Bishop urges Christians to call God 'Allah'

[nonsumd]

I suppose it could be seen as a diplomatic approach by the Church in just saying that these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, professing it and whether they actually do is another thing.

In short thats the only link we have with them, but their view of God is different, yes we recognize One God, One Creator, but they don’t recognize Three Divine Persons, like most Christians.

In recognizing that the Muslims hold the Abrahamic faith, the Church is not being merely diplomatic, not merely humoring or indulging Muslims.

In Genesis, we see God, whatever His promises to Isaac and his descendants, also blessing Abraham’s son by the maidservant Hagar, Ishmael, and his descendants – the Arabs, including Muhammad, are Ishmael’s biological descendants and Muhammad’s followers, Muslims in general. are his and hence Abraham’s spiritual descendants.

The Jews do not recognize the Trinity either, yet we do not say that the Jews do not worship the same God as we Christians do.

The Mormons believe God the Father is a physical being begotten by an earlier God the Father himself begotten by an earlier God the Father and so on and so on in an infinite series; this is even more alien to Muslim and Jewish concepts of the one God (a completely spiritual being who does not beget a son) than it is to Christianity’s First Person of the Trinity (a completely spiritual being who does).

“Professing the faith of Abraham without following it” – if we read that a certain way, we could apply to many, if not most, Christians (myself included).

If we read it another way, we should remind ourselves that Abraham, though he did extend hospitality to the “three angels,” was not a Trinitarian. He did sacrifice to the God that was revealed to him, just as Muslims, professing that they follow Abraham’s example, sacrifice to God as they believe he has been revealed to them.

There are Muslims who say that because we Christians believe in a Trinity that we are polytheists and “may profess the Abrahamic faith but not follow it.”

As has been pointed out, Muslims have a much more exalted view of Jesus (believing his to have been a virgin birth, believing that he will return at the end of the time) than all non-Christians, even the Jews (who at best see him as a wise rabbi and at worst a blasphemer who deserved to be hung on a tree). Given that there are post-Christians who argue that Jesus was a figment of the Apostles’ or even later people’s feverish imaginations, Muslim ideas that recapitulate Arian or Docetist heresies do not seem that bad, certainly not bad enough to justify us Christians saying that they do not worship the same God as we do.

As some say, even the American Indians recognized the Great Spirit, at least they weren’t atheist, however barbaric some of their acts were, considering what is going on in the world today I suppose they had as much moral standards as some of us do.

There are more than enough valid accusations of barbarism to go around – against atheistic Communists, against pagan American Indians, against Muslims, and against Christians. I wouldn’t go there…

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

In recognizing that the Muslims hold the Abrahamic faith, the Church is not being merely diplomatic, not merely humoring or indulging Muslims.

Good for you. Is that why the Pope said this?

“Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

That is beyond diplomacy, I’m afraid.

nonsumd:

In Genesis, we see God, whatever His promises to Isaac and his descendants, also blessing Abraham’s son by the maidservant Hagar, Ishmael, and his descendants – the Arabs, including Muhammad, are Ishmael’s biological descendants and Muhammad’s followers, Muslims in general. are his and hence Abraham’s spiritual descendants.

Thanks for precluding the majority of humanity from your God.

nonsumd:

The Jews do not recognize the Trinity either, yet we do not say that the Jews do not worship the same God as we Christians do.

The link is clear: Jesus was a Jew, even a practising one, and his early converts were Jews. The OT used by the Christians is essentially the same as the Jewish text - without the claim that it has been corrupted.

In other words, the transition is believeable. Jesus never persecuted Jews but showed them love and forgiveness.

In contrast, Muhammad was not a Jew or a Christian but an Arab. He was also a killer, murderer, torturer, bandit-chief, village plunder, livestock rustler, war-monger who persecuted the Jews and Christians. He also claimed that the Jews and Christians have corrupted their scripture.

Now, why would you believe a man like that? A man who was worse than Charles Manson, Hitler and Ted Bundy put together tells you that he has spoken to an angel of God and is the last prophet - and you believe him? How do you know that his Allah is your god? Because he said so?

nonsumd:

The Mormons believe God the Father is a physical being begotten by an earlier God the Father himself begotten by an earlier God the Father and so on and so on in an infinite series; this is even more alien to Muslim and Jewish concepts of the one God (a completely spiritual being who does not beget a son) than it is to Christianity’s First Person of the Trinity (a completely spiritual being who does).

So the Mormon God is your god. Great.

“Professing the faith of Abraham without following it” – if we read that a certain way, we could apply to many, if not most, Christians (myself included).

If we read it another way, we should remind ourselves that Abraham, though he did extend hospitality to the “three angels,” was not a Trinitarian. He did sacrifice to the God that was revealed to him, just as Muslims, professing that they follow Abraham’s example, sacrifice to God as they believe he has been revealed to them.

I’d a little difficult for Abraham to be a Trinitarian before Jesus Christ, don’t you think?

nonsumd:

There are Muslims who say that because we Christians believe in a Trinity that we are polytheists and “may profess the Abrahamic faith but not follow it.”

Doesn’t this ring alarm bells for you?

nonsumd:

As has been pointed out, Muslims have a much more exalted view of Jesus (believing his to have been a virgin birth, believing that he will return at the end of the time) than all non-Christians, even the Jews (who at best see him as a wise rabbi and at worst a blasphemer who deserved to be hung on a tree). Given that there are post-Christians who argue that Jesus was a figment of the Apostles’ or even later people’s feverish imaginations, Muslim ideas that recapitulate Arian or Docetist heresies do not seem that bad, certainly not bad enough to justify us Christians saying that they do not worship the same God as we do.

Why give credence to a lie? We know that Muhammad claimed Jesus was just a man and not divine. We know that he claimed Jesus would return at the end of time.

These are merely claims. If they conflict with your theology, why do you give them brownie points over the other non-Christians? Do these other non-Christians persecute Christians as part of their theology? Are you so afraid of Buddhists and Jainists and Shinto-worshippers who wouldn’t hurt a fly that you would take the side of the Muslims (who persecute Christians) over them? This I do not understand.

nonsumd:

There are more than enough valid accusations of barbarism to go around – against atheistic Communists, against pagan American Indians, against Muslims, and against Christians. I wouldn’t go there…

Why do you make condemnation of evil an all or nothing propositions? Is it so black and white to you?

We should fight evil wherever we see it - and not desist merely because we are unable to fight all evil at once.

 

[Booklover]

Good for you. Is that why the Pope said this?

“Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

That is beyond diplomacy, I’m afraid.

Thanks for precluding the majority of humanity from your God.

The link is clear: Jesus was a Jew, even a practising one, and his early converts were Jews. The OT used by the Christians is essentially the same as the Jewish text - without the claim that it has been corrupted.

In other words, the transition is believeable. Jesus never persecuted Jews but showed them love and forgiveness.

In contrast, Muhammad was not a Jew or a Christian but an Arab. He was also a killer, murderer, torturer, bandit-chief, village plunder, livestock rustler, war-monger who persecuted the Jews and Christians. He also claimed that the Jews and Christians have corrupted their scripture.

Now, why would you believe a man like that? A man who was worse than Charles Manson, Hitler and Ted Bundy put together tells you that he has spoken to an angel of God and is the last prophet - and you believe him? How do you know that his Allah is your god? Because he said so?

So the Mormon God is your god. Great.

I’d a little difficult for Abraham to be a Trinitarian before Jesus Christ, don’t you think?

Doesn’t this ring alarm bells for you?

Why give credence to a lie? We know that Muhammad claimed Jesus was just a man and not divine. We know that he claimed Jesus would return at the end of time.

These are merely claims. If they conflict with your theology, why do you give them brownie points over the other non-Christians? Do these other non-Christians persecute Christians as part of their theology? Are you so afraid of Buddhists and Jainists and Shinto-worshippers who wouldn’t hurt a fly that you would take the side of the Muslims (who persecute Christians) over them? This I do not understand.

Why do you make condemnation of evil an all or nothing propositions? Is it so black and white to you?

We should fight evil wherever we see it - and not desist merely because we are unable to fight all evil at once.

Vickie

 

[birdsong]

Contarini wrote: Because there is only one God. To say that Muslims worship “a different god” is a figure of speech by which you are asserting that their concept of God is so distorted that you choose to name it according to what is false, not according to what is true. This is ontologically misguided. Goodness and truth are realities. Evil and falsehood are privations of the goodness and truth that should be there, not realities in and of themselves. Therefore, it is less misleading to say that Muslims have a defective understanding of the true God than to say that they worship a false god. The latter is to turn the absence of a perfectly true understanding into something positive and real, which it isn’t. (Obviously it is different when people explicitly worship a being who is not the author and creator of all reality.)

The poverty of your arguments is amazing Contarini. it gets worse by the minute. Anyways, I am going to refute your latest nonsense very easily: since it is always better to argue with as many facts as possible, allow me to expose the fallacy of your position:

1.- we know for a fact that “something” or “someone” told the muhamedans in the quoran that Jesus Christ does not have a divine status. I will not bother quoting the verses from that book of satan where such things are written, but I can do it if you want me to.

2.- logic tells us that two totally opposite arguments can not be true at the same time and in the same context. A beginners’ example would be “Contarini is Episcopal” and “Contarini is NOT Episcopal”. Obviously, since these two statements are contrary to each other, one of them has to be false.

3.- We know God does not lie or equivocates, and would never, ever lie or misstate anything about his creation, let alone his own Son.

4.- Christians and muhamedans both argue that their books are authored and/or inspired by God.

As you can see, from 1, 2 and 3, statement 4 necessarily implies that either muhamedans or Christians are mistaken.

What you imply about islamic theology and teachings containing bits of truth is hilarious, that’s a kinder garden type of argument. Of course, even the demons and devils are capable of stating the truth (remember when they were being cast out and acknowledged that Jesus Christ was the Son of God?). As the saying goes, even a broken clock has it right twice a day!

I am not arguing about what they should believe in, except that they should believe in Christ and the Blessed Trinity.

You can laugh at me, but that will not make my position any less coherent. .

How does this contradict anything I am saying?

Edwin

The above is destined to go down as an all-time blunder !!!



Basically, you are saying: “I am not telling them they should stop believing that there is NOT such a thing like the Trinity and that Jesus Christ is NOT divine (as per the quoran), I am only telling them to start believing in the Trinity and Jesus Christ!”



It saddens me to think of your poor students who have to listen to their “scholar in religion” spout balderdash non-stop for 1 hour or more every day, and perhaps even pay for it!

:crying: :crying:

 

[birdsong]

I’m not “catching on”–this is what I have been maintaining all along. I wish you would point out to some of your enthusiastic friends that their assertions about the Islamic God being “different” are actually just figures of speech.

Now you need to defend ontologically why you would name a thing from what is not rather than from what is.
Edwin

Ahh my good friend Contarini, you’re at it again, eh?

By your logic, and revisiting my previous reference to the devils and demons who recognised Jesus Christ as the Son of God, I am assuming you’d not have a problem defending and proclaiming the demons and devils as messengers/bearers of Truth, right?

 

[nonsumd]

Good for you. Is that why the Pope said this?

“Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

That is beyond diplomacy, I’m afraid.

Our Holy Father did not say that. He quoted a Byzantine emperor saying that. Are you as ignorant of what the Holy Father actually said as the Muslim fanatics who called for him to be killed for insulting Muhammad?

As far as I know, none of the Church’s statements recognizing that Muslims worship the God of Abraham make any reference, positive or negative, to Muhammad. They could be construed to mean that despite Muhammad’s errors Muslims still believe in Abraham’s God, just as those statements on the “separated brethren” can be interpreted to mean that despite the errors of Luther, Calvin, et al. Protestants still follow Christ (if without the fullness of revelation).

Thanks for precluding the majority of humanity from your God.

What are you talking about?

I don’t know about you, but I follow the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which says that God’s promises are given to all of humankind.

The link is clear: Jesus was a Jew, even a practising one, and his early converts were Jews. The OT used by the Christians is essentially the same as the Jewish text - without the claim that it has been corrupted.

In other words, the transition is believeable. Jesus never persecuted Jews but showed them love and forgiveness.

Muslims honor Jesus as a prophet, one second only to Muhammad and one who was accorded distinctions not given to Muhammad such as the Virgin Birth, which to my ears is better than how Jews have at least traditionally looked on Jesus, as a blasphemer. Muslims even honor Mary, which the Jews have never done.

In contrast, Muhammad was not a Jew or a Christian but an Arab.

And Confucius was not a Jew or a Christian but a Chinese. Is “Arabness” a religion like Christianity is? Is Chineseness a religion like Christianity? Are the Christians in China not Chinese?

He was also a killer, murderer, torturer, bandit-chief, village plunder, livestock rustler, war-monger who persecuted the Jews and Christians. He also claimed that the Jews and Christians have corrupted their scripture.

Now, why would you believe a man like that? A man who was worse than Charles Manson, Hitler and Ted Bundy put together tells you that he has spoken to an angel of God and is the last prophet - and you believe him? How do you know that his Allah is your god? Because he said so?

I do not judge Islam or Muslims on the basis on how moral a man I think Muhammad really was. All your charges against him could be leveled with at least some justice, though I think his conduct is not that different from that of many of the Old Testament prophets who waged war and divorced wives.

Though Jesus teaches me that I should not judge, I “judge” Muslims by their actions and I judge Islam idea by idea, many of which are the same as our ideas.

So the Mormon God is your god. Great.

I do not doubt the sincerity of Mormons when they say they worship God, and according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church God recognizes such sincerity and offers salvation to those who sincerely seek to do His will.

The Mormon idea of God is not my idea of God, but, as Contarini pointed out, no one’s idea of God matches or can match completely God’s idea of God, God in His awesome, ineffable reality. We Catholic Christians have the fullness of revelation, but we are wrong to assume and presume that God has given no revelation at all to non-Catholics or non-Christians. Original Sin deformed human nature but did not efface entirely the natural law from human hearts and the capacity to follow its dictates.

I’d a little difficult for Abraham to be a Trinitarian before Jesus Christ, don’t you think?

It’s difficult for people to be Trinitarians now, after Christ, isn’t it? That the Trinity is a difficult idea does not make it less true, but it should make us Christians humbly grateful for the gift of faith and more understanding of others who cannot get their minds around the idea (strictly speaking, we Christians cannot get our minds around it either). (cont.)

 

[nonsumd]

(cont.)

Originally Posted by nonsumd
There are Muslims who say that because we Christians believe in a Trinity that we are polytheists and "may profess the Abrahamic faith but not follow it.

"Doesn’t this ring alarm bells for you?

Shouldn’t it ring bells for you that you should understand other people’s perspectives before condemning them out of hand?

I have heard of Muslims describing Christians as polytheists and idolators. I have heard of Muslims describing Christians as “People of the Book” whose Prothet Jesus will speak for them at the Last Judgment. I have heard Protestants describe Catholics as idolators. I have heard Protestants describe Catholics as “brothers in Christ.”

Why give credence to a lie? We know that Muhammad claimed Jesus was just a man and not divine. We know that he claimed Jesus would return at the end of time.

These are merely claims. If they conflict with your theology, why do you give them brownie points over the other non-Christians? Do these other non-Christians persecute Christians as part of their theology? Are you so afraid of Buddhists and Jainists and Shinto-worshippers who wouldn’t hurt a fly that you would take the side of the Muslims (who persecute Christians) over them? This I do not understand.

There are historical reasons why Christians and Muslims are at war at the present time. Go back only a half-century and you will see Christians were at war with Buddhists and Shintoists (and Buddhist and Shinto authorities in Japan actively supported Japanese militarism). If the US were bombing Jain communities, I think Jainist commitment to non-violence would be sorely tested, don’t you think?

The Muslims are substantially closer in their beliefs to us than non-Christians/non-Jews/non-Muslims – that is why there is so much enmity between Christians, Jews, and Muslims because we are all fighting over the same theological turf. In fact, historically, Christians have felt more enmity towards Jews on purely theological grounds (“the Jews killed Christ”), whereas Christians have hated Muslims more out of fear of the power of Islamic states (“the Muslims weren’t there on Good Friday”).

Why do you make condemnation of evil an all or nothing propositions? Is it so black and white to you?

We should fight evil wherever we see it - and not desist merely because we are unable to fight all evil at once.

Who is saying we should not fight terrorism?

All I am saying is that if you want to stop the terrorism of Islamic extremists you do not do so by categorically condemning Islam and thus alienating the vast majority of Muslims who are not terrorists. They will see how you are content with a caricature of their religion and judge that you are only seeking justifications for your colonialist aggression against the whole Islamic world and they will find the extremists even more convincing.

Let us not answer the bigotry of Islamic extremists with bigotry of our own. To modify Gandhi, you put out your own eye, I put out my own eye, and we all end up blind.

 

[PapaSquash]

1.- we know for a fact that “something” or “someone” told the muhamedans in the quoran that Jesus Christ does not have a divine status. I will not bother quoting the verses from that book of satan where such things are written, but I can do it if you want me to.

You are going to argue from the Q’ran, that the Q’ran is supernatural revelation? We only know from the Q’ran that the Q’ran CLAIMS to be revelation. Mohammed may have just made up the whole thing. Doesn’t matter anyway.

You, me and Edwin all agree that Muslims are mistaken. The Q’ran does not accurately reflect the reality of the Creator. To me it appears to be a fairly obvious crib of a Gnostic/Docetic heresy that Mohammed got from one of his wives and used to create a new Arabic society. Whether his influence was demonic or merely political, or if he thought he was really bringing some form of enlightenment to the masses, I don’t know. Since it works contrary to the spread of the gospel I have the think the enemy has a more than passing interest in it. To the polytheistic folks of the time it was the change to monotheism that was a nugget of truth in all that Q’ranic dross. There is, in fact, as the Q’ran asserts, only one God. The fact that people might permit or commit all manner of nastiness and claim that it is in his name does not change his name or nature one bit. He is God. The fact that someone’s co-relgionists might have some wrong-headed notions about the supreme being doesn’t mean that his supplications and prayers get re-routed to some non-existent destination.

There is only one occupant of the office of Supreme Being, Creator of the Universe. No one now on earth, worships him perfectly as he deserves. Some are WAY off the beam.

One of the reasons I think the Muslim heresy (and that’s what it is) is so persistent is that it has just enough truth to give it some roots. The best lies always do. The pre-existing paganism on the Arabian penninsula would have been easily swept aside by the gospel. Islam is appealing enough that it has proven to be very difficult to correct.

We know how it ends though.

 

[nonsumd]

Whether his influence was demonic or merely political, or if he thought he was really bringing some form of enlightenment to the masses, I don’t know. Since it works contrary to the spread of the gospel I have the think the enemy has a more than passing interest in it. To the polytheistic folks of the time it was the change to monotheism that was a nugget of truth in all that Q’ranic dross. There is, in fact, as the Q’ran asserts, only one God.

Muhammad taught that infanticide was was wrong to a society where it was commonly practiced. In that respect, he was more enlightened than many a Catholic politician in the US today.

I think there is more than a nugget of truth in the Qur’an: there is a whole rock of it, the same rock under which the Gospel of Thomas says you will find Jesus!

The enemy is working everywhere, we can presume – the only place I know for sure, though, where he is working is inside me (though the wrong that I do is ultimately mine and not the tempter’s).

The spread of Islam can be seen as contrary to the spread of the Gospel, particularly where Christians are converting to Islam, but where Islam is introducing belief in One God and many of the moral principles that the Gospel teaches I can only see God’s hand at work and perhaps hopefully a preparation for the eventual spread of the Gospel.

One of the reasons I think the Muslim heresy (and that’s what it is) is so persistent is that it has just enough truth to give it some roots. The best lies always do. The pre-existing paganism on the Arabian penninsula would have been easily swept aside by the gospel. Islam is appealing enough that it has proven to be very difficult to correct.

The fact is is that Christianity (though generally non-orthodox versions) was already being spread in Arabia long before the time of Muhammad and did not sweep away the old paganism (even though whole kingdoms and tribes had converted to Christianity).

Islam is an easier doctrine to accept than Catholicism – and in many of the same ways various Protestantisms are also easier to accept than Catholicism. Like its founder, Catholicism remains more of a “sign of contradiction” than any of its rivals, Christian or non-Christian. In the modern world, Islam can appeal to people both as more “rational” than Trinitarian Christianity and as a “religion of the oppressed” (in a world where colonial and neo-colonial powers have, except in the Soviet Communist and Japanese militarist cases, identified themselves as Christian).

 

[nonsumd]

Jim Jones (the Koolaid guy) did what he did “in the name of God.”

I solidarity with Jim Jones’ victims, I will never call God “God” again.

What do the Jains call God again? Or do they believe in a god at all?

 

[Mag_Uidhir]

Good for you. Is that why the Pope said this?

“Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

That is beyond diplomacy, I’m afraid.

Thanks for precluding the majority of humanity from your God.

The link is clear: Jesus was a Jew, even a practising one, and his early converts were Jews. The OT used by the Christians is essentially the same as the Jewish text - without the claim that it has been corrupted.

In other words, the transition is believeable. Jesus never persecuted Jews but showed them love and forgiveness.

In contrast, Muhammad was not a Jew or a Christian but an Arab. He was also a killer, murderer, torturer, bandit-chief, village plunder, livestock rustler, war-monger who persecuted the Jews and Christians. He also claimed that the Jews and Christians have corrupted their scripture.

Now, why would you believe a man like that? A man who was worse than Charles Manson, Hitler and Ted Bundy put together tells you that he has spoken to an angel of God and is the last prophet - and you believe him? How do you know that his Allah is your god? Because he said so?

So the Mormon God is your god. Great.

I’d a little difficult for Abraham to be a Trinitarian before Jesus Christ, don’t you think?

Doesn’t this ring alarm bells for you?

Why give credence to a lie? We know that Muhammad claimed Jesus was just a man and not divine. We know that he claimed Jesus would return at the end of time.

These are merely claims. If they conflict with your theology, why do you give them brownie points over the other non-Christians? Do these other non-Christians persecute Christians as part of their theology? Are you so afraid of Buddhists and Jainists and Shinto-worshippers who wouldn’t hurt a fly that you would take the side of the Muslims (who persecute Christians) over them? This I do not understand.

Why do you make condemnation of evil an all or nothing propositions? Is it so black and white to you?

We should fight evil wherever we see it - and not desist merely because we are unable to fight all evil at once.

 

[Crusader1095]

This bishop is under some kind of delusion, if I were the Pope I’d have him questioned by the Inquisition.

 

[dessert]

Jim Jones (the Koolaid guy) did what he did “in the name of God.”
**I’m sure you will agree that this was an idol god ,thus himself as he set himself up as a god to all those people. **

I solidarity with Jim Jones’ victims, I will never call God “God” again.**
i was sad for the victims too **

What do the Jains call God again? Or do they believe in a god at all?

**I think they have another name, probably Karma. **

**We are in need of hearing God call us, hearing His voice, which is granted not an easy thing. **
Dessert

 

[nonsumd]

Originally Posted by nonsumd
Jim Jones (the Koolaid guy) did what he did “in the name of God.”**

I’m sure you will agree that this was an idol god ,thus himself as he set himself up as a god to all those people.**

I guess you didn’t get my joke…

Some Christians are saying that Muslims are doing evil in the name of Allah, therefore Arab-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Allah.”

Some Spanish-speaking non-Christians are running around doing evil in the name of “Dios,” therefore Spanish-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Dios.”

Some Chinese-speaking non-Christians are running around doing evil in the name of “Tianzhu,” therefore Chinese-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Tianzhu.”

I say a particular table has a square top. Another guy says the same table has a rectangular table top. I tell him he has no right to call that table a “table.”

 

[Tiree]

I address God as: Allah, Jehovah and Father, in my prayer for world peace and frienship between all religions. All life comes from God and Christians, Muslims and Jews believe that.

If God created us then He is our Father and we are all brothers and sisters regardless of theological differences.

As Jesus said (Mt.7) “Love the Lord, your God, with your whole heart, your whole soul and with all your mind… and love your neighbor as yourself. These two commandments sum up all of the Law and the Prophets.”

It makes no difference, I’m sure, what we call God, as long as it’s done with respect and proper humility towards our Creator.

Peace,
Tiree

 

[Contarini]

Ahh my good friend Contarini, you’re at it again, eh?

By your logic, and revisiting my previous reference to the devils and demons who recognised Jesus Christ as the Son of God, I am assuming you’d not have a problem defending and proclaiming the demons and devils as messengers/bearers of Truth, right?

They do not intend to be messengers or bearers of Truth. They bear witness to the truth only unwillingly.

Now, how is that relevant?

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

1.- we know for a fact that “something” or “someone” told the muhamedans in the quoran that Jesus Christ does not have a divine status.

Right. And that something or someone (which might well have been Muhammad’s own fevered brain) was clearly not God. No dispute there.

As you can see, from 1, 2 and 3, statement 4 necessarily implies that either muhamedans or Christians are mistaken.

You have not refuted anything I said. I never suggested that Muslims were not mistaken. It is very easy to refute anyone if you simply make things up and falsely ascribe them to your opponent.

What you imply about islamic theology and teachings containing bits of truth is hilarious, that’s a kinder garden type of argument. Of course, even the demons and devils are capable of stating the truth (remember when they were being cast out and acknowledged that Jesus Christ was the Son of God?).

Because they couldn’t help it. They were acknowledging Christ as their enemy.

Muhammad did not proclaim One God unwillingly or as his enemy. He proclaimed One God against his own self-interest and against the interests of his clan. He put his own life in danger by doing so. (Yes, he did a lot of nasty things as well later on, but one true fact doesn’t cancel out another.) He proclaimed one God who created the universe and desired justice for widows and orphans. That is not Satanic talk. Clearly that part of his message came from God.

Basically, you are saying: “I am not telling them they should stop believing that there is NOT such a thing like the Trinity and that Jesus Christ is NOT divine (as per the quoran), I am only telling them to start believing in the Trinity and Jesus Christ!”

Again, you are making this up. I said nothing of the sort. People should believe what is true (such as that there is one invisible Creator who loves justice) and not believe what is false (such as that Jesus Christ is just a prophet and not the Eternal Son of God, or that Muhammad’s message should be spread by conquest and unbelievers should be subjugated).

I basically agree with what the Byzantine emperor quoted by the Pope said–by and large, what is good in Muhammad’s message is what he took from Judaism and Christianity.

Edwin

 

[dessert]

I guess you didn’t get my joke…

Some Christians are saying that Muslims are doing evil in the name of Allah, therefore Arab-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Allah.”

Some Spanish-speaking non-Christians are running around doing evil in the name of “Dios,” therefore Spanish-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Dios.”

Some Chinese-speaking non-Christians are running around doing evil in the name of “Tianzhu,” therefore Chinese-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Tianzhu.”

I say a particular table has a square top. Another guy says the same table has a rectangular table top. I tell him he has no right to call that table a “table.”

d
Didn’t meant to get back so late.
Add some smiles to your statements I’m a little slow.
sarccastic or
making a stupid funny or mean just the opposite
you know what I mean sort of
Thanks Dessert

 

[dessert]

I guess you didn’t get my joke…

Some Christians are saying that Muslims are doing evil in the name of Allah, therefore Arab-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Allah.”

Some Spanish-speaking non-Christians are running around doing evil in the name of “Dios,” therefore Spanish-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Dios.”

Some Chinese-speaking non-Christians are running around doing evil in the name of “Tianzhu,” therefore Chinese-speaking Christians should stop calling the Christian God “Tianzhu.”

I say a particular table has a square top. Another guy says the same table has a rectangular table top. I tell him he has no right to call that table a “table.”

You are talking about stereotyping, this is wrong.

If my last name was Smith and there was a Smith that robbed a bank they have to prove it was me not just go by my name being Smith.

And if my last name was Mc Donald does not mean I can walk into the franchise and demand a cut of the profits.

Therefore the Muslims don’t call themselves Christians, they are not folowers of Christ.
I don’t call a Muslim or Islam, Christian and it stands to reason they aren’t saying God but Allah, just like other “religions” say god with a little g as god, trying to distinguish themselves from the supreme being.

If I was speaking with some one about their belief in Budda I would not say God to them I would say Buddah.

I can ask God to bless them any one as this is the love God wants us to share, God says not to curse but to ask his peace and blessings. Dessert

 

[nonsumd]

d
Didn’t meant to get back so late.
Add some smiles to your statements I’m a little slow.
sarccastic or
making a stupid funny or mean just the opposite
you know what I mean sort of
Thanks Dessert

Sorry, Dessert.

If there’d been a “being ironic” face, I’d have added that, but that would kind of defeat the point of being ironic, wouldn’t it?

I thought the might come off as condescending, plus it looks like someone thinking about something other than what the person they’re talking to is talking about.

I don’t like the . It reminds me that I’ve been procrastinating about going to the dentist for a check-up.

Cheers!