Catholic faithful are supposed to stomach it? I think the intent behind it was the fervent ecumenical zeal of the Churchmen at the time who wanted to witness and entreat non-Christians to a conversation. But unfortunately the wording is so poor and scary to me that I can’t accept it. If the catechism is infallible as an extention of the papacy and magisterium and Church in general, I’m in deep trouble because I can’t accept 841?

Allah and Our Lord are not the same. Not even close.

Again, thanks for your words and may God bless you!

You are absolutely right gurney, about WE, and it surprises me that even in Quran its mentioned upteen times yet they dont accept. All they come out with is the silly royal we.

God Bless

 

[dzheremi]

Sometimes I really wonder!

The Catholic Church is far too squishy and indifferent on this matter for my taste, but I wouldn’t take even CCC 841 to mean that you are prohibited from pointing out the fallacies in Islam, of which there are many. At least I never got impression from anyone when I was a Catholic. Of course to go to town on Muslims is probably not the way to do it, but just think: if you don’t tell Muslims about the falsehood of their religion, where will they ever learn of it? Bad news and bad thoughts (a.k.a. anything that isn’t Islam) are simply not allowed within the Islamo-bubble, so you can count on others doing it for you right about the same time that Jesus Christ comes back as Muhammad’s understudy, as per the Qur’an…

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

“understudy” LOL

Sometimes I really wonder!

The Catholic Church is far too squishy and indifferent on this matter for my taste, but I wouldn’t take even CCC 841 to mean that you are prohibited from pointing out the fallacies in Islam, of which there are many. At least I never got impression from anyone when I was a Catholic. Of course to go to town on Muslims is probably not the way to do it, but just think: if you don’t tell Muslims about the falsehood of their religion, where will they ever learn of it? Bad news and bad thoughts (a.k.a. anything that isn’t Islam) are simply not allowed within the Islamo-bubble, so you can count on others doing it for you right about the same time that Jesus Christ comes back as Muhammad’s understudy, as per the Qur’an…

 

[Contarini]

I’ve heard this argument before. Nope. If you read Genesis, God says “we” when he speaks, sounds trinitarian enough for me already.

Never mind, of course, that most Biblical scholars think that it’s a “we” of majesty. As another poster pointed out, this occurs in the Qur’an as well. The poster did not appear to notice that this works quite strongly against the argument that the Allah of the Qur’an is other than the Christian God. If you want to say that the Qur’an is implicitly Trinitarian, then the God of the Qur’an is the true God misinterpreted by Muslims. But if you want to say that the “we” of the Qur’an is the we of majesty, then the same applies to the OT. And that is the most reasonable interpretation of what the original human authors intended.

Then if you look, Catholics and Jews believe in the same salvation history up until Christ whereas the Muslims believe in an alternative route.

That is a separate argument. It doesn’t affect the question of whether rejection of the Trinity constitutes worshiping a false god. The point remains unrefuted, and for the 100th time it works like this:

Jews have rejected the Trinity for the past 2000 years.

There is no evidence that Jews changed their view of God in so doing. As soon as they encountered the doctrine of the Trinity, they said, “that isn’t the view of God we have traditionally held.”

Furthermore, the arguments finding the Trinity in the OT are not supportable from a literal/historical point of view. There is not one shred of evidence that ancient Hebrews had anything like a concept of the Trinity, although there are a number of reasons to think that God inspired them to use language that pointed (without their knowing it) toward the doctrine of the Trinity.

Therefore, the point stands: if Muslims don’t believe in the true God, post-Christian Jews don’t either. And if post-Christian Jews don’t believe in the true God, then either pre-Christian Jews didn’t (which is obviously heretical), or post-Christian Jews changed gods without changing anything they believed about God, which makes no sense at all.

The Fall is a different account and outcome, the situation with Abraham and Ishmael different, and Jesus is mischaracterized. In the Old Testament Christ is not present at all but we see Him in prophecy. So looking at the holy writings and character of God, we have common ground. Would I say that at this point Jews misunderstand the nature of God? You bet! If God is Trinity and they refuse to accept it and His Son, yes, then in effect, we do worship different gods. But as far as salvation history prior to the advent of our Lord, we have the same understanding of God. Muslims never did.

You’re right that Christians and Jews accept the same OT narrative, while Muslims have altered the narrative. However, I don’t think it’s quite right to say that we have the same salvation history, because the interpretations are radically different. So no, we don’t have the same understanding of God in terms of salvation history. Nor, for that matter, do different Christian groups have the same understanding of salvation history. In fact, if it comes to that, Catholic/Orthodox Christians do not have exactly the same OT as Protestants and Jews, so even just in terms of the texts they don’t have the same narrative.

No matter which criterion you pick, the argument doesn’t work. That’s why you and others keep jumping back and forth from one criterion to the other–none of them actually work. Putting them together doesn’t help your case–it’s sheer sleight-of-hand.

Edwin

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Well, Edwin, I would never expect you to agree on me with anything anyway. That would set a precedent!

Never mind, of course, that most Biblical scholars think that it’s a “we” of majesty. As another poster pointed out, this occurs in the Qur’an as well. The poster did not appear to notice that this works quite strongly against the argument that the Allah of the Qur’an is other than the Christian God. If you want to say that the Qur’an is implicitly Trinitarian, then the God of the Qur’an is the true God misinterpreted by Muslims. But if you want to say that the “we” of the Qur’an is the we of majesty, then the same applies to the OT. And that is the most reasonable interpretation of what the original human authors intended.

That is a separate argument. It doesn’t affect the question of whether rejection of the Trinity constitutes worshiping a false god. The point remains unrefuted, and for the 100th time it works like this:

Jews have rejected the Trinity for the past 2000 years.

There is no evidence that Jews changed their view of God in so doing. As soon as they encountered the doctrine of the Trinity, they said, “that isn’t the view of God we have traditionally held.”

Furthermore, the arguments finding the Trinity in the OT are not supportable from a literal/historical point of view. There is not one shred of evidence that ancient Hebrews had anything like a concept of the Trinity, although there are a number of reasons to think that God inspired them to use language that pointed (without their knowing it) toward the doctrine of the Trinity.

Therefore, the point stands: if Muslims don’t believe in the true God, post-Christian Jews don’t either. And if post-Christian Jews don’t believe in the true God, then either pre-Christian Jews didn’t (which is obviously heretical), or post-Christian Jews changed gods without changing anything they believed about God, which makes no sense at all.

You’re right that Christians and Jews accept the same OT narrative, while Muslims have altered the narrative. However, I don’t think it’s quite right to say that we have the same salvation history, because the interpretations are radically different. So no, we don’t have the same understanding of God in terms of salvation history. Nor, for that matter, do different Christian groups have the same understanding of salvation history. In fact, if it comes to that, Catholic/Orthodox Christians do not have exactly the same OT as Protestants and Jews, so even just in terms of the texts they don’t have the same narrative.

No matter which criterion you pick, the argument doesn’t work. That’s why you and others keep jumping back and forth from one criterion to the other–none of them actually work. Putting them together doesn’t help your case–it’s sheer sleight-of-hand.

Edwin

 

[dzheremi]

No matter what you think about the use of “we” in the Holy Bible or the Qur’an, is God defined by His use of pronouns? I think that idea is silly, no matter where it comes from.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Agreed. Writing a half page about God’s pronoun usage is a questionable use of time!

No matter what you think about the use of “we” in the Holy Bible or the Qur’an, is God defined by His use of pronouns? I think that idea is silly, no matter where it comes from.