Did the Pope say that God and Allah are the same person?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1way
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi JKirk
By that argument, the passages in question don’t say that they DO pray to the same God.
Sorry, Lisa, I just thought of something.

Your argument, strictly in terms of logic, reminds me of a statement by a liberal friend of mine (as far as catechesis, very undereducated Catholic) when we were discussing gay marriage. He said,“Jesus never said one thing about homosexuality!” My response was “so?”
 
Lisa: You still haven’t addressed the central question that is problematic with your posts. Are we to trust the Church (NONE of the Church authorities which you cite say that Islam prays to a different god and the authorities cited back to you say that we do pray to the same God, the God of Abraham) or you? As has been said, you have essentially set yourself up as your own magisterium. The Church is in disagreement with you. To whom do we listen, the Church that cannot mislead the faithful, the Church to Whom Jesus promised the Holy Spirit that would lead Her into all truth…or you?

You say,“C’mon, let’s be for real.” I have no problem imagining Martin Luther or any of the “Reformers” saying the same thing (“Man can pronounce God’s absolution? Man can confect a “Holy Sacrifice” at which bread and wine actually become the Body and Blood of Christ? Shouldn’t we be simply be following the Bible alone? C’mon, let’s be for real!”).
Hi JKirk,
I agree with you, what I am saying goes against what Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II said. I realize that. But aside from a letter, I don’t know where Pope John Paul II got this idea from. Muslims were “infidels” in the past and now they are “believers”.

Please, address the points I’ve raised and answer these questions -
  1. how can Muslims and Muhammad be “infidels”, yet at the same time, be believers?
  2. How is it possible that Jews and Christians must follow the bible, yet Muslims can reject it and still be “believers”?
Thanks
 
No, dear, but you’ve been provided with passages by those exercising legitimate authority that DO say they pray to the same God. That YOUR citations don’t deal with the question is irrelevant.
Hi,
This would be question #3 then
  1. What source, prior to Vatican II is there for the doctrine that Christians and Muslims worship God together, other than a letter?
 
Hi JKirk,
I agree with you, what I am saying goes against what Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II said. I realize that. But aside from a letter, I don’t know where Pope John Paul II got this idea from. Muslims were “infidels” in the past and now they are “believers”.

Please, address the points I’ve raised and answer these questions -
  1. how can Muslims and Muhammad be “infidels”, yet at the same time, be believers?
    Because while they pray to the same God to Whom we pray, they’ve bought into either lies or delusions regarding Him.
  2. How is it possible that Jews and Christians must follow the bible, yet Muslims can reject it and still be “believers”? See Response #1
Thanks
 
Hi,
This would be question #3 then
  1. What source, prior to Vatican II is there for the doctrine that Christians and Muslims worship God together, other than a letter?
**3) Vatican II is a part of the continuous Magisterium of the Church. There is no rupture between it and preceding councils/teachings, etc. You pose a false dichotomy. Also, silence on the part of preceding popes regarding WHOM Moslems address when they pray does not preclude latter clarification on the same question. **

**We are not free to dissent from the Church. **
 
Here is another objection to Islam- This should make one consider carefully before endorsing a false religion.

sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum267.htm

From Summa Theologica

Whether apostasy pertains to unbelief?

Objection 2: Further, unbelief is an act of the understanding: whereas apostasy seems rather to consist in some outward deed or utterance, or even in some inward act of the will, for it is written (Prov. 6:12-14): “A man that is an apostate, an unprofitable man walketh with a perverse mouth. He winketh with the eyes, presseth with the foot, speaketh with the finger. With a wicked heart he deviseth evil, and at all times he soweth discord.” Moreover if anyone were to have himself circumcised, or to worship at the tomb of Mahomet, he would be deemed an apostate. Therefore apostasy does not pertain to unbelief.

On the contrary, It is written (Jn. 6:67): “Many of his disciples went back,” i.e. apostatized, of whom Our Lord had said previously (Jn. 6:65): “There are some of you that believe not.” Therefore apostasy pertains to unbelief.

I answer that, Apostasy denotes a backsliding from God. This may happen in various ways according to the different kinds of union between man and God. For, in the first place, man is united to God by faith; secondly, by having his will duly submissive in obeying His commandments; thirdly, by certain special things pertaining to supererogation such as the religious life, the clerical state, or Holy Orders. Now if that which follows be removed, that which precedes, remains, but the converse does not hold. Accordingly a man may apostatize from God, by withdrawing from the religious life to which he was bound by profession, or from the Holy Order which he had received: and this is called “apostasy from religious life” or “Orders.” A man may also apostatize from God, by rebelling in his mind against the Divine commandments: and though man may apostatize in both the above ways, he may still remain united to God by faith.

But if he give up the faith, then he seems to turn away from God altogether: and consequently, apostasy simply and absolutely is that whereby a man withdraws from the faith, and is called “apostasy of perfidy.” In this way apostasy, simply so called, pertains to unbelief.

Reply to Objection 2: It belongs to faith not only that the heart should believe, but also that external words and deeds should bear witness to the inward faith, for confession is an act of faith. In this way too, certain external words or deeds pertain to unbelief, in so far as they are signs of unbelief, even as a sign of health is said itself to be healthy. Now although the authority quoted may be understood as referring to every kind of apostate, yet it applies most truly to an apostate from the faith. For since faith is the first foundation of things to be hoped for, and since, without faith it is “impossible to please God”; when once faith is removed, man retains nothing that may be useful for the obtaining of eternal salvation, for which reason it is written (Prov. 6:12): “A man that is an apostate, an unprofitable man”: because faith is the life of the soul, according to Rom. 1:17: “The just man liveth by faith.” Therefore, just as when the life of the body is taken away, man’s every member and part loses its due disposition, so when the life of justice, which is by faith, is done away, disorder appears in all his members. First, in his mouth, whereby chiefly his mind stands revealed; secondly, in his eyes; thirdly, in the instrument of movement; fourthly, in his will, which tends to evil. The result is that “he sows discord,” endeavoring to sever others from the faith even as he severed himself.

Hopefully, it will be clear that the act of worshipping at the tomb of Muhammad, (ie: revearing muhammad) is an act of aspostasy **according to St. Thomas Aquinas./**QUOTE]

Bold is mine.

What is according to Thomas Aquinas is not always according to the Church or the Pope. St. Thomas Aquinas was a very humble man and would never put his opinion up against any pope who is acting in good faith.

Benedict XVI is not commiting an act of apostacy or asking anyone else to do so either. Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas would not rebuke the Holy Father.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF
 
Hi JKirk,
I agree with you, what I am saying goes against what Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II said. I realize that. But aside from a letter, I don’t know where Pope John Paul II got this idea from. Muslims were “infidels” in the past and now they are “believers”.

Please, address the points I’ve raised and answer these questions -
  1. how can Muslims and Muhammad be “infidels”, yet at the same time, be believers?
  2. How is it possible that Jews and Christians must follow the bible, yet Muslims can reject it and still be “believers”?
Thanks
Bold is mine. You are placing this at the feet of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. But you have already been given a list of popes who have said the same thing.

As to the change in terminology, from infidels to believers, remember what Pope Benedict said to the world when he came to NYC and what he has been saying since he became the Pope. Faith without reason cannot exist. Reason is necessary to explain faith and faith enlightens reason.

What the popes Gregory VII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI and the synod of bishops did was to use reason to understand the Muslim faith. When they did, they came away with the an understanding that Muslims do believe in the same God as Christians and Jews. They have never said that Islam has the fullness of truth. They have said that there are Catholic truths to be found in Islam. But they remain Catholic truths.

Hope you understand.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Hi JKirk,
I agree with you, what I am saying goes against what Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II said. I realize that. But aside from a letter, I don’t know where Pope John Paul II got this idea from. Muslims were “infidels” in the past and now they are “believers”.

Please, address the points I’ve raised and answer these questions -
  1. how can Muslims and Muhammad be “infidels”, yet at the same time, be believers?
  2. How is it possible that Jews and Christians must follow the bible, yet Muslims can reject it and still be “believers”?
Thanks
I’m not sure what you mean by infidel. Some use it to mean atheist, which would not include Muslims. Others use it to mean rejecting the divinity of Christ, which would include Jews and Muslims. Others use it to mean heretic, which would include most protestants. Labeling Muslims “infidels” doesn’t tell me anything about Allah.

Jews do not follow the Bible. They follow the Torah, Nevi’im and Ketuvim. Taken together, they are very similar to what Christians call the Old Testament. Muslims have the Koran and the Hadith, but they also have the Torah, which is the first five books of the Old Testament. Some Muslims also revere Psalms. So the three religions share some religious texts and not others. Of course the books, including our Bible, were created by the religions - the religions were not created by the books.

But regardless of how accurate or inaccurate each religions’ books are, how right or wrong each religions’ various leaders have been, and how good or bad each religions’ adherents worship and carry out God’s will, there is only one God, which all three worship.
 
The fact that they (Muslims) reject all the OT prophets is a clear sign to me that they worship a different god…a god created my Muhammad and his teachings.

Side Note: It cracks me up that catholics follow and believe that the pope and his teachings are infallible. Everyone is infallible, every man and every church. Infallibility is a title that belongs to God and God alone. I wish the Bible was as black and white as the catholic church makes it out to be…but unfortunately it isn’t. We’ll all be corrected about some things once we enter heaven.
 
The fact that they (Muslims) reject all the OT prophets is a clear sign to me that they worship a different god…a god created my Muhammad and his teachings.

Side Note: It cracks me up that catholics follow and believe that the pope and his teachings are infallible. Everyone is infallible, every man and every church. Infallibility is a title that belongs to God and God alone. I wish the Bible was as black and white as the catholic church makes it out to be…but unfortunately it isn’t. We’ll all be corrected about some things once we enter heaven.
Muslims do not reject the Old Testament prophets. They honor all the prophets of the Old Testament, and consider John the Baptist and Jesus to be prophets as well.
 
Jews do not follow the Bible. They follow the Torah, Nevi’im and Ketuvim. Taken together, they are very similar to what Christians call the Old Testament.
The Tanach (I believe its with a CH and not a K, but not positive), is the closed Jewish canon, what all Christian (except for the RCC) call the OT. Jesus refers to the TNCH as the word of God in Luke 24:44 and Luke 11:499-51. When ever Jesus says “it is written” he’s referring to the TNCH. The passages in Luke I gave give a very strong argument for this.
Of course the books, including our Bible, were created by the religions - the religions were not created by the books.
Christianity was created by the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles which is written and recorded. Yes it true that the Bible (as we know it today) itself was put together after the start of the church…but the church was founded on the words of Jesus which is recorded in the Gospels. The Bible IS the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles…and that’s what came first.

I don’t see how the catholic church can say they gave us the OT when Jesus did that for us. “It is written”!
 
The Tanach (I believe its with a CH and not a K, but not positive), is the closed Jewish canon, what all Christian (except for the RCC) call the OT. Jesus refers to the TNCH as the word of God in Luke 24:44 and Luke 11:499-51. When ever Jesus says “it is written” he’s referring to the TNCH. The passages in Luke I gave give a very strong argument for this.

Christianity was created by the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles which is written and recorded. Yes it true that the Bible (as we know it today) itself was put together after the start of the church…but the church was founded on the words of Jesus which is recorded in the Gospels. The Bible IS the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles…and that’s what came first.

I don’t see how the catholic church can say they gave us the OT when Jesus did that for us. “It is written”!
How one spells Tanach or Tanakh depends on how one spells Ketuvim as the word is essentially an acronym. Given that it is a word from a language with a completely different system of writing, spelling is hard to nail down.

The Catholic Church did not give us the OT, but it did decide what writings would be included in it. Some Protestants did later modify their canon to remove the so-callaed apocrapha.

There is considerable disagreement over what books would have been included in what Jesus refers to as Scripture, and over when the Jewish canon was closed. Some Jews claim their Scripture was canonized hundreds of years BC, others around 100 AD, some claim it was even later. We don’t know precisely what set or version of books the scrolls Christ used contained, but the Septuagint existed in Christ’s time, and was the version of Scripture used by Greek speaking Jews. It contains the apocrypha, and also other books that are not included in the Catholic or Protestant OT canon.

We agree that Christianity was created by the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. Christianity existed for decades before any of those teaching were written down, and hundreds of years before all of written teachings we have were completed. The bible was written to reflect the beliefs of Christianity, it is not the source of those beliefs. Christ is the source of the beliefs.
 
Muslims do not reject the Old Testament prophets. They honor all the prophets of the Old Testament, and consider John the Baptist and Jesus to be prophets as well.
Hang on for a sec. The Muslims deny that Our Lord Jesus Christ is God? But, He is God. He is the second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Our Triune God.

So, therefore, the Muslims don’t worship the same God we do?

Simple enough innit? Or is a spade not a spade??
 
Hang on for a sec. The Muslims deny that Our Lord Jesus Christ is God? But, He is God. He is the second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Our Triune God.

So, therefore, the Muslims don’t worship the same God we do?

Simple enough innit? Or is a spade not a spade??
By your logic, the Jewish people do not worship the same God either, and of course that is patent nonsense, unless you want to try to rewrite Holy Scripture for us all. While all three Abrahamic religions worship the same God, their understandings of that same God are different.

Take as another example many Christian sects which have wrong ideas about God, such as the Mormons. They certainly entertain flakey ideas about God. Do they worship a different God? Of course not.

To God, it doesn’t matter what’s in our minds, since no one can understand God. We’d need to have the mind of God to understand God. Rarher, God looks in our hearts to see what is there, to look for justice and charity and mercy and any of the other Godly virtues.

Perhaps a father has three children. The youngest can only say 'DaDa." The middle child calls him “Daddy” while only the eldest can correctly call him “Father.” Yet, the father knows when any of his children are addressing him.
 
Hang on for a sec. The Muslims deny that Our Lord Jesus Christ is God? But, He is God. He is the second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Our Triune God.

So, therefore, the Muslims don’t worship the same God we do?

Simple enough innit? Or is a spade not a spade??
I write to you not because you do not know the truth but because you do, and because every lie is alien to the truth. Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist. No one who denies the Son has the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well.

1 John 2:21-23

I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and you do the things that you have seen with your father. They answered, and said to him: Abraham is our father. Jesus saith to them: If you be the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham. But now you seek to kill me, a man who have spoken the truth to you, which I have heard of God. This Abraham did not.

You do the works of your father. They said therefore to him: We are not born of fornication: we have one Father, even God. Jesus therefore said to them: If God were your Father, you would indeed love me. For from God I proceeded, and came; for I came not of myself, but he sent me: Why do you not know my speech? Because you cannot hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. But if I say the truth, you believe me not. Which of you shall convince me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? He that is of God, heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God.

John 8:38-48

Nor is it sufficient that we call Him Who is in Heaven “Father.” We must add to the name “Our Father.” This name rebukes and condemns the Jews who not only spurned Christ faithlessly, but also cruelly executed Him Who was announced to them by the prophets, and sent first to their nation. No longer may they call God their Father, because the Lord confounds and refutes them, saying: “Your father is the Devil” (John viii.44). O sinful nation, O people weighed down with guilt, breed of evil-doers, lawless children, you have turned your backs on the Lord and have provoked the Holy One of Israel! We Christians at prayer say “Our Father,” since He has begun to be ours, but ceased to be the Father of the Jews who have forsaken Him. There is no way a sinful nation can be His children; on the contrary, that title is bestowed on those to whom remission of sins has been granted and to whom eternal life has been promised.

St. Cyprian of Carthage, Bishop, Father of the Church

Whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is Antichrist, and whosoever does not profess the testimony of the cross is a devil, and whosoever perverts the saying of the Lord to his own evil desires … is the first-born of Satan.

St. Polycarp of Smyrna, Bishop, Father of the Church, Disciple of St. John the Apostle
 
By your logic, the Jewish people do not worship the same God either, and of course that is patent nonsense, unless you want to try to rewrite Holy Scripture for us all. While all three Abrahamic religions worship the same God, their understandings of that same God are different.

Take as another example many Christian sects which have wrong ideas about God, such as the Mormons. They certainly entertain flakey ideas about God. Do they worship a different God? Of course not.

To God, it doesn’t matter what’s in our minds, since no one can understand God. We’d need to have the mind of God to understand God. Rarher, God looks in our hearts to see what is there, to look for justice and charity and mercy and any of the other Godly virtues.

Perhaps a father has three children. The youngest can only say 'DaDa." The middle child calls him “Daddy” while only the eldest can correctly call him “Father.” Yet, the father knows when any of his children are addressing him.
This strikes me as a bit indifferentist. Almost like it doesn’t matter what we believe about God as long as we all believe in God. This is not what our Lord taught.: “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in TRUTH. For the Father also seeketh such to adore him. God is a spirit; and they that adore him, must adore him in spirit and in TRUTH” (John 4: 23-24). We can’t separate our worship of God from the truth of who He is as revealed by Jesus Christ.
 
To God, it doesn’t matter what’s in our minds, since no one can understand God. We’d need to have the mind of God to understand God. Rarher, God looks in our hearts to see what is there, to look for justice and charity and mercy and any of the other Godly virtues.
By your logic, Truth is irrelevant, and it doesn’t matter what religion we have. As long as we feel good about it.

Of course, to a true Catholic, the Catholic Church is the One, True, Catholic and Apostolic Church. And it is the only Church that will help you to heaven.

You might get to Heaven whilst professing another faith, but it will be in spite of your religion, and not because of it.
 
  1. how can Muslims and Muhammad be “infidels”, yet at the same time, be believers?
    **Because while they pray to the same God to Whom we pray, they’ve bought into either lies or delusions regarding Him. **
  2. How is it possible that Jews and Christians must follow the bible, yet Muslims can reject it and still be “believers”? See Response #1
    Thanks
Hi JKirk,

Let me reword the question. In the past, Popes called them “infidels” which means non-believer. Now, the Popes are calling them believers and saying they worship god together with us.

My question was, how can they be both infidels and believers? You answer because they pray to the same god as us. You are only repeating what the present popes are saying.

I am asking you how it is possible, that present popes can reverse their position on Muslims? Do you know?
 
3) Vatican II is a part of the continuous Magisterium of the Church. There is no rupture between it and preceding councils/teachings, etc. You pose a false dichotomy. Also, silence on the part of preceding popes regarding WHOM Moslems address when they pray does not preclude latter clarification on the same question.

**We are not free to dissent from the Church. **
Hi again:)

I have given you quotes from a previous ecumenical council calling Muslims infidels, sacrilegious etc… Your response is to say that Vat II doesn’t say anything different from past ecumenical councils?

Do you wish me to requote the Council of Viennes for comparison?

Are you saying that there is no change in our relationship with the Muslims as stated in Ecumenical councils?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top