Catholicism verses Islam differences and similarities

[Angelos]

Bernard Lewis is often cited as the foremost scholar on the Middle East in the West. Besides his Scholarly prominence he is also a major source of inspiration for neo-conservative thought. Edwards Said cited him as a notable “Orientalist”.

Bernard Lewis might be cited as the foremost scholar on the Middle East in the West, but this does not make him a religious authority on Christianity or Islam. He is not even a theologian! I should once more remind you that being an Orientalist cannot guarantee that one’s subjective comments and values are accurate and trustworthy.

His significance is that he is on “your side” of this debate, yet even he notes this point.

Will you please clarify this? What do you mean when you say that Lewis is on MY side of the debate??? Is Lewis Orthodox Christian? Is he an ex-Muslim like me???

He made the comment about Jews, and I’m quite sure he has read Muslim scripture.

Here, this is Lewis

Everyone is free to make comments about anything on this planet! What makes you conclude that whatever he says is definitely true?

I know plenty of Muslims who don’t find the idea of being religious minorities intolerable.

I don’t know why you find stereotypical blanket statements appropriate

I don’t know why you choose to deny the apparent ideological aspirations of the Islamic world due to few Muslims that do not even practise Islam or know what Islam wants them to do.

I know Mohammad and his fellows, the first generation of Islam, whose primary target was to conquer Mecca and make the pagans living there a minority. More, the Koran forbids Muslims from accepting the leadership of Jews and Christians. The Muslims who are happy with the idea of being a minority in non-Muslim countries go against that commandment in their scripture.

 

[Sister_Amy]

A good source of comparison of Christianty and Islam is a book by Mark Gabriel (ex-Muslim) titled “Jesus and Muhammad”.

In this book Gabriel compares Jesus side by side with Muhammad, since they were founders of world’s 2 most powerful religions. It is very insiteful and I highly recommend it to anyone.

Peace to all.

I remember coming across this book several years ago, and actually I had a very low opinion of it. It gave a very biased and distorted perception of Muhammad.

This is a very popular short collection of ahadith which gives a good summary of the teachings of Muhammad. 40hadith.com/40hadith_en.htm

 

[Verisimilitude]

I’m sure he has

Do you read the books and authors you suggets others read? What do you think of Umar’s contribution to Muslim society with respect to how Muslims interact with dhimmis?

what’s the context?

The Quran is the context. I thought that was clear. Can Muslims or Islam apologists show by way of the Quran or hadith that allahs cause is a peacefull intent; where does the non-Muslim fit in allahs cause?

Jihad (holy fighting in Allahs Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #216)

*Is this the internal jihad or external jihad?

And whatever you spend for spendings (e.g., in Sadaqah - charity, etc. for Allahs Cause) or whatever vow you make, be sure Allah knows it all. And for the Zalimoon (wrong-doers, etc.) there are no helpers.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #270)

*Does the charity extend to non-Muslims?

Then when Iesa (Jesus) came to know of their disbelief, he said: “Who will be my helpers in Allahs Cause?” Al-Hawarioon (the disciples) said: “We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims (i.e. we submit to Allah).”
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #52)

*Is the Good News and allahs cause the same?

I haven’t even talked about Muhammad. I have never said anything positive or negative about him.

I know. Why not enligten us to your thoughts about him since you are defending the followers of his faith.

Ok?

Staying with the context of my statement it suggests Islam cares only for Muslims, not humanity which is the messege of Christ.

I’d suggust you read up on “Projection”.

When you read up on ‘deflection’ you can tell me what I projected not supported by reason.

 

[planten]

…Anyway, as for the rest of your paragraph, as i said, you call Jesus a prophet… INSULTING!!! We say the ‘angel’ that Mo saw was not an angel of God. No angel of God would hurt one of us first and foremost, secondly, why would God send his only son then send another ‘prophet’ later on. None of this makes sense. So that is why we dont believe the angel mo saw was an actual angel of God. Simple.
FTR, us Christians arent silly, we truly know God, do you?

What you have written that you do not think Jesus is a prophet is not correct. What you have written has no sense. It is clearly admitted in the bible that Jesus was a prophet. You need that very much. Do you deny it? You cannot. But what your book says has no sense. You have made your own rules of the prophets, how one can be a prophet and how one cannot be a prophet…That is your mistake. You have become a gOd yourself.

Already you had many lords beside the God. One of those Lords was Jesus. Then there were others who were called apostle. Youtake them also as a lord beside the God. It was forbidden to do such a thing in the OT too. So You are wrong. I am not wrong.

You have many status for Jesus which is awkward and impossible. He is a man and a god at the same time. He is a god and a son of God at the same time. He is a prophet of god and a god at the same time. Then he had a god too. Can you please see all these complexities in your religion.

It was not my duty to remind you of all these problems.But because you said that the angel that Muhammad saw was not an angel of God. Then I had to remind you about your real words in the bible. They are all impossible.

You deny the angel. Then deny that any angel visited the carpentar and told him that his wife already pregnant by the holy ghost. How could any angel visit Joseph? That was impossible and not true. Same goes for Elizabeth talking to Mary. All false. Where you will go and how will any one believe you when you start denying the news of the others faiths. No one will believe you.

 

[Verisimilitude]

I remember coming across this book several years ago, and actually I had a very low opinion of it. It gave a very biased and distorted perception of Muhammad.

I thought it was more than fair and out of all his notes and references I could only find one that I could not support. “The Life and Times of Muhammed” by Sir John Glubb is another good commentary.

 

[Sister_Amy]

I thought it was more than fair and out of all his notes and references I could only find one that I could not support. “The Life and Times of Muhammed” by Sir John Glubb is another good commentary.

Of you’ll think it’s fair if you think Muhammad was evil in the first place, or that he hated women, or that his message was violent, etc., etc., etc.

 

[Postmodern]

Bernard Lewis might be cited as the foremost scholar on the Middle East in the West, but this does not make him a religious authority on Christianity or Islam. He is not even a theologian! I should once more remind you that being an Orientalist cannot guarantee that one’s subjective comments and values are accurate and trustworthy.

The claim can be established independent of Lewis, there is ample historical evidence to support it. Lewis not being a theologian is irrelevant. This is a historical claim, not a theological one.

Will you please clarify this? What do you mean when you say that Lewis is on MY side of the debate??? Is Lewis Orthodox Christian? Is he an ex-Muslim like me???

I don’t know Lewis’s religious beliefs. I would assume he derives from an Anglican background. He is on “your side” in that he seems to subscribe to a “clash of civilizations” thesis.

Everyone is free to make comments about anything on this planet! What makes you conclude that whatever he says is definitely true?

I never bestowed any infallibility upon Dr. Lewis.

I don’t know why you choose to deny the apparent ideological aspirations of the Islamic world due to few Muslims that do not even practise Islam or know what Islam wants them to do.

Most Muslims I know are devout. Hijab, five daily prayers, fasting, the whole nine yards.

I know Mohammad and his fellows, the first generation of Islam, whose primary target was to conquer Mecca and make the pagans living there a minority. More, the Koran forbids Muslims from accepting the leadership of Jews and Christians. The Muslims who are happy with the idea of being a minority in non-Muslim countries go against that commandment in their scripture.

I didn’t say they are “happy” being minorities, I doubt any minority prefers being a minority. I simply said they did not seem to find it “intolerable”.

 

[Postmodern]

Do you read the books and authors you suggets others read?

I never suggested anyone read Bernard Lewis.

What do you think of Umar’s contribution to Muslim society with respect to how Muslims interact with dhimmis?

I couldn’t say. I have no real knowledge of the subject

The Quran is the context. I thought that was clear. Can Muslims or Islam apologists show by way of the Quran or hadith that allahs cause is a peacefull intent; where does the non-Muslim fit in allahs cause?

You say the Context is the Koran, and yet you quote Hadiths. I find that a bit odd.

Jihad (holy fighting in Allahs Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #216)

*Is this the internal jihad or external jihad?

And whatever you spend for spendings (e.g., in Sadaqah - charity, etc. for Allahs Cause) or whatever vow you make, be sure Allah knows it all. And for the Zalimoon (wrong-doers, etc.) there are no helpers.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #270)

*Does the charity extend to non-Muslims?

Then when Iesa (Jesus) came to know of their disbelief, he said: “Who will be my helpers in Allahs Cause?” Al-Hawarioon (the disciples) said: “We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims (i.e. we submit to Allah).”
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #52)

*Is the Good News and allahs cause the same?

So far as I can tell non of those Hadiths even mention non-Muslims.

I know. Why not enligten us to your thoughts about him since you are defending the followers of his faith.

I haven’t defended anyone. The only exception being the extent to which actual facts conflict with prejudices.

As for Muhammad I don’t have any strong feeling about him one way or another. I’d love to meet him, along with a few other key historical actors.

Muhammad, Charles Darwin, Jesus, Edward Said, Albert Einstein, Kurt Godel, Adolf Hitler, Noam Chomsky, Pope John Pal II, Slobodon Milosevic.

In no real order.

Staying with the context of my statement it suggests Islam cares only for Muslims, not humanity which is the messege of Christ.

I don’t see how.

When you read up on ‘deflection’ you can tell me what I projected not supported by reason.

There was no deflection. I addressed you claim that I was some apologist for Muhammad’s character, which I am not.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Of you’ll think it’s fair if you think Muhammad was evil in the first place, or that he hated women, or that his message was violent, etc., etc., etc.

Sister, you presume I had preconceived notions before reading that book. I won’t deny I had drawn some conclusions from my first reading of the Quran but due to the erratic compilation of the Quran I felt I needed something more to evaluate what the Quran was telling me. I then read the book by Glubb which helped put Mohammed into context of the times. I then read the Quran again followed by the book by Gabriel.

I think it pretty clear Mohammed was a typical 7th century man before the first visitation- neither very evil or very good. I think it clear that between the first visitation to when he migrated to Medina he was motivated by something other than himslef and his messege and demeanor was still rather unremarkable.

It is the next and last phase of his life that not only changed my perceptions of the man but the religion he brought. Mohammed was not evil ‘in the first place’ but his actions after moving to Medina were evil. He did not hate women, he loved their company but thought them little more than property to men. The concilliatory messege he preached in Mekka before migrating was one of tolerance because he was not tolerated himslef. The ‘persecution’ he experienced in Mecca pales in comparrison to what he brought as retribution to the whole of Arabia from Medina.

Strange that you dislike a book/author because it paints a different view of your religions founder than you have; and take offense at those who say it is a fair representation; but then you also take offense when I say the Quran paints a view of Christ that is offensive to me because my saying so disrespects Mohammed whom you revere. You (Muslims) will take offense at everything unless peopel subscribe to your view.

Simply put, either Mohammed lied purposely about ‘the books that came before’, spoke out of ignorance, or was influenced by something other than a Angel of God. Why simple? Because The Gospels and OT are accurate, valid and uncorrupted whether you choose to believe them or not. Glubbs book convinced me Mohammed was not visited by Gods Angel. Gabriels book confirmed for me he was not evil by nature but was unlearned by even the standards of the day. That in itself is not such a bad/remarkable thing because the Apostles were similarly uneducated.

By reason and logic I can conclude Mohammed spoke out of ignorance and was influenced by something not from God and that is enough to reject anything and everything he said. Both those books convinced me he was not a liar at least before the call. The minor similarities between Mohammed and the Apostles, the Quran and the Gospels are surface deep only and largley insignificant but it is the only veneer Islam has to truth.

 

[Irene72]

People talk of “reason and logic” that Muhammad was wrong; how does reason and logic work on the trinity , creation of saints, and the church as a whole since Jesus has died ;to date.
Not very logical to me.

 

[Verisimilitude]

I never suggested anyone read Bernard Lewis.

Then what was the purpose of bringing him up if you hadnt read it or want others too?

I couldn’t say. I have no real knowledge of the subject

That is becoming clearer about most of what you say.

You say the Context is the Koran, and yet you quote Hadiths. I find that a bit odd.

More odd is that you don’t have a clue to what you are talking about.

So far as I can tell non of those Hadiths even mention non-Muslims.

Have you ever read the Quran?

I haven’t defended anyone. The only exception being the extent to which actual facts conflict with prejudices.

Then your defense of the ‘truth’ is seriously lacking substance.

As for Muhammad I don’t have any strong feeling about him one way or another. I’d love to meet him, along with a few other key historical actors.

You don’t seem to have strong feelings for Christ either so why not drop the ‘Catholic’ tag completley?

Muhammad, Charles Darwin, Jesus, Edward Said, Albert Einstein, Kurt Godel, Adolf Hitler, Noam Chomsky, Pope John Paul II, Slobodon Milosevic.

In no real order.

I can say with some conviction you will meet at least one of those actors some day.

I don’t see how.
There was no deflection. I addressed you claim that I was some apologist for Muhammad’s character, which I am not.

You accused me of projecting something unsubstantiated while you defend the peacefull intentions of Islam and how they have dealt with non-Muslims throughout history without reading the authors you cite, without recognizing suras from the Quran, and basically talking out of your

 

[Verisimilitude]

People talk of “reason and logic” that Muhammad was wrong; how does reason and logic work on the trinity , creation of saints, and the church as a whole since Jesus has died ;to date.
Not very logical to me.

I think reason and logic work quite well with those subjects you bring up. After reading this about the Trinity,if you have any questions about the logic and reason used to justify the position please start a thread about it or look up the many that have been done about it.

 

[eelpis]

If you ever thought that Catholism be the religion of God, you are right!

 

[Sister_Amy]

People talk of “reason and logic” that Muhammad was wrong; how does reason and logic work on the trinity , creation of saints, and the church as a whole since Jesus has died ;to date.
Not very logical to me.

Yeah, I’m with you on that one. Muhammad was a man, a man who received inspiration from God. But a man. With a message that from where I stand seems remarkably consistent with the messages of Moses and Jesus.

 

[Postmodern]

Then what was the purpose of bringing him up if you hadnt read it or want others too?

I read his statements in another book. I checked and found it was correct.

That is becoming clearer about most of what you say.

If I don’t know something I will say so. If you’d like to challenge any factual claim I made, or conclusions drawn, please, go right ahead.

More odd is that you don’t have a clue to what you are talking about.

No, I wasn’t paying attention and believed you were referencing a predominate collector of Traditions in your first two citations.

I am happy to admit it when I make a mistake, I still do not see where non-Muslims are mentioned.

Have you ever read the Quran?

Yes

Then your defense of the ‘truth’ is seriously lacking substance.

I gave a fairly(for the setting) detailed analysis of terrorist groups. You have failed to challenge those findings.

You don’t seem to have strong feelings for Christ either so why not drop the ‘Catholic’ tag completley?

I’d love to know by what methodology you arrived at that conclusion.

Please be specific.

I can say with some conviction you will meet at least one of those actors some day.

Sounds fun.

You accused me of projecting something unsubstantiated while you defend the peacefull intentions of Islam and how they have dealt with non-Muslims throughout history without reading the authors you cite, without recognizing suras from the Quran, and basically talking out of your/

There are a number of distortions here.

Most notably I don’t believe I have ever “defended the peacefully intentions of Islam”.
Secondly there is your use of plural, “authors”. You are actually referring to one instance where I cited a claim made by one author(that is singular) who’s work I have not read. I never recommended him. I never claimed I had read him. I made the singular claim that Bernard Lewis stated that Jews overall fared better under Muslim rule than Christian rule.

You are correct that I mistook your citation for a Hadith collectors name.

 

[dolphinlove]

What you have written that you do not think Jesus is a prophet is not correct. What you have written has no sense. It is clearly admitted in the bible that Jesus was a prophet. You need that very much. Do you deny it? You cannot. But what your book says has no sense. You have made your own rules of the prophets, how one can be a prophet and how one cannot be a prophet…That is your mistake. You have become a gOd yourself.

Already you had many lords beside the God. One of those Lords was Jesus. Then there were others who were called apostle. Youtake them also as a lord beside the God. It was forbidden to do such a thing in the OT too. So You are wrong. I am not wrong.

You have many status for Jesus which is awkward and impossible. He is a man and a god at the same time. He is a god and a son of God at the same time. He is a prophet of god and a god at the same time. Then he had a god too. Can you please see all these complexities in your religion.

It was not my duty to remind you of all these problems.But because you said that the angel that Muhammad saw was not an angel of God. Then I had to remind you about your real words in the bible. They are all impossible.

You deny the angel. Then deny that any angel visited the carpentar and told him that his wife already pregnant by the holy ghost. How could any angel visit Joseph? That was impossible and not true. Same goes for Elizabeth talking to Mary. All false. Where you will go and how will any one believe you when you start denying the news of the others faiths. No one will believe you.

Oh Planten seriously, this is the same tired old stuff you keep bringing up.
The Angel appeared to Joseph because he was Jesus’ guardian here on earth and to reassure him that everything was ok. He didnt pin him on the ground and try to kill him like YOUR angel tried to do to Mo.
Everything is only impossible for you because you fail to see the truth. You trapped in the typical Muslim thinking.

 

[Verisimilitude]

I read his statements in another book. I checked and found it was correct.
If I don’t know something I will say so. If you’d like to challenge any factual claim I made, or conclusions drawn, please, go right ahead.

You claimed:

Even Bernard Lewis will attest to the fact that Jews faired much better under Islamic rule than they did under Chrstendom, and Muslim Scriptures do not have Jews spreaming to have the guilt of shedding Christ’s blood placed upon them and their children.

The basis of you observation is more than just suspect since you give no context to the statement. Did the Pope issue orders to mistreat Jews? Did avowed Christian governments mandate persecution, humiliation, and severe restrictions on Jews as commanded by the Catholic faith? Is Lewis considered and unbiased author?

I’m not denying Christians mistreated Jews in history but to claim fact that Jews fared better under Muslims is a subjective fact that is proved false. Christians evangilized the Jews first and foremost while suffering persecution for a few centuries from the pagans and gentiles before becoming accepted by society and government. It is clear what Jesus said about those who reject the offer to accept the Good News.

Mohammed was not very peaceful with the Jews/Christians of Arbaia and when Muslims first took Jerusalem soon after Mohammed the rules established for non-Muslims was established in Syria but soon became a standard that became indoctrinated into both Muslims and non-Muslims for the next 1400 years and such attitudes still exist today in the Muslim mindset and indeed by the non-Muslims as well. Like slavery and discrimination in America, it takes a while if ever for long held practices to change. Jews in particular have received the short end of the stick from everybody but to suggest Islam treats them more fair than oterh cultures/religions is false.

I am happy to admit it when I make a mistake, I still do not see where non-Muslims are mentioned.

Don’t get lost in minor specifics and look at the larger picture. The Quran and hadith call for Muslims to fight in allahs cause- which is to convert all for allah. Only Christians and Jews were permitted to keep their faith if they so choose but with humiliating restrictions and teh constant threat of war and death if they upset the Muslims. The non-Muslims aren’t mentioned because in Mo’s farewell speech because the good will he tells other muslims must give otehr Muslims is not to be given to non-Muslims. It is not by accident in the Quran that the charity called for in allahs cause does not mention the non-Muslim because teh non-Muslim must be fought and converted. Why give comfort to one you are commanded to fight/kill/convert?

I’d love to know by what methodology you arrived at that conclusion.

Please be specific.

Sounds fun.

Your tag of agnostic Catholic and the silly comment of what sounds fun above.

There are a number of distortions here.

Most notably I don’t believe I have ever “defended the peacefully intentions of Islam”.
Secondly there is your use of plural, “authors”. You are actually referring to one instance where I cited a claim made by one author(that is singular) who’s work I have not read. I never recommended him. I never claimed I had read him. I made the singular claim that Bernard Lewis stated that Jews overall fared better under Muslim rule than Christian rule.

You are correct that I mistook your citation for a Hadith collectors name.

The only distortion is nitpicking rather than giving substance even if it is opinion. Do you think Mohammed was a prophet of God?

 

[planten]

Oh Planten seriously, this is the same tired old stuff you keep bringing up.
The Angel appeared to Joseph because he was Jesus’ guardian here on earth and to reassure him that everything was ok. He didnt pin him on the ground and try to kill him like YOUR angel tried to do to Mo.
Everything is only impossible for you because you fail to see the truth. You trapped in the typical Muslim thinking.

The problem is about angels. It appears that you can have your angels but the Muslims cannot. When you have antipathy to angels then do not believe that any angel appeared to Joseph the carpentar. Forget about him. You need him to authenticate Jesus pious birth. That is impossible now. Nobody will believe a word of what you say. Have a good laugh at your one way traffic please.

That is what we call the bias and prejudice of the christians.

 

[Angelos]

The claim can be established independent of Lewis, there is ample historical evidence to support it. Lewis not being a theologian is irrelevant. This is a historical claim, not a theological one.

Historical evidence to support what? I agree with you that Lewis, who is not a theologian, is irrelevant to this discussion. Read the name of this thread to see that we are disputing the differences between Catholicism and Islam (religions), NOT historical claims of secular scholars

I don’t know Lewis’s religious beliefs. I would assume he derives from an Anglican background. He is on “your side” in that he seems to subscribe to a “clash of civilizations” thesis.

If this is true, I am not on “his side”. I do not subscribe to a “clash of civilizations” thesis either. I simply compare Christianity and Islam on a theological basis.

I didn’t say they are “happy” being minorities, I doubt any minority prefers being a minority. I simply said they did not seem to find it “intolerable”.

What else can those Muslims do if they cannot reach their long-term goal instantly? They have no alternative than considering their situation tolerable.

More to the point, you are always referring to what some Muslims think about being a minority. I am not here to discuss what individuals think or do, but what the Islamic scripture asks Muslims to do. These are apparently different things.

 

[inJESUS]

What happens if Muslims conquered and ruled a country, yet the citizens refused to pay the jizya?