Catholic Considering Islam

[Cecilianus]

(The schism was re-established several centuries later - 17th c. I think - over a dispute between two contendants to the office of Catholicos, and they appealed to the Pope; the loser was a little less than willing to actually accept the Pope’s judgment, however.)

Make that 1552, not 17th century.

 

[dzheremi]

The story goes they were Monothelites. If they were, they never realized that they had drifted to anything different than the orthodoxy of the rest of the Church, because by the time the Crusades rolled around they thought they were Catholics. They have always been in full union with Rome.

Ahhh, okay. Now we’re getting somewhere! Reading about the Monothelites I find it hard to believe that they were in full union with Rome for any extended period of time, as Pope Honorius I supported them (apparently as a means to bring the Monophysites back into communion with the Chaldeonians), but their position was condemned as heresy at the Third Council of Constantinople in 680-681 (where Honorius himself was also condemned).

What gives?

 

[inJESUS]

inJESUS;5662157:

The only thing you seem to know about Mohammed is fact you been reading from some antiislamic sites…no point argumenting against it since yuo hve no will to find out the truth

but anyway,the prophet did not change anything,judaism and islam are more similar then judaism and christianity…there you see how much Mohammed changed and how much Paul changed

your only excuse is anti Islamic sites…but put in mind that i live among Muslims and am exposed to your ideologies and books all the time so i know what i am talking about when i compare Paul to a man who used to jump from bed to bed including sexual slaves and his adopted son’s wive, and who attacked and beheaded and killed and sent people to kill people who do not believe in Muhammad…if this is good and Paul’s life reflects a bad man than you have a serious flawed view of good and evil thanks to Muhammad.

 

[bosnian_muslim]

]where’s your evidence that Paul changed 90% of the religion ? all he did was say that gentile converts should not have to follow the law because they under the grace of Jesus Christ. He did not allow forbidden things he said that gentiles were under grace not the law as he thought that the law will not save people only Christ can.

thats what im talking about,he changed the religion so that the people would follow it…with the rules,not many would accept christianity

Then Muslims say that the NT doesn’t contain the words of Jesus because its in Greek not Aramaic or Hebrew. Well I could argue that Mohammad invented Islam because he never met any of the prophets he preached about and his koran has them speaking in qurashi Arabic a language they never spoke either.

How can that be the same? the words in Koran are not Mohameds but Gods,Mohamed is just the prophet,he had no idea about the prophets,he could not read,nor could he write…he didnt have any controll over anything,he just shared with people the things he was suposed to share

no its not a silly question my point was you cannot judge all of Christianity by the actions of some Serb nationalists who’s actions have nothing to do with the teachings of Christianity. If so then am I to judge all Muslims and Islam by the actions of terrorists or the genocide in Sudan? That is hypocrisy sir.

im not a sir,im a female as i said before

im not judging all christianity,where did i say that? i was talking about the cultural and historical background of the Bosniaks.They associate christianity with serbs,and they dont like serbs.I didnt say it was right,i just said that it was so.

My point was the Turks as you will know perpetrated many horrid acts during their conquest and subjugation of our people yet that doesn’t stop you from following Islam so the actions of those Serbs who committed genocide should not stop you or any Bosnians from following Christianity .

no it should not,but i dont want to follow christianity because of religious,not political reasons

1st Croatians all hate the church and now im a pagan traitor. Wow you are just so amiable. 1st off before the southern slavs were converted to Christianity they were all pagan. That includes you Bosnians too. You must be a pagan traitor too then?

That was just an answer to those who call us bosniaks “traitors” because we converted to islam.We converted by our own will,and we want to be muslims,and if that makes us traitors then they are also traitors since their/your people converted to christianity(you were not christians always,its like some of you believe that the slavs became christians direct after the Big Bang lol)

 

[bosnian_muslim]

It does make a difference. Assuming he is not imaginary, there should be some accounting for this. The idea that he was a Maronite seems less likely. Jacobite, perhaps (I have read some Orthodox anti-Catholic writings that claim that the Maronites were Jacobites before the union with Rome…I have no idea how true that is). Point being, no monk of any orthodox form of Christianity would ever accept Muhammad’s supposed prophethood.

This is certainly news to them!

An interesting idea. You would think a church rebuilt with Muhammad’s own hands would stand today, as every available evidence of the man’s life is so highly prized by Muslims.

They were sent packing, and those were the lucky ones. Unlike many Muslims, I can be honest about the history of my religion. As far as I’ve studied it, I can’t say I agree with things like the Inquisition, but I certainly likewise will not apologize for the Reconquista (which is, of course, a different event). It hurts to lose things, I know, but this is one example of a reversal of fortune among how many successes that were themselves brutal and resulted in tremendous loss of life and hardship for the conquered? And I don’t exactly see you crying over the loss of life, property and all the rest at the hands of the Muslims anywhere else in the world. Basically, Muslims have this ONE defeat (which, lest anyone think I am of any other opinion, they did deserve), being exiled from a land that they had taken using similarly brutal tactics in the first place, and they milk it and complain to the ends of the earth looking for sympathy. I don’t know what to say other than that it hurts to be on the receiving end of the same sort of viciousness displayed towards the kuffar in other situations. If your style of argumentation is any indication, Bosnian Muslim, it would seem that Muslims have learned nothing from it other than how to manipulate history so as to bolster their already incredibly inflated sense of victimhood.

The Jews of Spain fled to many places, including North Africa. I know some Spanish-speaking Moroccans from Tetuan, actually. Nice guys. Don’t know if they’re Jews or what. Anyway, what’s your point?

I cant believe you say they deserved to be killed? may i remind you that most of the muslims in Spain at that time were spanish(converts) ? only the rulers were arab,and what about the forced convertions? many of them fled because of that,others were killed.Is that according to your faith okey?

the jews were saved by the muslims,Sarajevo has one of the oldest synagogues from that time.Even today we have a jewish ,community,among local bosnians they were called "spanci(spanish).Same thing in Istanbul,Morroco and many others muslim places.Its interesting to note that when they came the sultan(political leader) wanted to force them to convert to islam,and then the spiritual leader of the muslims,sejh ul islam,said that he will not allow it since it is against the islamic teachings.It tells a lot about the differences between islam and christianity(who forced people to convert in every part of the world where they had power,just look at latin America )

An interesting idea. You would think a church rebuilt with Muhammad’s own hands would stand today, as every available evidence of the man’s life is so highly prized by Muslims.

the muslims destroyed the house were he lived,they destroyed the grave of his mother,they even destroyed one of his mosques

so sorry,we do not do such things…it is considered to be wrong because it can lead to idol worshiping…just look at you guys,it all happened because of all the pilgrimage places,saints and stuff.It made a monotheist people become idol worshipers

 

[dzheremi]

I cant believe you say they deserved to be killed?

Excuse me? Where do you get that idea from anything I’ve written?

may i remind you that most of the muslims in Spain at that time were spanish(converts)?

So what? This is true by the end of the TENTH century, but not before. And even so, again, so what? Is the fact that the majority of Christians converted to Islam after 300 years of oppression supposed to be teaching me something? Yeah, being treated as a second class citizen and forced to pay humiliating taxes is not good, and many people converted rather than continue living that way. In this respect, Spain is no different than the other places Muslims conquered.

only the rulers were arab,and what about the forced convertions? many of them fled because of that,others were killed.Is that according to your faith okey?

The forced conversions of who? Muladis? Jews? Christians? (It is not clear who you’re talking about here)

Anyway, forced conversion of anyone is not okay ever. And if it is not okay when Christians do it, then it was certainly likewise not okay when Muslims did it previously in the first place. That’s the problem that it always comes down to when discussing this or any other part of Islamic history with Muslims: No one ever converts to Islam for any other reason then that they just loooove it so much. Nevermind how many period resources that you can show that prove otherwise or how many scholarly books you can cite, it’s all “anti-Islamic” and therefore a distortion that is useless against the power of Muslims’ willful ignorance of the truth of their own history.

the jews were saved by the muslims,Sarajevo has one of the oldest synagogues from that time.Even today we have a jewish ,community,among local bosnians they were called "spanci(spanish).

Indeed. Again, not to be rude, but what is your point here? That the Bosnians were nicer to the Jews at that time than the Spanish were? I don’t doubt it. It’s not that Christians are always nice and kind and all-good simply by virtue of their being Christians. At other times in history (for instance, the Farhud in Iraq in 1941), it has been Muslims who have killed Jews indescriminantly. It is fair to say that the Jews have been the scapegoats of many people, and while I think it is commendable that many people also helped them in the face of persecution, I think you are dreaming if you think that you have any right as a Muslim to talk down to any other religious group with regard to treatment of Jews. Maybe Bosnia is a good example of tolerance, but much of the rest of the Muslim world is not.

Same thing in Istanbul,Morroco and many others muslim places.Its interesting to note that when they came the sultan(political leader) wanted to force them to convert to islam,and then the spiritual leader of the muslims,sejh ul islam,said that he will not allow it since it is against the islamic teachings.

That’s good.

It tells a lot about the differences between islam and christianity(who forced people to convert in every part of the world where they had power,just look at latin America )

Yes, there were a lot of forced conversions in Latin America at the hands of the conquistadores. No Latino that I’ve ever known denies this, including those within my own family. But you know what? Better to be Christian than to be Muslim. By and large, Latinos do not see Islam as being a good religion for them. It has far better success among blacks, for whatever reason.

the muslims destroyed the house were he lived,they destroyed the grave of his mother,they even destroyed one of his mosques

Okay. I have seen letters with his insignia on them in various museums, together with mideval Qur’ans and the like. I figured something built by him might fit in with that sort of thing. I guess not.

so sorry,we do not do such things…it is considered to be wrong because it can lead to idol worshiping.

I guess…if you’re an idiot. This reminds me of the Taliban excuse for blowing up the Buddha statues at Bamiyan, that they might lead the people of the area to idol worship. Hahaha. I don’t know if that’s actually the reason given, but that was reported in some news outlets…silly, isn’t it? “Idol” worship of the Buddha by who? There are no Buddhists today in Afghanistan!

just look at you guys,it all happened because of all the pilgrimage places,saints and stuff.It made a monotheist people become idol worshipers

Ouch. My feelings. Hey, don’t forget to offer salat to Allat, al-Uzza and Manat in kind…

 

[planten]

bosnian_muslim;5662238:

your only excuse is anti Islamic sites…but put in mind that i live among Muslims and am exposed to your ideologies and books all the time so i know what i am talking about when i compare Paul to a man who used to jump from bed to bed including sexual slaves and his adopted son’s wive, and who attacked and beheaded and killed and sent people to kill people who do not believe in Muhammad…if this is good and Paul’s life reflects a bad man than you have a serious flawed view of good and evil thanks to Muhammad.

** inJesus, nobody will believe what you have written. We do not know Paul (or in reality Saul of Tarsus, the enemy of Jesus). No muslim will go near Paul. It is your own will that you honor him. We do not respect Paul. Because you have been jumping around against Muhammad all over the place, so I tell you that Saul was the first Anti-Christ which you have failed to recognise.

Okay, more about Paul. He was the wolf in sheep clothing who came among the poor sheep of Jesus and found that there was no shepherd. He devoured the sheep mercilessly. Please do not mind and no one should mind my saying. inJesus has given his opinion about our prophet who was a good man of God. I have given my opinion about Paul who was a devil from beginning to end.

Jesus had never told any one that Saul will convert to his faith. Jesus never told any one afterwards too that Paul was his rightful representative. Why was that? Why did Jesus not predict the most important news about Paul? That proves that it is all false, made out story.

Plus we know and we can clearly see the damage done by Paul to the teachings of Jesus. He brought in the Trinity and the death on the Cross, and eating of pigs flesh and doing away with the good Code (law) of Moses a.s. I have not exhausted the list of bad things done by Paul. May be some other time I will complete that list here. Please wait out.

This is my reply only to inJesus.**

 

[Jay53]

inJESUS;5663887:

** inJesus, nobody will believe what you have written. We do not know Paul (or in reality Saul of Tarsus, the enemy of Jesus). No muslim will go near Paul. It is your own will that you honor him. We do not respect Paul. Because you have been jumping around against Muhammad all over the place, so I tell you that Saul was the first Anti-Christ which you have failed to recognise.

Okay, more about Paul. He was the wolf in sheep clothing who came among the poor sheep of Jesus and found that there was no shepherd. He devoured the sheep mercilessly. Please do not mind and no one should mind my saying. inJesus has given his opinion about our prophet who was a good man of God. I have given my opinion about Paul who was a devil from beginning to end.

Jesus had never told any one that Saul will convert to his faith. Jesus never told any one afterwards too that Paul was his rightful representative. Why was that? Why did Jesus not predict the most important news about Paul? That proves that it is all false, made out story.

Plus we know and we can clearly see the damage done by Paul to the teachings of Jesus. He brought in the Trinity and the death on the Cross, and eating of pigs flesh and doing away with the good Code (law) of Moses a.s. I have not exhausted the list of bad things done by Paul. May be some other time I will complete that list here. Please wait out.

This is my reply only to inJesus.**

I want to know why you don’t hate St. Peter just as much as St. Paul? St. Peter was one of Jesus’ 12 apostles, was with Him through all of His ministry and then, according to you, completely distorted Jesus’ teachings by becoming the 1st Pope of a Church that the “evil” Paul invented with corrupted teachings. So why don’t you villify St. Peter (or any of the other apostles for that matter) for deserting Jesus and corrupting His teachings?

 

[AdrianP]

St Paul was guided by Jesus which St Paul saw.
I want you to do a study.
Recommends Jesus baptism or not?
If Jesus recommends directly Baptism and if Islam follows Jesus teachings in TRUTH then how Muslims get baptized?

Please read Catholic or Orthodox Bible or ask an Orthodox Priest if problems arises since you are in Bosnia Orthodox Priests should be close.
Just so people get clear, the Church directed by St Paul does baptize every man. So study who is lying and who is telling the Truth and come to Truth.

 

[DeusVult09]

hey Bosanka where is your proof Paul changed 90% of the religion? All he did was say that gentile converts don’t have to be circumcised or follow the Jewish law as they are under the grace of Jesus Christ . That is not changing 90% of the religion or inventing Christianity that is nowhere near it.

Who corrupted Jesus’ teachings Mohammad or Paul? As far as I am concerned the Koran is the word of Mohammad not god. You are free to think otherwise.

Now you are going on about catholic history again what about the forced conversions and massacres undertaken when the Muslims invaded the Byzantine empire? Or the kidnapping of children and forced indoctrination of children Islam by the ottomans please dont complain about something your own religion is guilty of. it sickens me it really does.

You complain about the atrocities in Latin America but what about the 17 million killed by Tamerlane. Muslims always do this and it hacks me off they complain about catholic history when their own is just as bad

As i have already proven the moors treated the jews very badly so please stop going on about that.

Not to mention the 4 million Assyrians, Armenians and pontic Greeks killed by the ottomans last century alone. You think you muslims have a perfect history?

 

[DeusVult09]

inJESUS;5663887:

** inJesus, nobody will believe what you have written. We do not know Paul (or in reality Saul of Tarsus, the enemy of Jesus). No muslim will go near Paul. It is your own will that you honor him. We do not respect Paul. Because you have been jumping around against Muhammad all over the place, so I tell you that Saul was the first Anti-Christ which you have failed to recognise.

Okay, more about Paul. He was the wolf in sheep clothing who came among the poor sheep of Jesus and found that there was no shepherd. He devoured the sheep mercilessly. Please do not mind and no one should mind my saying. inJesus has given his opinion about our prophet who was a good man of God. I have given my opinion about Paul who was a devil from beginning to end.

Jesus had never told any one that Saul will convert to his faith. Jesus never told any one afterwards too that Paul was his rightful representative. Why was that? Why did Jesus not predict the most important news about Paul? That proves that it is all false, made out story.

Plus we know and we can clearly see the damage done by Paul to the teachings of Jesus. He brought in the Trinity and the death on the Cross, and eating of pigs flesh and doing away with the good Code (law) of Moses a.s. I have not exhausted the list of bad things done by Paul. May be some other time I will complete that list here. Please wait out.

This is my reply only to inJesus.**

Paul was the anti-christ? Paul never killed anyone (after his conversion that is. before it he was involved in persecuting Christians), Paul was never involved in any wars, Paul never committed polygamy or pedophilia, Paul never raped slave girls or had big orgies,Paul owned no slaves nor committed any atrocities Now you tell me who was the anti-Christ Paul or Mohammad? Who led the more rightous life?

Paul was righteous man who died a martyr in Rome. And your telling me he would knowingly devote his life for so many years to a farce he invented and then die for it? I don’t think so. Mohammad was the real anti-Christ not Paul

Paul prophercied false prophets like Mohammad in the bible when he said

Galatians 1:

8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

as far as i know this is the only prophecy of mohammad in the bible. (All the others are pretty ludicrous)

Paul did not do away with the law but said it applied to Jews as part of the covenant. Gentiles were under the grace of Jesus so they were not obliged to follow it. That is all he did.

Please provie proof paul invented the trinity and the crucifiction.

 

[inJESUS]

inJESUS;5663887:

** inJesus, nobody will believe what you have written. We do not know Paul (or in reality Saul of Tarsus, the enemy of Jesus). No muslim will go near Paul. It is your own will that you honor him. We do not respect Paul. Because you have been jumping around against Muhammad all over the place, so I tell you that Saul was the first Anti-Christ which you have failed to recognise.

Okay, more about Paul. He was the wolf in sheep clothing who came among the poor sheep of Jesus and found that there was no shepherd. He devoured the sheep mercilessly. Please do not mind and no one should mind my saying. inJesus has given his opinion about our prophet who was a good man of God. I have given my opinion about Paul who was a devil from beginning to end.

Jesus had never told any one that Saul will convert to his faith. Jesus never told any one afterwards too that Paul was his rightful representative. Why was that? Why did Jesus not predict the most important news about Paul? That proves that it is all false, made out story.

Plus we know and we can clearly see the damage done by Paul to the teachings of Jesus. He brought in the Trinity and the death on the Cross, and eating of pigs flesh and doing away with the good Code (law) of Moses a.s. I have not exhausted the list of bad things done by Paul. May be some other time I will complete that list here. Please wait out.

This is my reply only to inJesus.**

you can say whatever you want about Paul yet his teachings and most importantly his LIFE proves who he is, unlike Muhammad whose teachings AND life prove he is the farthest away possible from Jesus. Add to it that Paul lived DURING and WITH and WHEN the other apostles were preaching and AMONG eyewitnesses to Jesus’ teachings and life so if you want to go against scriptures, history, and common sense be my guest but do not throw words that have no leg to stand on unless you prove them…and if you don’t like your only history books that shed light on Muhammad also be my guest but my duty is to tell you that you have been lied to, that Muhammad is not a prophet, that there are no prophets/laws to come after the Messiah, that the Messianic rule is forever, that God does NOT lie, does NOT deceive humanity, and DOES watch over His words as He said; therefore Muhammad is a liar, not God…and it is our duty to show you not only that he wasn’t a prophet, that scriptures do not fortell him, but also that he wasn’t even close to being an ideal to follow because that is another insult to God, scriptures, humanity, history and common sense. So for once i ask you to forget me as a person and go read scriptures and read that God does not lie, does not leave His words unwatched, and that history proves that Muhammad is far from being an ideal to follow, on the contrary, and only then will you understand that God’s standard of Holiness cannot be on Muhammad’s level .

 

[planten]

planten;5664342:

Paul was the anti-christ? Paul never killed anyone (after his conversion that is. before it he was involved in persecuting Christians), Paul was never involved in any wars, Paul never committed polygamy or pedophilia, Paul never raped slave girls or had big orgies,Paul owned no slaves nor committed any atrocities Now you tell me who was the anti-Christ Paul or Mohammad? Who led the more rightous life?

**Paul never killed any one? Are you in your senses? Before or after is no matter. He had many poor christians killed and he was on the way to damascus to kill a few more.

I do not believe in conversion of Paul because it was the most important good news which was not given by Jesus in his life time. Jesus did not give that news of conversion even after the pseudo-conversion of Paul. That was a clever move by paul to ruin the whole work of Jesus.

He was a Jew. Why he did not get married??**

Paul was righteous man who died a martyr in Rome. And your telling me he would knowingly devote his life for so many years to a farce he invented and then die for it? I don’t think so. Mohammad was the real anti-Christ not Paul

Paul was not a martyr. He was a fale prophet. That is why he was killed. He tried hard to save himself. But he could not do that because of his very sinful life. he was killed according to the prophesy of Moses in Deut 18:20. It says that false prophet will be killed.

Paul prophercied false prophets like Mohammad in the bible when he said

Galatians 1:

8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

I do not care what Paul said. He himself was a false messenger. Most of your bibleNT is full of Paul and less of Jesus.

as far as i know this is the only prophecy of mohammad in the bible. (All the others are pretty ludicrous)

Paul did not do away with the law but said it applied to Jews as part of the covenant. Gentiles were under the grace of Jesus so they were not obliged to follow it. That is all he did

.

** Paul not only did away with the good law of Moses a.s. but he abused that law and said that law was a curse. That was very bad of him to call a law given by God as a curse. Who the hell was paul to call the mosaic law as curse? Jesus never said that law was a curse. Why did Paul?/ He did it because he was a cursed person himself.

If you open your eyes you will see that Paul was an enemy of Jesus all his life. Paul could not kill and finish the teachings of Jesus in the presence of Jesus. So he did it when Jesus went away. That is the real side of things. We Muslims have all the disciples of Jesus with us. We love them all more than you do. But paul is no where in the books**.

Please provie proof paul invented the trinity and the crucifiction.

Paul invented many things. The list is long and will be presented to you sometime. In any case your bibleNT is no more reliable now. Much manipulation has been done in it. So it is not fit for any serious discussion.

 

[Jay53]

DeusVult09;5664777:

**Paul never killed any one? Are you in your senses? Before or after is no matter. He had many poor christians killed and he was on the way to damascus to kill a few more.

I do not believe in conversion of Paul because it was the most important good news which was not given by Jesus in his life time. Jesus did not give that news of conversion even after the pseudo-conversion of Paul. That was a clever move by paul to ruin the whole work of Jesus.

He was a Jew. Why he did not get married??**

Paul was not a martyr. He was a fale prophet. That is why he was killed. He tried hard to save himself. But he could not do that because of his very sinful life. he was killed according to the prophesy of Moses in Deut 18:20. It says that false prophet will be killed.

I do not care what Paul said. He himself was a false messenger. Most of your bibleNT is full of Paul and less of Jesus.

.

** Paul not only did away with the good law of Moses a.s. but he abused that law and said that law was a curse. That was very bad of him to call a law given by God as a curse. Who the hell was paul to call the mosaic law as curse? Jesus never said that law was a curse. Why did Paul?/ He did it because he was a cursed person himself.

If you open your eyes you will see that Paul was an enemy of Jesus all his life. Paul could not kill and finish the teachings of Jesus in the presence of Jesus. So he did it when Jesus went away. That is the real side of things. We Muslims have all the disciples of Jesus with us. We love them all more than you do. But paul is no where in the books**.

Paul invented many things. The list is long and will be presented to you sometime. In any case your bibleNT is no more reliable now. Much manipulation has been done in it. So it is not fit for any serious discussion.

And I repeat my questions from Post #416:

I want to know why you don’t hate St. Peter just as much as St. Paul? St. Peter was one of Jesus’ 12 apostles, was with Him through all of His ministry and then, according to you, completely distorted Jesus’ teachings by becoming the 1st Pope of a Church that the “evil” Paul invented with corrupted teachings. So why don’t you villify St. Peter (or any of the other apostles for that matter) for deserting Jesus and corrupting His teachings?

 

[planten]

planten;5665109:

And I repeat my questions from Post #416:

I want to know why you don’t hate St. Peter just as much as St. Paul? St. Peter was one of Jesus’ 12 apostles, was with Him through all of His ministry and then, according to you, completely distorted Jesus’ teachings by becoming the 1st Pope of a Church that the “evil” Paul invented with corrupted teachings. So why don’t you villify St. Peter (or any of the other apostles for that matter) for deserting Jesus and corrupting His teachings?

**Jay, Sorry, I do not know much about Peter. But I will reply to you if you present all the Peter to me from your BibleNT. I mean you may post complete words concerning Peter, or you may just give reference to the text about Peter.

I want to know where is Peter in the bibleNT.

I know Peter was a great lover and disciple of Jesus. I also love Peter very much. Paul never had been near Jesus even for a day.

I will reply to you as soon as you show me all about Peter in the BibleNT. Until then you have no case.**

 

[Jay53]

Jay53;5665159:

**Jay, Sorry, I do not know much about Peter. But I will reply to you if you present all the Peter to me from your BibleNT. I mean you may post complete words concerning Peter, or you may just give reference to the text about Peter.

I want to know where is Peter in the bibleNT.

I know Peter was a great lover and disciple of Jesus. I also love Peter very much. Paul never had been near Jesus even for a day.

I will reply to you as soon as you show me all about Peter in the BibleNT. Until then you have no case.**

Well, first St. Peter is recognized as the first Pope of the Catholic Church.
catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=5358

Becoming a disciple of Jesus, Peter acknowledged him as "… the Messiah, the son of the living God”. Christ responded by saying: "… you are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church… He added: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”. Peter was always listed as the first of the Apostles in all of the New Testament accounts and was a member of the inner circle of Jesus, with James and John.
catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=5358

There are 2 epistles of St. Peter in the New Testament. I gave Hadi some excerpts from them in the Question on Islam #4 thread: (I will try to redo my own comments in blue again.)

Here is info. on St. Peter: (You can research the Epistles of St. Peter probably on biblegateway.com if you don’t have a Bible) I will just give you a couple of lines that I think are relevant. I added my comments in blue.

2 Peter 1:2
Greeting. Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained an equal privilege of faith with ourselves through the justice of our God and Savior Jesus Christ. May grace and peace be given you in abundance in the knowledge of our Lord.

St. Peter identifies himself and acknowledges Jesus as God and Savior.

2 Peter 1:16-18
For we were not following fictitious tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but had been eyewitnesses of his grandeur. For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when from out the majestic glory a voice came down to him, speaking thus: This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. And this voice we ourselves heard borne from heaven when we were with him on the holy mount.

St. Peter acknowledges his presence at the Transfiguration of Jesus. Also recorded in the Gospels (Matthew 17:1-9 and Mark 9:1-7)

2 Peter 1:18
But grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. To him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen

Again, St. Peter acknowledges Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

1 Peter 1:1-2
Greeting. Peter, an Apostle of Jesus Christ, to the sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, chosen unto the sanctification of the Spirit according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, unto obedience to Jesus Christ and the sprinkling of his blood: grace and peace be given you in abundance.

St. Peter’s letter begins with his acknowledgment that he was an apostle of Jesus and also mentions God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Spirit. (The Trinity)

1 Peter 1:3

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy has begotten us again, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, unto a living hope, unto an incorruptible inheritance - undefiled and unfading, reserved for you in heaven.

St. Peter acknowledges the resurrection of Jesus from the dead - thus also acknowledging his crucifixion.

1 Peter 5:12-14
Farewell. By Silvanus, the faithful brother as I account him, I have written to you thus briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand firmly in it. The church which is at Babylon, chosen together with you greets you, and so does my son Mark. Greet one another with a holy kiss. Grace be to you all who are in Christ. Amen

St. Peter acknowledges the church.

There is much more in both of the Epistles if you would like to read them in there entirety. They are not extremely lenghty.

 

[sedonaman]

You said,

Now to my understanding you are not in full communion with the Catholic because the catechism says
"… together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."
…

Contarini said that he had …

… no problem with the idea that Akhenaton in some sense was worshiping the true God.

The Catechism says,

"YOU SHALL HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME.” [Emphasis in original]

These statements could lead one to the logical conclusion that since the First Commandment prohibits the worship of other gods [plural] that one is allowed one false god. Therefore, anyone, including Catholics, could decide to worship any image and not run afoul of the First Commandment.

 

[sedonaman]

dont use my qoutes just like that since you have no idea in what context i said all those things,…

Ah, the tired, old, worn-out “context” excuse. Look. If what you are posting has a context that might not be conveyed, you have an obligation to put it in the correct context, otherwise, we will take what it plainly says for what you mean.

And I have just as much right to comment as anyone as long as I don’t break the rules. If you don’t want others to comment, don’t post.

 

[Jay53]

Jay53;5665159:

**Jay, Sorry, I do not know much about Peter. But I will reply to you if you present all the Peter to me from your BibleNT. I mean you may post complete words concerning Peter, or you may just give reference to the text about Peter.

I want to know where is Peter in the bibleNT.

I know Peter was a great lover and disciple of Jesus. I also love Peter very much. Paul never had been near Jesus even for a day.

I will reply to you as soon as you show me all about Peter in the BibleNT. Until then you have no case.**

Here is also information for you on St. John from his epistles. Accordingly Muslims should hate St. John just as much as St. Paul because he was also apparently led astray in writing the Gospel and then his epistles. He acknowledges Jesus as the Son of God and also refers to the Trinity. (See my 2nd quote below.)

1 St. John 4 13:16
In this we know that we abide in him and he in us because he has given us of his Spirit. And we have seen, and do testify, that the Father has sent his Son to be Savior of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God.

1 St. John 5 7:10
For there are three that bear witness (in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witnesss on earth): the Spirit, and the water and the blood; and these three are one. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God which is greater that he has borne witness concerning his Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony of God in himself. He who does not believe the Son, makes him a liar; because he does not believe the witness that God has borne concerning his Son.

St. John also said:
2 St. John 8:11
Look to yourselves, that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may receive a full reward. Anyone who advances and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ, has not God; he who abides in the doctrine, he has both the Father and the Son. If anyone come to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, or say to him, Welcome. For he who says to him, Welcome, is sharer in his evil works.

 

[AdrianP]

I invite muslims debating to read Bible as much as they can so they know and understand what Christians believe.It will be easier for Muslims this way.