F
FrDavid96
Guest
Do you honestly want to know the answer to that question?
Do you really and truly want to know the answer?
Do you agree that the Judeo-Christian God is not the same as the Muslim God?
- Status
Do you really and truly want to know the answer?
S
simonmic
Guest
Yeah, hit me with it!
F
FrDavid96
Guest
He (Christ) would have used the word “ee-laah” or possible “ah-laah.”
S
simonmic
Guest
OMG! it sounds almost like… Don’t let the anti-anything-Islam-Brigade see this.
Is that Aramaic then?
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Yes.
Aramaic is actually a very broad word that encompasses many different dialects over thousands of years. There is no “one Aramaic.”
There were countless regional variations (just as there are today with languages).
Christ’s own native language was Aramaic. He would have only used Hebrew in the Temple or synagogue or at prayer. His daily language was Aramaic.
Someone who was a native speaker of Aramaic, living in and around Jerusalem (Galilee, etc) 2,000 years ago would have used a word for God that sounded very much similar (if not identical) to the word Allah.
Mohammed did not invent the word “Allah” he used the word that was already being used by the Aramaic-speaking peoples of his time & place. Mohammed’s word for God was the same word the Christians were using.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Looking back at the thread, I can see you probably (nay, certainly) already knew that.
S
simonmic
Guest
Thanks for the info.
I read online as well that many may have spoken Greek back then too in that region. I don’t know much at all about history so they were just some comments i came across.
By the way…I found this song on youtube a few yrs ago. It is meant to be the Our Father, sung in Aramaic.I liked it anyway, and sometimes play it.
youtube.com/watch?v=MAEIrp4MFBE
I read online as well that many may have spoken Greek back then too in that region. I don’t know much at all about history so they were just some comments i came across.
By the way…I found this song on youtube a few yrs ago. It is meant to be the Our Father, sung in Aramaic.I liked it anyway, and sometimes play it.
youtube.com/watch?v=MAEIrp4MFBE
A
Abu
Guest
The failure of Mohammed’s Koran and the Muslim theologians was the rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as the Divine Son of God, and thus the Church which He founded which has all the truths that mankind needs, for as Peter Kreeft points out Mohammed and the Koran are essentially another Moses (lawgiver) and another law, so denying the mediator between God and man – Christ. The essentials missing are grace, salvation, redemption.
Denied are three main dogmas: the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Resurrection.
Clearly Mohammed’s ideas are inadequate.
Denied are three main dogmas: the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Resurrection.
Clearly Mohammed’s ideas are inadequate.
A
Abu
Guest
It needs to be crystal clear that Vatican II is also a Dogmatic Council, containing two Dogmatic Constitutions.
In his book, *Sources of Renewal *Karol Cardinal Wojtyla (Pope St John Paul II) wrote: “It may be said that every Council in the Church’s history has been a pastoral one, if only because the assembled bishops, under the Pope’s guidance, are pastors of the Church. At the same time every Council is an act of the supreme Magisterium of the Church. Magisterium signifies teaching based on authority, a teaching which is the mission of the Apostles and their successors, it is part of their function and an essential task.” The Cardinal goes on: “All this has been signally confirmed by Vatican II, which, while preserving its pastoral character and mindful of the purpose for which it was called, profoundly developed the doctrine of faith and thus provided a basis for its enrichment.” (Ibid, p 38-39).
So pastorally inclined like all Councils, Vatican II also developed doctrine profoundly, as Fr John a Hardon, S.J., affirms. Vatican II confirmed that even non infallible doctrine must be received with assent: “This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra”…when doctrine is proposed or formulated. *Lumen Gentium *(Dogmatic Constitution on the Church), 25].
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
Allah is the generic word for God in Arabic, just as God is the generic word for God in English.
The person who originated this posting is right in that Allah is used as a proper name in Islam whereas Yahweh is the proper Name for God in both Judaism and Christianity and it is reportedly given to us by God thru Moses in the Old Testament or Torah.
The use of “Allah” by Christians in Arabic language places is a generic use, just as “God” is a generic use in English speaking places.
The person who originated this posting is right in that Allah is used as a proper name in Islam whereas Yahweh is the proper Name for God in both Judaism and Christianity and it is reportedly given to us by God thru Moses in the Old Testament or Torah.
The use of “Allah” by Christians in Arabic language places is a generic use, just as “God” is a generic use in English speaking places.
M
MartinJordan
Guest
J
john81
Guest
…if it is in conformity with the teachings of the Church of all time, then yes. The statement that Muslims believe in the same God is not in conformity with the teaching of all time, and since this is not an ex cathedra statement (in fact, it never could be) is a pastoral statement that does not continue the deposit of faith.
Don’t over think this please, my 6 year old knows the answer to “How many persons are there in God?” Answer: “There are THREE DIVINE persons, GOD the Father, GOD the Son, GOD the Holy Ghost”. To deny GOD (the Son) is to deny GOD.
Would you affirm then that Vatican II can be believed to say/teach (as a deposit of faith) that to deny Jesus Christ is to believe in the true God? Can we believe in the Father (as the Muslims would say) if Jesus himself said “you can only go to the Father through me”?
S
SteveVH
Guest
Believing in the one, true God can be accomplished without having a good understanding the nature of that one, true God. As has been said repeatedly on this very thread, you cannot believe the Muslims worship a false god without applying this equally to the Jews. Both worship the God of Abraham even if they do not understand his triune nature.
A
Abu
Guest
Agreed.
It is false to claim that Vatican II disrupts “the deposit of faith”. That Muslims “adore the one merciful God” says no more than that, and nothing about how they lack the truths of faith, as that is not the purpose of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. This cannot be surmised realistically to be “the same God”.
C
cena
Guest
When did the Church teach that Muslims worship the same God as us?
C
CatholicHockey7
Guest
“The plan of salvation also includes those who ignore the creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these professed to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” CCC 841 quoting Lumen Gentium (aka, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church).
The surrounding paragraphs are also worth a read. Paragraphs 839-845 specifically deal with the Church and non-Christians.
P
Petaro
Guest
Words are just linguistic tools to express a concept. I accept the Church teaching that Muslims worship the God of Abraham. However their view of God’s nature is not ours as they do not accept the Trinity. They are also at odds with us as to his wish for how we are to live our lives. Their teaching on the treatment of those caught in adultery is in complete contradiction to Jesus’s forgiveness in the Scriptures. Their treatment of their wives, no matter if it is cultural, is contrary to our expression of love in marriage. We are not permitted as Christians to beat our wives if they disobey.
Disregarding the mad and bad perverting the religion in Iraq and Syria, we can still see fundamental differences both in the Nature of the God worshipped and His tenets for our lives. The concept of one God seems the only similarity. I therefore believe that, in truth, the religions differ too radically to worship the same Deity.
Disregarding the mad and bad perverting the religion in Iraq and Syria, we can still see fundamental differences both in the Nature of the God worshipped and His tenets for our lives. The concept of one God seems the only similarity. I therefore believe that, in truth, the religions differ too radically to worship the same Deity.
A
Abu
Guest
It is very clear that the God of Muslims is very different from the real God revealed by Jesus the Christ, the Son of God. Realism is offered by Fr James V Schall, S.J.
**Tuesday, 23 August 2011
On the Fragility of Islam
By James V. Schall, S. J. **
Excerpt:
Is the Koran what it claims to be?
So with this background, why talk of the “fragility” of Islam? This instability arises from the status of the text of the Koran as an historical document. The Koran is said to have been dictated directly in Arabic by Allah. It has, as it were, no prehistory, even though it did not come into existence until a century or so after Mohammed.
Scholars, mostly German, have been working quietly for many decades to produce a critical edition of the Koran that takes into consideration the “pre-history” of the Koran. Due to the Muslim belief that any effort to question the Koran’s text is blasphemy, the enterprise is fraught with personal risk to the researchers. The idea that the text cannot be investigated, of course, only feeds suspicion that even Muslims worry about its integrity.
Much of the philosophy within Islam, as we know, had roots in scholars who were originally Christian or Persian. This is well recorded in Robert Reilly’s The Closing of the Muslim Mind. But even more, the Koran itself seems to be composed of many elements from Christian or Hebrew scripture. The very word Koran has roots in liturgical books.
The systematic denial in the Koran itself of the Trinity and the Incarnation, the reducing of Christ from the Messiah to another prophet, force us to inquire about the connection between the Koran and Judaeo-Christian Scriptures. The broader claim that Mohammed’s “revelation” rewrote and made obsolete the earlier revelation needs direct confrontation.
The ecumenical movement has limited relations to Islam pretty much to areas of mutual agreement. This is well enough. But one cannot ignore the issue of truth about a text and the grounds on which it is based.
Religion or faith, even in Islam through Averroes, has been conceived as a myth designed to keep the people quiet. The scholars could quietly let the caliphs and the imams rule if the intelligentsia were left free to pursue philosophy, which was conceived to be anti-Koranic in the sense that the Koran did not hold up under scrutiny about its claims.
The fragility of Islam, as I see it, lies in a sudden realization of the ambiguity of the text of the Koran. Is it what it claims to be? Islam is weak militarily. It is strong in social cohesion, often using severe moral and physical sanctions. But the grounding and unity of its basic document are highly suspect. Once this becomes clear, Islam may be as fragile as communism.
2011 The Catholic Thing
**Tuesday, 23 August 2011
On the Fragility of Islam
By James V. Schall, S. J. **
Excerpt:
Is the Koran what it claims to be?
So with this background, why talk of the “fragility” of Islam? This instability arises from the status of the text of the Koran as an historical document. The Koran is said to have been dictated directly in Arabic by Allah. It has, as it were, no prehistory, even though it did not come into existence until a century or so after Mohammed.
Scholars, mostly German, have been working quietly for many decades to produce a critical edition of the Koran that takes into consideration the “pre-history” of the Koran. Due to the Muslim belief that any effort to question the Koran’s text is blasphemy, the enterprise is fraught with personal risk to the researchers. The idea that the text cannot be investigated, of course, only feeds suspicion that even Muslims worry about its integrity.
Much of the philosophy within Islam, as we know, had roots in scholars who were originally Christian or Persian. This is well recorded in Robert Reilly’s The Closing of the Muslim Mind. But even more, the Koran itself seems to be composed of many elements from Christian or Hebrew scripture. The very word Koran has roots in liturgical books.
The systematic denial in the Koran itself of the Trinity and the Incarnation, the reducing of Christ from the Messiah to another prophet, force us to inquire about the connection between the Koran and Judaeo-Christian Scriptures. The broader claim that Mohammed’s “revelation” rewrote and made obsolete the earlier revelation needs direct confrontation.
The ecumenical movement has limited relations to Islam pretty much to areas of mutual agreement. This is well enough. But one cannot ignore the issue of truth about a text and the grounds on which it is based.
Religion or faith, even in Islam through Averroes, has been conceived as a myth designed to keep the people quiet. The scholars could quietly let the caliphs and the imams rule if the intelligentsia were left free to pursue philosophy, which was conceived to be anti-Koranic in the sense that the Koran did not hold up under scrutiny about its claims.
The fragility of Islam, as I see it, lies in a sudden realization of the ambiguity of the text of the Koran. Is it what it claims to be? Islam is weak militarily. It is strong in social cohesion, often using severe moral and physical sanctions. But the grounding and unity of its basic document are highly suspect. Once this becomes clear, Islam may be as fragile as communism.
2011 The Catholic Thing
S
SteveVH
Guest
Sorry, but you misquoted the Catechism. The plan of salvation does not include those who “ignore” the Creator, but rather those who acknowledge the Creator.
“The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” (CCC par 841).
Just thought we should clear that up.
Peace
Steve
- Status