I’m sure even the fullest possible briefing doesn’t remove the possibility of diplomatic snafus, however much it minimises them.
Like it or not, there it is…
There is nothing in that statement that makes sense.
, instead of looking toward the Patriarchs as important types and logically follow how the Promise of God was being passed down from Abraham to Isaac and then to Jacob the muslims should be refered to as the faith of Ishmael, and the Christians and the Jews are the faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Beside muhammad retroactively claim other important religious figures in history as muslims, not only Abraham, in fact the people they claim are so divergent in beliefs that it could be considered the first New Age religion in history. From what I heard islam is a mixture of three traditions Christian Gnosticism, Kabbalism and Arabic Pagansim (source: PBS). Being the fact that the muslims are influence by the Gnostics their allah may have more in common with GRATU then the Bleesed Trinity. Most of the actions of Abraham and Ishmael they claimed are not mentioned in the Bible but more importantly what was writen about them was long after (about five hundred years later after) the death of St John, which is considered the end of Divine revalation. So therefore the qu’ran can not be divinely inspired if you believe that the death of St. John ends Divine revalation.Read the Catechism section in context. It makes clear that the Muslims are the first among the non-Judeo-Christian people.There is nothing in that statement that makes sense.
Would you agree “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” But if you are a muslim you come in first place?
The ancient Hebrews were not interested in the creator God, but a Covenant God, Whose promise was given to Abraham and passed to Isaac and then to Jacob; the promise did not pass to Ishmael. There are many who people ackowlegde the creator of the universe, even The Freemasons, the GRATU. But does it follow that all creator gods that are mention out side of the Judeo-Christian context like the demiurge, the GRATU, allah are the same as God the Father in the Blessed Trinity?
If one wants to go down that road and acredit the Patriarchs as founders of religions
To them “mankind’s judge on the last day” is them by their allah’s approval punishing people of the book, the Jewish people and Christians, they don’t believe the last day in the same sense as Christians do.
So all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, but if someone says “we’re Abrahamic too!”, they are first among the non-Christians? Weird.
Not necessarily. This is what the Catechism says:
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm
We’ll just have to agree to disagree then. There is no divine revelation in Islam, or else there is none in Christianity.
Christians, to me, are not one of many groups to whom salvation is offered (and who have an easier time reaching it). Christians are the saved. And I cannot accept that Islam’s teachings are based in any divine revelation and that Christ’s teachings are divine revelation. Both cannot be ultimately true, as God is pure Truth. The teachings of the Son are true, and the teachings of other religions about the Son are not. They depart so fully from the Truth that they cannot, in themselves, point one to the real Truth. Only the Spirit can do that, and He ordinarily works through the Church and not through false religions. Merely being “Abrahamic” is not what is required of the follower of Christ. Though there can be degrees of understanding, light, and truth in any belief system, it seems to me that the existence of multiple Abrahamic options for achieving salvation (that are even easier than the non-Abrahamic ones) undermines Scripture and Tradition. If I’m wrong, Lord forgive me. But there is only one Way, and that Way cannot include both Christianity and religions created later that deny what the Church teaches.
