How Should Christians Approach Islam and Muslims?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dzheremi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would agree with everything he says. But I would not say that Islam has a different God.
But I see that St John is saying that Islam does not have the same God. He says that until the times of Heraclius they were plain idolators. He goes on to say that Mohammed happened upon and conversed with an Arian monk. And so Mohammed took an Idol worshipping sect…added the Arian heresy… mixed in bits and pieces of the old and new Testament in a perverted way…and formed his own unique heresy. How can this possibly be the same God?
 
Edwin, this thread concerns approaching the false god of Islam. I am not discussing the Jewish faith…and I am not discussing the Filioque. I have contributed to those threads in the past. You can continue to prod, but I will not bite.
If you maintain a principle, and then refuse to apply it consistently, your position collapses. Why does your “all or nothing” principle apply to Muslims and not to Jews or Western Christians? The question remains. Every time you refuse to answer it you are convicting yourself of inconsistency.

Jews do not believe in everything that God has revealed.

According to you, as an Orthodox Christian, Western Christians have added a false conception to the Trinity.

According to your principle, neither group worships the true God.

Yet you refuse even to discuss the matter.

What else am I to conclude but that your position on Islam is driven purely by hatred of Islam (note that I do not say “hatred of Muslims”) and not by sound reason or adherence to Sacred Tradition?
I believe it is quite coherent and logical. And I think many here, Catholic and Orthodox alike, would agree.
Well, your belief doesn’t make it so. Truth matters. You can’t or won’t defend the truth of your position. You simply repeat that it is coherent, while refusing to address the concrete counter-examples I have offered.
What bothers me about **your **position is that you whine about people being uncharitable, and then you become uncharitable.
Where have I accused you of being uncharitable?
And where have I been uncharitable?

I think your position is wrong. I will say so in plain language. I do not blame you for putting your position in plain language. I blame you for clinging stubbornly to a position that you cannot logically defend, and that you cannot support from Sacred Tradition.
And furthermore, if you are so frustrated with my posts, you do not have to respond with your uncharitable diatribes. 😦
What’s uncharitable about pointing out inconsistency? Are you really so thin-skinned that you think refutation is uncharitable?

I’m acting charitably by refuting and rebuking you when you abandon sound reason and orthodox Christianity.

I expect no less of you.

In Christ,

Edwin
 
I have given you my take on Muslims. Jews do not worship a Trinitarian God. A thread about Jews vs Christians usually gets quite contentious and charity levels fall quickly…I will not participate. Christians worship a Trinitarian God. I would call non-Orthodox Christians “heterodox” (non-Orthodox). The Muslims worship a god that was contrived by a false prophet to deceive the people. “The forerunner of Antichrist” as St John tells us.
Yes, I understand that you might prefer not to get into what happens in the Jewish discussions. However, many people do affirm the one position and deny the other, which I see as a problem. And if the ancient Jews worship a different God, that is a serious problem in other ways.
I understand. It is a pluralist/syncretistic view.
I am not sure I would say my view is pluralistic - it would depend on what you mean.

Hey now! That’s a low blow! 😃

😛
 
But I see that St John is saying that Islam does not have the same God.
But he is saying absolutely nothing of the kind.
He says that until the times of Heraclius they were plain idolators.

Yes, but the point at issue is their status after
the times of Heraclius.
He goes on to say that Mohammed happened upon and conversed with an Arian monk. And so Mohammed took an Idol worshipping sect…added the Arian heresy… mixed in bits and pieces of the old and new Testament in a perverted way…and formed his own unique heresy. How can this possibly be the same God?

In other words. St. John does not in fact say that they worship a different god. It’s simply that you can’t see how they can possibly worship the same God.

And I repeat: in exactly the same way that Jews and Arians and (from your perspective) Filioquists worshipo the same God!

Your point remains unproven. You have failed to show that St. John says they worship a different god. You are simply deducing this from what he says based on the very presuppositions that we are challenging (that heretical belief about God amounts to worshiping a different god).

In fact, if you look at the context, you find that he speaks throughout of “God” in a univocal sense, as if Christians and Muslims disagree about the nature and attributes of the God in whom they commonly believe. Nowhere does he so much as hint that the Islamic “Allah” is a false god. He says that the Muslims mutilate God in response to the Islamic charge that Christians associate someone else with God. Both charges assume that the same God is being spoken of by both religions. (In my experience Muslims say that Christians worship the true God, but err by associating others with Him–I won’t claim that there are no Muslims who take a different view, but they don’t seem common.)

I don’t claim that this is strong evidence, but if anything, it’s more reasonable to read the passage as saying that Muslims worship the true God erroneously (my position) than as saying that “a false prophet revealed a false god” (your position).

Edwin
 
But I see that St John is saying that Islam does not have the same God. He says that until the times of Heraclius they were plain idolators. He goes on to say that Mohammed happened upon and conversed with an Arian monk. And so Mohammed took an Idol worshipping sect…added the Arian heresy… mixed in bits and pieces of the old and new Testament in a perverted way…and formed his own unique heresy. How can this possibly be the same God?
I think that the substance of idolatry is substituting something else for God. It could be a figment, or a demonic spirit, or money, or ourselves.

But in many cases, idolatry is mixed. Most people are not taken in by pure idolatry. So they mix characteristics of the real God with the idol.

This can happen in various ways - it could be done on purpose by a demon who wanted to be mistaken for God. It could be done by mistake by someone who was confused, or maybe some other way. When I said before that we often “add things” to God, this is what I meant. Although as Christians we get the correct teaching, we tend to unconsciously interpret that through our own experiences and perceptions. So people buy into the “prosperity gospel” for example because they are mistaking an idol of their own for God. That is why we need constant reminders and spiritual directors.

I think Islam actually gives a lot of God - that is why people find it so compelling. And the idolatry is in a way subtle. Muslims can be particularly pious people - it appeals to that instinct and uses it. It’s almost like the spiritual mistakes very saintly Christians can fall into.
 
Every time you refuse to answer it you are convicting yourself of inconsistency.
LOL! How can I be labeled as inconsistent if I have not answered it. But of course you have uncharitably put many words in my mouth.
Jews do not believe in everything that God has revealed.
Correct. Jesus is God and the Jews do not believe it.
According to you, as an Orthodox Christian, Western Christians have added a false conception to the Trinity.
Western Christians argue that when they say “and the Son” they are meaning “through the Son”. That is what the Eastern Catholics (and many Western Christians tell me). As you know, the Filioque in itself is an endless debate. But of course we are talking about Islam here.
According to your principle, neither group worships the true God.
Now you are being contentious.
Yet you refuse even to discuss the matter.
Correct. This is about Islam.
What else am I to conclude but that your position on Islam is driven purely by hatred of Islam
I am so saddened by your conclusions and rush to judgement.
Truth matters.
Amen.
You can’t or won’t defend the truth of your position.
I have let one of the Church Fathers speak for me. It was very clear.
And where have I been uncharitable?
You have already hurled many insults—the most recent being your discernment of my hatred of Islam. Please knock it off.
I think your position is wrong.
I know what you think.
I blame you for clinging stubbornly to a position that you cannot logically defend, and that you cannot support from Sacred Tradition.
I have already done so. I blame you for not accepting it.
What’s uncharitable about pointing out inconsistency?
What inconsistency?
Are you really so thin-skinned that you think refutation is uncharitable?
Are you so thin-skinned that you must continue to resort to uncharitable attacks?
I’m acting charitably by refuting and rebuking you when you abandon sound reason and orthodox Christianity.
You are refuting and rebuking nothing. Sound reason and Orthodox Christianity has not been abandoned. You have offered nothing to show that the Islam worships the true God. Whereas I have offered an excellent patristic source.
 
Caught in semantics.

The idea is save the civilized world, the one already covered by the Apostles. And the works not done as you see in the USA.

Individuals isn’t the issue nor would it be. How about the Hells Angels, not all bad people on a “individual basis” but the overall organization which btw is also registered as a religion is a problem.

To focus on the middle east is another wasted effort. Focus here, with what we could change. And thats Christianity. It would go a long way for the East-West Chruchs to be in full communion. The world would be that much better a place immediately. Angelicans and Lutherans would be forced to make the extra effort and bend. Foolish denominations would disappear. The USA would again embrace the process of completing the un-complete conversion.

Change us first, the petty differences do little when it cause’s all to lose focus of the storm coming. Do you realize just how foolish the Orthodox Catholic arguement is. They’ll give you a Cracker Jack Prize for winning a debate against each other. Meanwhile the world is escalating in chaos.

Its fine to be polite to muslims, but it doesn’t change the overall problem with Islamic Flaws in the political/religious forum of Islam. Its a major problem and of course dialogue needs to continue. But focused on Christianity not defining Islams God or their faith.

Building mosques on ground zero is more foolishness, how about we elect a Muslim for President next for PR? Being polite to individuals doesn’t mean roll out the red carpet and give the shop away, and kiss their butt either.

The concern has to constantly be on Christianity and its goal “first”. Take a good look at the USA. This is what we need to save, not the middle east. Those kids need to come home. We spending money we don’t have to “play” war while wasting resources and kids lifes. We need to focus on the elections here, we can’t stand another couple decades of mediocrity. We need Christians in politics. The materialistic pipe dream is dead. The credit cards are maxed out and we need to get back to business “here”. In the process while its all well and fine to continue dialogue with Islam we need to stop Islam from building and expanding here. Its a problem. You children, childrens, children will be fighting for this land there forefathers conquered. At the rate we are going you can take that to the bank. Thats who you owe this to. Your insignificant life means nothing in the larger picture. The path we are on is failure and enslavement. Stick to the plan of Jesus Christ. be cordial to the those Christians in Orthodox-Catholic conversation, concern yourself there “first”.
 
But in many cases, idolatry is mixed. Most people are not taken in by pure idolatry. So they mix characteristics of the real God with the idol.
If this is true…and I do not know where you get this from…the mixed idol is still an idol.
we tend to unconsciously interpret that through our own experiences and perceptions.
I can only adhere to patristic interpretations.
So people buy into the “prosperity gospel” for example because they are mistaking an idol of their own for God.
But the Ishamaelites were worshipping the morning star and aphrodite
That is why we need constant reminders and spiritual directors.
Amen.
It’s almost like the spiritual mistakes very saintly Christians can fall into.
Yet the Christian can be picked up when he/she falls through patristic interpretations of Sacred Scriptures and spiritual fathers the Chruch and the Sacraments.

Islam does not have anything to correct Mohammed’s error.
 
Regardless of most of the uncharitable nonsense that has been thrown at him, Mickey has done a heckuva job explaining his position. He has made perfect sense, and has sadly been subjected to antagonistic replies. Chill out and show the man some respect. He’s not at all being inconsistent, and he is making excellent points.

And it disturbs me to no end when people on forums revel in attacking Christians who think that a false god is a false god. Grow up already.
 
In other words. St. John does not in fact say that they worship a different god.
Only if you are blind.
And I repeat:
Yeah… keep repeating.
Your point remains unproven.
My point has been proven patristically. You are the one who has not provided proof of any sort.
You have failed to show that St. John says they worship a different god.
Read it again. They went from idol worshippers to a mix of idol worshipping, Arian, Mohammedist fables. If that is the true God, then my name is Edwin. :rotfl:
You are simply deducing this from what he says based on the very presuppositions that we are challenging (that heretical belief about God amounts to worshiping a different god).
You are simply dismissing it based on your pre-conceived bias.
Nowhere does he so much as hint that the Islamic “Allah” is a false god.
Have you heard the term Allah Akbar (god is great)? These, then, were idolators and worshippers of the morning star and Aphrodite whom in fact they called Chabar in their own language, which means “great.”
He says that the Muslims mutilate God in response to the Islamic charge that Christians associate someone else with God. Both charges assume that the same God is being spoken of by both religions.
Wrong. He says it in the sense that it is unrecognizable from the Christian God.
I don’t claim that this is strong evidence, but if anything, it’s more reasonable to read the passage as saying that Muslims worship the true God erroneously (my position) than as saying that “a false prophet revealed a false god” (your position).
And of course, I disagree.:tiphat:
 
Regardless of most of the uncharitable nonsense that has been thrown at him, Mickey has done a heckuva job explaining his position. He has made perfect sense, and has sadly been subjected to antagonistic replies. Chill out and show the man some respect. He’s not at all being inconsistent, and he is making excellent points.

And it disturbs me to no end when people on forums revel in attacking Christians who think that a false god is a false god. Grow up already.
Thank you my brother in Christ. I have been waiting for some reinforcements. 😃

There are many others here (Catholic and Orthodox) who do not support Edwin’s style of interfaith pluralism. I must be leaving for a few days and I am hopeful that others will continue to refute his errors.
 
Regardless of most of the uncharitable nonsense that has been thrown at him, Mickey has done a heckuva job explaining his position. He has made perfect sense, and has sadly been subjected to antagonistic replies. Chill out and show the man some respect. He’s not at all being inconsistent, and he is making excellent points.

And it disturbs me to no end when people on forums revel in attacking Christians who think that a false god is a false god. Grow up already.
No, what this boils down to is whether having misconceptions about God’s nature amounts to worshipping a different God. Edwin is drawing out the implications of this position to show how bankrupt it is – that is what is making people uncomfortable. No one is being uncharitable – they are disputing. If people can’t dispute on a message board, what’s the point of having a message board?

If someone makes a statement that has strong and disturbing implications (say that Rush is the best band ever) then they should have every expectation of being strongly challenged. That’s the way the game is played.
 
No, what this boils down to is whether having misconceptions about God’s nature amounts to worshipping a different God.
So you agree with Edwin.
Edwin is drawing out the implications of this position to show how bankrupt it is – that is what is making people uncomfortable.
Wrong. What is making people uncomfortable is the theory that Islam worships the Triune God…except they (Muslims) have a few misconceptions. 🤷
No one is being uncharitable – they are disputing.
If someone makes a statement that has strong and disturbing implications then they should have every expectation of being strongly challenged. That’s the way the game is played.
That’s fine. But it should not be implied that someone has a deep seeded hatred for Islam. That is uncharitable.
 
I have no problem with the God of Abraham either. Lets go with that. For argument sake lets assume Islam in fact worships the same God of Abraham. It still remains everything from that point is on is heresy. In fact there understanding of God and ours is different and theirs is also heresy. And salvation is nonexistant. So in fact the God of Abraham becomes what to Islam and Christianity, but a point to open conversation?

I fail to see what anyone thinks thats accomplishs. The conversion process in no easier, you in fact are still starting from scratch. The intreptation of God through Islam is not Trinity. So the definition of God might as be none existant. God must still be defined for Islam.

I fail to see the relevence of that point?
 
So you agree with Edwin.
Whether I agree with him or not, this is the main point of contention here in this thread, no? There is one camp that believes that if religions disagree about God’s nature, then they worship separate gods. This is what separates the one camp from the other. Therefore if we could settle this issue we could put this question to bed once and for all.
 
With regard to the Jews…I am waiting to hear back from the Coptic Orthodox priest I correspond with to have his say on this issue. It has actually been put forth by several Orthodox priests I have listened to and more whom I have talked to that the Jews do not in fact worship our God. The thinking here, as best as I can tell, is that while they did worship correctly and consistently before the incarnation, in the Old Testament times, by failing to recognize Jesus Christ as being of the same Father that they worshiped in those days, they are in fact failing to recognize the one they once worshiped, and have in effect decided that their rejection of the Messiah is so important that they are willing to disobey God in order to maintain their obstinacy in the face of overwhelming evidence of Christ’s miracles, the historicity of the crucifixion, and all the other things that we Christians take as evidence of Jesus Christ’s Messiahship and Divine Sonship.

I’m not going to pretend that that’s easy to swallow. In fact, I’ll go as far to say that of all the things drilled into me as a Catholic, the view of the Jews as worshipers of the one true God is the one thing that I find the most difficult to reconsider. It just seems like it should be that way, doesn’t it? After all, all Christians (Orthodox and heterodox) accept the OT as being God’s word, and accept that Our Savior was Himself a Jew, and accept the OT prophets as worshipers of our God…so how can it be that they have it wrong?

Well…again, I’m still in the process of trying to figure all of this out…but in a way I can see where the logic of this claim comes from: The fault of the Jews is not the same as that of the Muslims. The Jews, worshiping the one God who had not yet revealed Himself to the world as a Trinity, simply went on as they always had once the majority of them had decided that Jesus was a false Messiah. Yet, from a Christian perspective, their rejection of Jesus Christ was not simply an exercise in free agency, a way of saying “no thank you; we’ll stick with our ways” – they were actually rejecting God by rejecting Christ. It seems a little odd that Christians should have to be reminded of this, but in case anyone has forgotten, Christ is God and those who reject Him will be rejected before the Father who sent Him. To believe otherwise is to believe that God’s Trinitarian nature is some sort of optional belief that you can either hold or not hold, depending on how you want to see God. But what is there to substantiate this idea that your intellect should be the deciding factor in how GOD decides to reveal Himself? Surely if we are going to engage in such games and establish parallel salvation histories so that the Jews can get out of having to follow Christ and yet still worship God (and the Muslims can do the same, and the ____ can do the same…), couldn’t God have simply decided NOT to become incarnate in the womb of the holy virgin St. Mary, then none of us would be Christians, and we wouldn’t need to puzzle over the mystery of the Trinity? That would’ve been a lot easier, right? It would have “made sense” and Erwin would’ve been happy about it?

Alas, God’s ways are not our ways, and even if the Trinity had never been revealed to us, it still would be. The Holy Trinity is, as is sung in one of my favorite Orthodox hymns, “uncreated and without beginning”, an “undivided unity”. That means before we knew it, God existed in the one undivided and uncreated Holy Trinity.

What none of you who harp on the Jewish question seem to understand is that, far from creating a different standard by which the Jews or the Muslims may be judged for their belief or lack thereof, the heart of this question is not “what about the Jews?” The heart of this question (and I feel confident in writing this since I’m the one who started this damn thread and I seem to attract this argument from certain people wherever I go) is in fact “What about the Christians? What is appropriate for them, in dealing with other religions?” All that I can be at all confident about in this regard is that we cling to the Holy Trinity. It is not some manufactured “tension” with the place of the Jews that rankles me whenever this topic is brought up, but this idea that maybe each one can have bits and pieces of God, and that’s good enough. I am not all made uncomfortable by the Jews. Can those of you who are bringing up the Jews in this debate and suggesting that they make us “uncomfortable” honestly say that you are comfortable with the Holy Trinity? I am, and if through my devotion to the Holy Trinity, the one God, I have to deny the Jews who have denied Our Lord to begin with, then that’s just what I’ll do. The Jew from Galilee who was crucified for us and for our salvation is the ONLY Jew I am actually interested in following, anyway.

Until I hear back from the priest, this will be my only post on this matter. I have given my personal opinion, which should in no way detract from Mikey’s very correct assertion that this thread is about Muslims and Islam. I just figured I should answer it once and for all since certain forces here on CAF are determined to not let a moment pass without beating us all over the head with their iron logic and inescapable arguments. Rather than have these be spread out against all users who dissent from the professional opinions of the Judeo-reminders, please Erwin, Tomarin, et. al., give me the brunt of whatever it is you have. Start a new thread about it, if you wish. I’ll post in it. I promise. We can continue this argument for however long you’d like. It is a debt I will attempt to pay to the Orthodox who are teaching me. Leave this thread to be about Islam.

One is the Holy Father, One is the Holy Son, One is the Holy Spirit. Amen. :signofcross:
 
I have given you my take on Muslims. Jews do not worship a Trinitarian God. A thread about Jews vs Christians usually gets quite contentious and charity levels fall quickly…I will not participate. Christians worship a Trinitarian God. I would call non-Orthodox Christians “heterodox” (non-Orthodox). The Muslims worship a god that was contrived by a false prophet to deceive the people. “The forerunner of Antichrist” as St John tells us.
This is interesting and I want to listen further to this argument. We (that is the CCC) contend that Muslims worship the same God as us, that is God the Creator.

Who is the Antichrist in Islam? Is is Mohammad, the so-called Angel Gabriel or Allah?

It is possible that the prophet was false and the so-called angel may not be an angel, but could there’ll be another God the Creator or God’s of Abraham, remembering that Muslims profess that they worship this God? (or for that matter the Jews).
 
dzheremi -

What I would say is that it is the fact that the Jews do in fact know and recognize God that makes their rejection of Christ so serious. And the principle follows in general with Muslims, or Christian heretics, or atheists. Their object after they reject Christ is the same - the Father alone really - but they are trying to have him and reject him at the same time. It’s in that contradiction that the sin lies
 
I am not sure why saying that anyone, a group or an individual, can understand God in part, means that it is therefore ok to stick with that when more is offered? It might in some cases be understandable that people do, but that would at best be an unfortunate thing.

More generally, how do we deal with Islam as a faith, or with Muslims as individuals? Or really any non-Christians? I find this a difficult question to answer in a way, because I don’t feel like I am having to make decisions about it all the time. In day to day like, I assume individuals are doing their best with what they have been taught or learned, and I assume they have a brain. I don’t try to hide my own religious beliefs, and I try to exemplify them. I’ll answer questions if asked. With people I know better I might be more pointed, but it would depend somewhat. I find trying to missionize someone in conversation is pretty ineffective; it annoys the, it often doesn’t really speak to their understanding, and it suggests that you value them as potental converts rather than as individuals. I try to take people as themselves and I have found this leads to much better interactions in matters of religion as well. If you can say one thing that meets the person where they are and leads them to a new line of thought that seems to be useful, and people actually appreciate it. I feel God can use us to open little doors for people that way - but they are the ones that need to walk through.

As far as interfaith stuff as a group - I guess the thing is discerning where there are shared spheres, and where they are not. I don’t see shared worship as a generally good idea, and really it doesn’t occur to me to consider it - how would it work? I think practical issues can be shared usually - I would have no problem with an interfaith anti-abortion rally. I wouldn’t want to exclude non-Christians from the liturgy as guests, and I can think of instances I might attend a non-Christian service as a guest (say, a funeral). I can imagine civic public events where having prayers or blessings from a few different groups might be appropriate - Remembrance Day maybe (like Veteran’s Day).

In my experience, other religions don’t want shared worship either.

But I am not really sure that I am getting at what you are asking.

OTOH, I am no
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top