Church teaching on Islam

[catharina]

Hey Jam!

I have never heard a convincing explanation pertaining to that phrase. This debate has been recycled many times on this forum…and I’m not going to stick around very long to re-hash it again. Been there…done that.

But one thing is very clear to me…and I will let Sacred Scripture reslove the issue as set forth by the Quran:

Sura 4:171 (Quran)– Allah forbid that he should have a son!

1 John 2:23 (Douay-Rheims)–**Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the **Father.

We depend on Scripture and Tradition.
We are not free to choose BETWEEN them
We are not free to invent our OWN interpretation of either.

We learn from Holy Mother Church.
Remember???
Or does that sound familiar???

 

[Contarini]

There’s the rub. Muslims worship the “god” who has spoken in the Q’uran.

Whom you admit is NOT DIVINELY INSPIRED. Therefore NOT THE ONE TRUE GOD!
Their worship is directed AWAY from the one True God.
And it is where your whole argument unravels. And why so many refused to answer.
Because it is the only logical conclusion.

Not logical at all. Totally muddled.

You insist on using the characteristic “who inspired the Qur’an” as the defining characteristic for the Islamic “god.”

But that makes no sense at all, because Muslims believe that this God was known before the Qur’an. You’re simply picking a criterion that lets you make your point.

Muslims worship the one God, the Creator, who spoke through Abraham and Moses and Jesus. Ask any Muslim. They will tell you this.

But of course you don’t start there–where Muslims themselves start–because then your argument will unravel.

The only consistent case against the argument that we and Muslims worship the same God is Mickey’s, because only Mickey (at least in posts I’ve read on this forum) is willing to say that Jews also do not worship the true God, and that pre-Christian Jews (at least the faithful ones) did believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation.

If you aren’t willing to go with Mickey on these points you have not the slightest shred of a logical case.

Neither Christians nor Muslims have for the most part historically held this draconian position. Both religions have historically confessed that the true God was known, albeit imperfectly, before He revealed Himself fully (in Jesus as we believe, in the Qur’an as they believe).

As I’ve pointed out over and over, early Christian apologists, including St. Paul, routinely agreed that even pagans had some knowledge of the true God, let alone Jews.

Your “logic” is nothing more than linguistic sleight-of-hand.

Edwin

 

[Mickey]

We depend on Scripture and Tradition.
We are not free to choose BETWEEN them

Indeed. Sacred Tradition interprets Sacred Scripture. And I certainly don’t see any rousing endorsement for your argument from the Church prior to say…perhaps the 19th century.

Do you have anything from before the schism? 12th century? 13th century?

Pope Eugene IV, in 1434 called Islam an “abominalble sect”. I’m prety sure he would not echo the modern statements of “adoring the same God”.

The Martyr, St Alexander the dervish +1794 said that everything about islam was “false and abominable”.

St John of Damascus called them the “forerunner of Antichrist”.

These staements are a far cry from the new ideas of “adoring the same God.”

And so I repeat:

Sura 4:171 (Quran)– Allah forbid that he should have a son!

1 John 2:23 (Douay-Rheims)–**Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the **Father.

 

[catharina]

Indeed. Sacred Tradition interprets Sacred Scripture. And I certainly don’t see any rousing endorsement for your argument from the Church prior to say…perhaps the 19th century.

Do you have anything from before the schism? 12th century? 13th century?

Pope Eugene IV, in 1434 called Islam an “abominalble sect”. I’m prety sure he would not echo the modern statements of “adoring the same God”.

The Martyr, St Alexander the dervish +1794 said that everything about islam was “false and abominable”.

St John of Damascus called them the “forerunner of Antichrist”.

These staements are a far cry from the new ideas of “adoring the same God.”

And so I repeat:

Sura 4:171 (Quran)– Allah forbid that he should have a son!

1 John 2:23 (Douay-Rheims)–**Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the **Father.

We live in the present.
Well, I live in the present
and the Church lives in the present.

If you’d rather pick and choose
among Church teachings over the passing of time and place,
acc to your preferences, help yourself. No one will stop you.

 

[Contarini]

Indeed. Sacred Tradition interprets Sacred Scripture. And I certainly don’t see any rousing endorsement for your argument from the Church prior to say…perhaps the 19th century.

Do you have anything from before the schism? 12th century? 13th century?

Pope Eugene IV, in 1434 called Islam an “abominalble sect”. I’m prety sure he would not echo the modern statements of “adoring the same God”.

The Martyr, St Alexander the dervish +1794 said that everything about islam was “false and abominable”.

St John of Damascus called them the “forerunner of Antichrist”.

These staements are a far cry from the new ideas of “adoring the same God.”

No. They aren’t. There is absolutely no contradiction between Pope Eugene’s and St. John of Damascus’s statements and the claim that they adore the same God.

Sure, the tone is different. But the claims aren’t incompatible at all.

Muhammad can be the forerunner of Antichrist while still teaching people a mistaken way of worshiping the true God.

Islam can be an abominable sect because it teaches people to worship the true God wrongly.

This isn’t language I would myself use. But that’s not the issue. The problem is that you and those who agree with you insist on equating mistaken worship of the true God with worship of a false god.

You don’t actually find St. John of Damascus using the language you want him to use. So you assume that “forerunner of Antichrist” means the same thing. It certainly does not.

As I’ve pointed out numerous times, there were medieval Byzantines (after the time of St. John of Damascus and lacking his knowledge of actual Islamic belief) who thought Muslims worshiped a solid metal sphere. And they naturally argued that this was a false god. The Byzantine emperor disagreed with them, and he seems to have had a more accurate understanding of what Muslims actually believed.

Other than that, you don’t have support in the Tradition for your position. You just have a lot of harsh rhetoric–but the harshness of the rhetoric makes all the more conspicuous the fact that the claim “Muslims worship a false god” is absent from the polemical arsenal.

If St. John thought this, why wouldn’t he say so? He certainly said lots of other very critical things about Islam, as you point out. Thus, the very language you cite works against you.

Edwin

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I did not ask you that. I said show me where Abraham revealed to us that Jesus Christ was the word made flesh.

Abraham did not reveal to us the Trinity, It was Christ who revealed to us the Trinity. If Abraham revealed to us the Trinity, why did the Jews not accept it from the beginning as they accepted God the Creator of heaven and earth.

Again I agree Jesus is the promise. But where did Abraham teach God in the 3 persons? Show me?

Why should I show that Abraham revealed to us the Trinity? Odd thinking !

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Since Allah is an Arabic word, it would be logical to point the person I responded to toward a country full of Arabic speakers. It would be kinda of silly to point the person to Germany to find Catholics that use the Arabic word Allah for God.

Ok, Ok,
We think Orthodox the Greek, we forget the Arabs.
You are right, I did not know that.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

What does Muhammad teaching a false doctrine have to do with Muslims praying to the one true God??

Why do you continue to argue with me that Muhammad is teaching a false doctrine? Where did I ever say, Even ONE TIME that Muhammad’s teaching is true.

I AGREE that the teachings are false, and he did not teach them the true Gospel. But we are not arguing about whether Muhammad is teaching a true gospel. We are arguing whether Muslims are praying to a false god or not.

Why do you continue to tell me the teachings they have are false. How many times do I have to tell you I KNOW THAT.

You need to show me where the RCC is wrong in saying Muslims do not pray to a false god.

That is whay YOU are saying, the Church is saying they do NOT have a false god, and I agree,

Muslims say they pray to the One true God the God of Abraham, the Church agrees. It is you who are saying they are praying to a false god.

So now PROVE IT! If they are not praying to the One true God the Creator of Heaven and Earth show me this false god they pray to.

You put the things in True or False. But there is no true and false.
All religions pray to God even the hindhus who have 100 million gods.
BUT the FULL dimension of God’s revelation in in the RCC.
So, the Muslims may participate in the revelation made by Jesus Christ but they are not, in any way, in the FULL revelation of God to the World, which is Jesus Christ.
In fact, the Muslim extremists’ hobby seems to be killing themselves and killing christians.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

This is a false statement. Budda does not follow the One true God the creator of heaven and earth.

Many religions follow false gods, many believe the sun is a god, Etc.

Your way of thinking is wrong and outdated.
So, for you, there are fellows who have no religion at all? Are you sure?

 

[jam070406]

Not logical at all. Totally muddled.

You insist on using the characteristic “who inspired the Qur’an” as the defining characteristic for the Islamic “god.”

But that makes no sense at all, because Muslims believe that this God was known before the Qur’an. You’re simply picking a criterion that lets you make your point.

Muslims worship the one God, the Creator, who spoke through Abraham and Moses and Jesus. Ask any Muslim. They will tell you this.

But of course you don’t start there–where Muslims themselves start–because then your argument will unravel.

The only consistent case against the argument that we and Muslims worship the same God is Mickey’s, because only Mickey (at least in posts I’ve read on this forum) is willing to say that Jews also do not worship the true God, and that pre-Christian Jews (at least the faithful ones) did believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation.

If you aren’t willing to go with Mickey on these points you have not the slightest shred of a logical case.

Neither Christians nor Muslims have for the most part historically held this draconian position. Both religions have historically confessed that the true God was known, albeit imperfectly, before He revealed Himself fully (in Jesus as we believe, in the Qur’an as they believe).

As I’ve pointed out over and over, early Christian apologists, including St. Paul, routinely agreed that even pagans had some knowledge of the true God, let alone Jews.

Your “logic” is nothing more than linguistic sleight-of-hand.

Edwin

St. Paul also said pagans sacrifice to demons not God.

 

[jam070406]

No. They aren’t. There is absolutely no contradiction between Pope Eugene’s and St. John of Damascus’s statements and the claim that they adore the same God.

Sure, the tone is different. But the claims aren’t incompatible at all.

Muhammad can be the forerunner of Antichrist while still teaching people a mistaken way of worshiping the true God.

Islam can be an abominable sect because it teaches people to worship the true God wrongly.

This isn’t language I would myself use. But that’s not the issue. The problem is that you and those who agree with you insist on equating mistaken worship of the true God with worship of a false god.

You don’t actually find St. John of Damascus using the language you want him to use. So you assume that “forerunner of Antichrist” means the same thing. It certainly does not.

As I’ve pointed out numerous times, there were medieval Byzantines (after the time of St. John of Damascus and lacking his knowledge of actual Islamic belief) who thought Muslims worshiped a solid metal sphere. And they naturally argued that this was a false god. The Byzantine emperor disagreed with them, and he seems to have had a more accurate understanding of what Muslims actually believed.

Other than that, you don’t have support in the Tradition for your position. You just have a lot of harsh rhetoric–but the harshness of the rhetoric makes all the more conspicuous the fact that the claim “Muslims worship a false god” is absent from the polemical arsenal.

If St. John thought this, why wouldn’t he say so? He certainly said lots of other very critical things about Islam, as you point out. Thus, the very language you cite works against you.

Edwin

What is this idea of imperfect worship? Is it sanctioned by God? Is it sufficient enough to please God? Let me get this straight, you can reject God and His revelation and expect that He will somehow accept your imperfect worship? After He has stated a perfect sacrifice will be offered all over the world. God owes you NOTHING. You owe Him everything.
A rejection of Truth is a rejection of God.
You either worship God as HE prescribed, in spirit and Truth, or you are not worshipping Him. Your worship is directed elsewhere. Imperfect worship is just that, imperfect. Not acceptable to Almighty God.

 

[jam070406]

Catholics do. Another reason to seriously doubt your claim that their worship is co-equal with ours.
Besides if you make the claim, as Edwin did, that St. Paul says pagans have partial Truth, pleasing to God, you had better be willing to admit that St. Paul said their worship is to demons.

 

[Armyvet007]

And so I repeat:

Sura 4:171 (Quran)– Allah forbid that he should have a son!

1 John 2:23 (Douay-Rheims)–**Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the **Father.

Sura- A false teaching due to the errors within Islam

John- Absolutely correct. However, denying the Son means someone who knows in their heart that the Catholic understanding/teaching of God is the Right understanding/teaching but rejects it. A person who has no understanding of an idea/concept can not reject/deny it. They are simply ignorant [unwillfully; willful ignorance is a form of rejection/denial] of it.

 

[Mickey]

No. They aren’t.

Sure they are.

Sure, the tone is different.

You think so?

Muhammad can be the forerunner of Antichrist while still teaching people a mistaken way of worshiping the true God.

I am sure that the hundreds of thousands of martyrs and neo-martyrs who were murdered under the Islamic yoke would not be so eager to accept this strange way of thinking.

The problem is that you and those who agree with you insist on equating mistaken worship of the true God with worship of a false god.

No. The problem is: You and those who agree with you insist on believing that Muslims adore the same God as the Christians. We know that there is only one true God. We also know that this one true God is Trinitarian. We also know that Muslims deny the Trinitarian God. I do not know who they are adoring…but it is not the Trinitarian God.

So you assume that “forerunner of Antichrist” means the same thing.

It is strong language…and I think it gets the point across.

Other than that, you don’t have support in the Tradition for your position.

The witness of the countless martyrs…St John of Damascus…some of the post schism popes…and Sacred Scripture…is good support. It is you who do not have any support for the relatively new “ecumenical” statements that have been set forth by Rome.

You just have a lot of harsh rhetoric

I think most of the harsh rhetoric and condescending language is coming from you.

If St. John thought this, why wouldn’t he say so?

Forerunner of Antichrist pretty much says it all…eh? :yup:

Thus, the very language you cite works against you.

Not at all.

Sura 4:171 (Koran)– Allah forbid that he should have a son!

---

****1 John 2:23 (Douay-Rheims)– Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.

 

[Mickey]

A person who has no understanding of an idea/concept can not reject/deny it. They are simply ignorant [unwillfully; willful ignorance is a form of rejection/denial] of it.

Thank you for an honest answer. The Roman Catholic concept of “invincible ignorance” seems to be the only way to reconcile this dilemma. However, you can travel to any mosque…talk to any Imam…ask any muslim…if they worship the same God as the Christians. They will ask: “Who is your God?” And you will say: God the Father…God the Son…and God the Holy Spirit…the Trinity, one in essence and undivided. And they will tell you: “We do not worship that God.”

That seems like conscious and willful rejection to me.

 

[Mickey]

We live in the present.
Well, I live in the present
and the Church lives in the present.

Scripture and Tradition must be taken in it’s entirety. There is no time with God. If you choose to accept only the relatively new comments from the past 100 years or so…that is up to you.

 

[jam070406]

Thank you for an honest answer. The Roman Catholic concept of “invincible ignorance” seems to be the only way to reconcile this dilemma. However, you can travel to any mosque…talk to any Imam…ask any muslim…if they worship the same God as the Christians. They will ask: “Who is your God?” And you will say: God the Father…God the Son…and God the Holy Spirit…the Trinity, one in essence and undivided. And they will tell you: “We do not worship that God.”

That seems like conscious and willful rejection to me.

Invincible ignorance has been used so liberally that it almost turns into a sort of universal salvation.

 

[jam070406]

Scripture and Tradition must be taken in it’s entirety. There is no time with God. If you choose to accept only the relatively new comments from the past 100 years or so…that is up to you.

Wasn’t the idea that Truth is relative to the current time condemned by the Church?

 

[jam070406]

If they worshipped the same one God they would recognize the Trinity. Please provide those quotes.

 

[Armyvet007]

Thank you for an honest answer. The Roman Catholic concept of “invincible ignorance” seems to be the only way to reconcile this dilemma. However, you can travel to any mosque…talk to any Imam…ask any muslim…if they worship the same God as the Christians. They will ask: “Who is your God?” And you will say: God the Father…God the Son…and God the Holy Spirit…the Trinity, one in essence and undivided. And they will tell you: “We do not worship that God.”

That seems like conscious and willful rejection to me.

1. Going to an Imam is a great idea if you only want to learn what Islam teaches or its history, but a bad one if you are trying to learn what is True about it. You would need to go to the Authority on the Truth for that [the Church]. Imams have no authority in determining what is True.
2. “You can lead a horse to water [explain/teach], but you can’t make it drink [learn/understand].” I had a very good calculas teacher in college. He knew calculas forwards and backwards and was an outstanding teacher. Despite all this, I never learned or understood calculas. This doesn’t mean I willfully rejected or denied calculas, it just means I remain ignorant about it.

Edit- Add “This doesn’t…” on IOT complete my thought.