How do I as a Catholic refute these Muslim claims

[jjmonroy]

Islam professes to be a restoration of the true Abrahamic religion. It claims that Abraham, Moses and Jesus were all Muslims who merely taught submission to Allah.

1. It claims that Jews and Christians all distorted the revealed books of Allah (Torah, Psalms, and Gospels).
   -Muslim apologists justify this by mentioning the non-canonical books e.g. Gospel of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermes.
   -Also by finding similarities in early Christian sects e.g. Arianism (rejects the Christian Trinity).
2. Furthermore they claim that Jews defiled the biographies of the Prophets by insinuating that they committed major sins e.g. King David committing adultery.
   -They also claim Jews defiled God’s character e.g. God commanding the killing of the Canaanites which included women and children.
   -They reject the Jewish claim that God is a Father; they see their relationship with him as Master and slave.
3. As for Christians they claim we inserted pagan beliefs e.g. Trinity.
   -They claim Christians commit idolatry: praying to Mary, and the saints. Also by having pictures, icons, statues of them.
   -They claim the sacred mysteries of our Christian faith are illogical (Jesus’ hypostatic union fully God and fully man). They claim we made Christ divine, he never utter the words “I am God”.
4. (Defense for sharia). Muslim apologists justify the use of capital punishment in their religion by finding similarities in the OT when God commanded the nation of Israel to execute severe sentences for sinners e.g. stoning adulterers.
5. (Defense for jihad). Muslims apologists defend Muhammad military campaign as one in line with OT kings, and prophets e.g. King David, Moses.
6. (Defense for polygamy). Muslims assert that because revered people in the OT were allowed to have multiple wives Muhammad continued on with that practice.

***While I reject Muhammad’s prophethood. I understand that he’s a social reformer. I believe he was successful in creating a great religion based on the precepts of both Jewish and Christian teaching. My narrative is a reconciliation between Islamic, secular, Jewish and Christian sources. At some point in Muhammad’s life he came in contact with Jews and Christians. He admired what he saw in both respective communities. He sought to bring that same stability, uniformity and peace with his own people the warring Arab tribes of his time. Unfortunately for Muhammad his people were not interested in his new message. They were set in their old ways. Eventually Muhammad realize that he would need to claim the title of prophet in order to gain legitimacy for his actions. He sought to find common ground with Jews and Christians. Both would reject granting him this status. Nonetheless Muhammad would continue to win converts, and eventually land as well.

Islam is successful because it has enough truth to attract people to it. e.g. monotheism, 99 names of Allah, reward & merit. It’s also filled with tremendous falsehoods e.g. denial of Christ’s divinity, death, and resurrection. Islam basically makes religion simple it negates all mystery of the faith and simply asks its members to submit to Allah and perform certain exercises to appease him e.g. hajj, charity. Islam will continue to show its might on this world because like Christianity it’s a universal faith. And like Judaism it employs severe punishments in order to keep uniformity in it’s stringent teachings.***

 

[Servant19]

Wouldn’t it just have been a lot easier for Muhammad to profess Christs Divinity, His Resurrection etc etc?

Why would Muhammad just not do the smart, and easiest, and most attractive thing to reel in the followers, and simply say, Jesus is God and on the third day He was physically resurrected?

.

 

[sousley]

My understanding is that he encountered Jewish and Arianism and learned from that experience. The five pillars of Islam mimic facets of Judiasm with sort of a personal twist. The celebration of Hanukkah was soon replaced with Ramadan, and obviously the prayers of the hours and concept of a pilgrimage, etc. Mohammed united his people by quieting discord between the tribes focusing acrimony outward against neighboring nations, and successfully so. They claim to be descendants of Abraham through Ismael so I’m not sure how David is factoring in. The rest, like Sharia law developed as they grew more organized.

 

[7_Sorrows]

And don’t forget the part the angel gabriel played.

 

[dronald]

Islam professes to be a restoration of the true Abrahamic religion. It claims that Abraham, Moses and Jesus were all Muslims who merely taught submission to Allah.

1. It claims that Jews and Christians all distorted the revealed books of Allah (Torah, Psalms, and Gospels).
   -Muslim apologists justify this by mentioning the non-canonical books e.g. Gospel of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermes.

The Gospel of Barnabas is an argument for children; no true scholar would ever take it seriously. Also, please note what argument Muslims draw from Hermes? It only speaks in favor of Christianity.

-Also by finding similarities in early Christian sects e.g. Arianism (rejects the Christian Trinity).
2. Furthermore they claim that Jews defiled the biographies of the Prophets by insinuating that they committed major sins e.g. King David committing adultery.
-They also claim Jews defiled God’s character e.g. God commanding the killing of the Canaanites which included women and children.
-They reject the Jewish claim that God is a Father; they see their relationship with him as Master and slave.
3. As for Christians they claim we inserted pagan beliefs e.g. Trinity.
-They claim Christians commit idolatry: praying to Mary, and the saints. Also by having pictures, icons, statues of them.
-They claim the sacred mysteries of our Christian faith are illogical (Jesus’ hypostatic union fully God and fully man). They claim we made Christ divine, he never utter the words “I am God”.

Ariansm is not like Islam at all, and the Trinity has been discussed at length.

1. (Defense for sharia). Muslim apologists justify the use of capital punishment in their religion by finding similarities in the OT when God commanded the nation of Israel to execute severe sentences for sinners e.g. stoning adulterers.
2. (Defense for jihad). Muslims apologists defend Muhammad military campaign as one in line with OT kings, and prophets e.g. King David, Moses.
3. (Defense for polygamy). Muslims assert that because revered people in the OT were allowed to have multiple wives Muhammad continued on with that practice.

Jesus fulfilled the law and brought a higher morality while Muhammad lived in the past. Jesus even said the only reason why one could have more than one wife was because of the hardness of our own hearts. Muhammad was committing a sin that God has condemned.

***While I reject Muhammad’s prophethood. I understand that he’s a social reformer. I believe he was successful in creating a great religion based on the precepts of both Jewish and Christian teaching. My narrative is a reconciliation between Islamic, secular, Jewish and Christian sources. At some point in Muhammad’s life he came in contact with Jews and Christians. He admired what he saw in both respective communities. He sought to bring that same stability, uniformity and peace with his own people the warring Arab tribes of his time. Unfortunately for Muhammad his people were not interested in his new message. They were set in their old ways. Eventually Muhammad realize that he would need to claim the title of prophet in order to gain legitimacy for his actions. He sought to find common ground with Jews and Christians. Both would reject granting him this status. Nonetheless Muhammad would continue to win converts, and eventually land as well.

Islam is successful because it has enough truth to attract people to it. e.g. monotheism, 99 names of Allah, reward & merit. It’s also filled with tremendous falsehoods e.g. denial of Christ’s divinity, death, and resurrection. Islam basically makes religion simple it negates all mystery of the faith and simply asks its members to submit to Allah and perform certain exercises to appease him e.g. hajj, charity. Islam will continue to show its might on this world because like Christianity it’s a universal faith. And like Judaism it employs severe punishments in order to keep uniformity in it’s stringent teachings.***

I see nothing of value in Islam.

 

[Mystophilus]

Regarding the Qu’ran’s claims that the Bible includes falsified versions of “what really happened”, I am afraid that there is no reasonable refutation, since the only way to prove one version over the other would require a time machine. As such, it is simply an article of faith for Muslims that their Scriptures are correct about ours not being so.

My narrative is a reconciliation between Islamic, secular, Jewish and Christian sources. …] Eventually Muhammad realize that he would need to claim the title of prophet in order to gain legitimacy for his actions. He sought to find common ground with Jews and Christians. Both would reject granting him this status. Nonetheless Muhammad would continue to win converts, and eventually land as well.

Um, okay, what “narrative”, exactly? Are you writing a novel? Also, are you aware of the fact that this will offend Muslims just as much (and in precisely the same way that) saying, “Jesus eventually realised that he would need to claim the title of Son of God in order to gain legitimacy for his actions”?

 

[Servant19]

The Gospel of Barnabas is an argument for children; no true scholar would ever take it seriously.

I didn’t know scholarship was a seriously taken facet of knowledge by the Christian community, especially since scholarship puts doubt into the historical reliability of some events in the Gospels…

.

 

[Servant19]

Jesus fulfilled the law and brought a higher morality while Muhammad lived in the past. Jesus even said the only reason why one could have more than one wife was because of the hardness of our own hearts. Muhammad was committing a sin that God has condemned.

Might I ask two questions please?

1. Do you think the true teachings of Christ were practiced by many in the times of Muhammad in Arabia? If so, what is your source please?
2. If the situation presented itself, what would Jesus have done if He saw widows with their recently orphaned children, about to be killed by savage men? If the only option was to marry the woman/women, would He have refused and condemned them to innocent slaughter?

.

 

[Matthew_Light]

Jesus fulfilled the law and brought a higher morality while Muhammad lived in the past.

Jesus came to a civilized people who followed Moses for generations. Muhammad came to wild tribes of idol worshipers who even killed their own baby daughters.

Jesus even said the only reason why one could have more than one wife was because of the hardness of our own hearts.

No, He was speaking of divorce, not polygyny.

Muhammad was committing a sin that God has condemned.

Muhammad was protecting and providing support for widows in a society where they faced rape and death.

 

[sousley]

Jesus came to a civilized people who followed Moses for generations.

?? Jesus’s first ministerial event ended with the Jews trying to push him off a cliff. We do remember what Saul was doing before the road to Damascus, no? Stephen, Zealots, …

No, He was speaking of divorce, not polygyny.

Agreed, but that doesn’t negate the point.

Muhammad was protecting and providing support for widows in a society where they faced rape and death.

A noble objective. Many, many priests and lay Christians have done the same throughout history. But they did not start their own religion; I’m not sure how that applies as a justification.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I didn’t know scholarship was a seriously taken facet of knowledge by the Christian community, especially since scholarship puts doubt into the historical reliability of some events in the Gospels…

.

If you want to talk about scholarship, tell me, what scholar affirms that Jesus taught bahai doctrines? Tell me how you defend your belief in the virgin birth which secular scholars deny happening?

Tell me, if you want to treat the gospel of Barnabas seriously, do you deny Jesus was the Christ?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Muhammad was protecting and providing support for widows in a society where they faced rape and death.

How do you know this?

 

[Contarini]

I didn’t know scholarship was a seriously taken facet of knowledge by the Christian community, especially since scholarship puts doubt into the historical reliability of some events in the Gospels…

.

Some scholarship does, yes. Christians as a whole (certainly this is true of the Catholic Church) take that scholarship very seriously.

However, this scholarship doesn’t help the Islamic case at all. For instance, the one thing about Jesus’ life scholars are most agreed on is the fact that he was crucified, which Muslims typically deny. On the other hand, Muslims believe in the virgin birth, which is probably the most historically dubious of all the major things asserted about Jesus in the NT.

The Islamic portrait of Jesus, or of the OT, has very little to do with anything asserted by scholarship. It looks very much as if it were based on Christian and Jewish legend.

Muslims have for the most part not even begun to take the findings of critical scholarship seriously with regard either to the Bible or the Qur’an. One of the leading revisionist scholars of the Qur’an can’t even publish under his own name because he fears for his life. In that climate, Muslims can get away with making all kinds of confident claims about the Qur’an, because the people who try to challenge those claims are silenced (in the Islamic world, and to some extent even in the West, as “Christoph von Luxemburg’s” case shows).

So Muslims really shouldn’t try to use critical scholarship against Christianity unless and until they are willing to open up their own religion to similar scholarly inquiries.

Edwin

 

[7_Sorrows]

Congratulations Contarini on seeking admission to the Catholic church.
Were you previously episcipalian or an I confusing you with someone else?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

jjmonroy;12184848]Islam professes to be a restoration of the true Abrahamic religion. It claims that Abraham, Moses and Jesus were all Muslims who merely taught submission to Allah.

1. It claims that Jews and Christians all distorted the revealed books of Allah (Torah, Psalms, and Gospels).
   -Muslim apologists justify this by mentioning the non-canonical books e.g. Gospel of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermes.
   -Also by finding similarities in early Christian sects e.g. Arianism (rejects the Christian Trinity).
2. Furthermore they claim that Jews defiled the biographies of the Prophets by insinuating that they committed major sins e.g. King David committing adultery.
   -They also claim Jews defiled God’s character e.g. God commanding the killing of the Canaanites which included women and children.
   -They reject the Jewish claim that God is a Father; they see their relationship with him as Master and slave.
3. As for Christians they claim we inserted pagan beliefs e.g. Trinity.
   -They claim Christians commit idolatry: praying to Mary, and the saints. Also by having pictures, icons, statues of them.
   -They claim the sacred mysteries of our Christian faith are illogical (Jesus’ hypostatic union fully God and fully man). They claim we made Christ divine, he never utter the words “I am God”.

Islam cannot make any such claims in opposition to the True Christian and Jewish faith. The best a Muslim or Islam’s prophet Muhammad can do is speculate on history from afar which leads only to a prejudiced and bias opinion of the historical facts.

Reason number one; There exist no Muslim who follows Muhammads ideology in all of Jewish, Christian and Pagan recorded history prior to Muhammad’s message of Islam.

Reason number two; There never was a Muslim existing who follows Muhammads new religion of Islam to give an eyewitness recorded historical account that would support any Islamic or Muslim false accusations about Jews and Christians recorded histories.

Reason number three; Because no Muslim who follows Muhammad’s teachings or Islamic faith ever existed during the Old testament and New testament recorded times.

No Muslim nor the Islamic faith do not have any historical facts or eyewitnesses to support their false claims against the Jews or Christians. Without any Muslim eyewitnesses or Islamic faith existing during the Judeo/Christian recorded history pre-Islam. Muslims have no leg or no truth to their false claims.

Islam invents a history that never existed, because Islam never exists in that history from which it makes it’s false claims.

As far as the Iconoclasts period is concerned the Christians resolved that issue themselves and corrected the world’s false views of what is deemed Idol worship which the Church has always condemned and Islam’s false interpretation of the scriptures of Idols, when God commands Moses to build in opposition to Muhammad’s false view of Jews and Christians.

1. (Defense for sharia). Muslim apologists justify the use of capital punishment in their religion by finding similarities in the OT when God commanded the nation of Israel to execute severe sentences for sinners e.g. stoning adulterers.
2. (Defense for jihad). Muslims apologists defend Muhammad military campaign as one in line with OT kings, and prophets e.g. King David, Moses.
3. (Defense for polygamy). Muslims assert that because revered people in the OT were allowed to have multiple wives Muhammad continued on with that practice.

Muslims follow the man Muhammad who dictates to them what Islam’s Allah has revealed to their prophet without any other eyewitness to give proof for Muhammad’s claims.

John the baptist, all prophets pre-announce and foretell of Jesus coming and what He will do which all came to pass.

The only eyewitness who foretells of Muhammad’s coming is recorded in the New Testament, which reveals an anti-Christ who will twist the Word of God and convince the many of a truth with a lie.

Islam is successful, because it possess’s the virtue of deception in order to conquer any and all non-Muslims, and after success is made by deception, the sword and black flag of Islam gets revealed to deliver their Allah’s just punishment and vengeance to any who will not submit to Muhammad and Islam by conversion or death.

I agree with you, that Muhammad did rid many of the Arab tribes of Idolatry, although the method by which Muhammad’s army was successful is debatable as far as human standards of human life and dignity is concerned.

Muslims have no sources of their own to support their false history accounts because they did not exist yet. Contrary to the different tribes living in their lands at the time, but these are never Muslim because they are all idol worshippers during the time Islam makes it’s historical false claims of Jews and Christians.

Interesting thread:thumbsup:

peace be with you

 

[KathleenGee]

It is impossible to dialogue and refute Islam based on analyses given here by Mystophilus, Edwin, and Gabriel12.

Best to pray for their conversion and live out the most upright Christian life.

 

[Estevao]

The thing is that the person making the claim has the burden of proof. These are all a bunch of claims that THEY need to substantiate before we think about the need to refute them. If the proof for all this “distortion” of the Old and New Testaments comes from the claims of a 7th century book, I’m going to be rather quick to reject these claims much like I’m rather quick to reject the similar claims of a book written in the 19th century.

Moreover, listing a bunch of claims is just shotgun argumentation, and it takes a lot longer to refute a falsehood than to assert one to a naive audience whom the speaker thinks is too uneducated to do their own research, and therefore neglects to mention any kind of historical evidence for these claims for the audience. Like by mentioning non-canonical gospels, to refute this, you would need to explain the process of canonization and the interplay between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. That takes a lot longer than simply asking “well, what about the gospel of Thomas, huh?” Same goes for the rest of the claims. So to save time, demand substantiation for the claims in the first place.

Finally, I fail to understand the Moslems’ take on Old Testament figures like King David and Noah. If Mohammed is able to consummate a marriage with a nine year old girl/“woman” than what is so shocking about King David committing adultery and murder or Noah getting drunk? And moreover, why should I believe that the Old Testament accurately records the existence of polygamy if I’m going to reject claims about Noah getting drunk or King David committing adultery? Why should I reject one fact but accept the other?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

It is impossible to dialogue and refute Islam based on analyses given here by Mystophilus, Edwin, and Gabriel12.

Best to pray for their conversion and live out the most upright Christian life.

It depends on how one goes about it. True, most likely your not going to convince them by merely arguing. But equally you aren’t going to be able to convince anyone if you can’t respond to the criticisms which they think might over power any explanation.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

It depends on how one goes about it. True, most likely your not going to convince them by merely arguing. But equally you aren’t going to be able to convince anyone if you can’t respond to the criticisms which they think might over power any explanation.

Both KathleenGee and IgnatianPhilo are correct;

As Christians we have to lead by living out our Christian faith first, which includes learning of our Christian heritage, sacred Traditions especially our Christian martyrs and saints who give witness to our faith.

In every age since the resurrection of our Master Jesus Christ, our forefathers lived and followed the gospels and in obedience to St.Peter’s letter these Christians give reason for their faith against all who opposed the teachings and revelations of Jesus Christ.

To the OP, practice and keep learning your rich Christian faith especially the Catholic Church history from which Muslims try and deceive the ignorant.

By practicing your Christian faith and armed with the knowledge of Jesus Christ and His body the Church, there is no weapon formed by the evil powers and principalities which influences man that can defeat you, including death which has lost it’s sting against True Christians.

So be encouraged, there is no argument placed against the revelations of Jesus Christ which can stand when met with the whole of TRUTH.

In short, to refute any Muslims claims, refute them with the Truth.

When a Muslim presents his argument, know that Muslim steps out of rank fully armed with deception of every kind against TRUTH in order to convince you what Jesus revealed and what the Catholic Church teaches got it all wrong.

This Johnny come lately (religion Islam) apologetics practiced on the minds of the ignorant become moved by their deception.

Yet as KathleenGee said, living out your Christian faith, with prayer and fasting give witness to the Truth, so as not to be moved by every wind of doctrine invented by men builds his/her house on Rock. And if our living witness is not enough, then we use words.

The Muslims false claims the OP presents for this one thread are too many to address and “refute” in detail here.

In summary for the OP, instead of refuting a Muslims complaints of Jews and Christians history. Communicate first for the Muslim to prove his/her Islamic faith revealed by the man Muhammad who died, becomes revealed by God Himself and not a spirit which can deceive itself as an angel of light.

I agree with KathleenGee to the fact, Islam possess’s the virtue of deception and Islam has seven different interpretations to it’s Quran, which can leave one defenseless if Islam’s opponent is ignorant to which interpretation of the Quran is being presented.

Peace be with you

 

[Servant19]

A noble objective. Many, many priests and lay Christians have done the same throughout history. But they did not start their own religion; I’m not sure how that applies as a justification.

Hello dear friend. This is not the point. The point is that He was a Prophet, and His station as a Prophet is in no way weakened because He married several women and took on their children in order to save them from brutality.

It is commonplace among many to assign “sin” onto Muhammad for this action and to deny His Prophet-hood resultingly. This is a grievous error…



.