Is Catholicsm and Islam compatible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter theCardinalbird
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MonteRCMS said:
Please consider also the Battles of Tours / Poitiers and Vienna.

Major big deal battles that shaped the future of Europe.

These were not lighthearted casual events.
Click to expand...
The Battle of Trafalgar was fought between Catholic Spain and Protestant England.

Does the Battle of Trafalgar prove that the God of Catholicism and the God of the Church of England are two different Gods?

By your “reasoning” there can be no other conclusion.
 
Don_Ruggero said:
I don’t argue anything here…there is no one here who merits such a distinction as that level of discussion.

In my lecture hall, the people here who have submitted comments to Father David would not have even been allowed to be recognised let alone speak – since at the point displayed by people here, they would not have reached a sufficient level of formation to have reached the stature of being able to speak in the lecture hall. That required a sufficient level of theological achievement. Before that, they were lectured to; they were auditors…hearers.

I compliment @FrDavid96 for his good-hearted desire to try to explain to those who were not comprehending. I, on the other hand, apply in the forum the same criteria I used in the lecture hall.

I honestly think good-hearted attempts can be counter-productive when it involves laity below a certain threshold of theological formation…to say nothing of the odd persons one can encounter in this forum who manifest aberrant behaviour most charitably described as “disturbed”

The Church has articulated that both the Jews and the Muslims worship with us the God of Abraham. Period. The laity are to assent – and that is it. No discussion. No argument. End of topic.

What “seems” to such people holds absolutely no interest with me…let alone any weight or value.
Click to expand...
There is something about this post that has continued to bother me since it was posted.

It isn’t merely because of the disturbing image it has left in my brain of a very quiet, very intimidating, but aptly named lecture hall where knowledge appears to have been “lectured” or dispensed in doses according to the capacity of the “auditors” and then, apparently, vacuum sealed by the “experts” such that “No discussion. No argument. End of topic.” finalized the whole coercive enterprise.

No, the more disturbing issue is one of giving the impression that theology and, by extension, Catholicism is a system that has all the absolute answers and all that is required is submission and assent. Or, as you put it: No discussion. No argument. End of topic.

This is completely contrary to the Scholastic method as practiced by the Medievals, which, ironically enough, have been accused by moderns as practicing just your method. The reality is that the Scholastic Method was a place of raucous and open discussion. The answers revealed or settled by Church dogma were thoroughly discussed as to why they had to be true, while open questions were permitted great leeway in terms of expression of opinion and objections.

Continued…
 
Last edited:
It would appear that the scholastics got things essentially correct since they were not likely to declare No discussion. No argument. End of topic. on any issue at any time. Consider the Summa of St. Thomas. Each question of the thousands and thousands raised were thoroughly and thoughtfully considered including all known objections and responses to those. This was not an attempt to end the discussion by Thomas, but rather to further it by documenting clearly and precisely the state of the truth that was known so the discussion might move forward from there. Think of it as a map of the wild frontier of the science of God – and Thomas himself thought of it as a crudely drawn map, made of straw. Which implies he, himself, didn’t assume he had documented the “final” answers where all other “dissenting” views did not have “any weight or value.” I mean, straw has very little weight, and Thomas thought all his opinions amounted to straw.

I submit that your No discussion. No argument. End of topic. is closer to the practice of Islam – I.e., SUBMIT because God is utterly unknowable – than it is to Catholicism and to Christ, who said, “You will know the truth and the truth will set you free.”

This, to get back to the thread topic, is, I would submit, the major difference between Christianity and Islam: the latter requires nothing but submission and assent, while the former declares that grace perfects nature and that the glory of God is man fully alive. The truth, then, is accessible to every human, including “those who were not comprehending,” in Christianity, whereas the truth of God is “utterly unknowable” in Islam.

In short, I don’t buy your No discussion. No argument. End of topic. method.
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle said:
There is something about this post that has continued to bother me since it was posted.

It isn’t merely because of the disturbing image it has left in my brain of a very quiet, very intimidating, but aptly named lecture hall where knowledge appears to have been “lectured” or dispensed in doses according to the capacity of the “auditors” and then, apparently, vacuum sealed by the “experts” such that “No discussion. No argument. End of topic.” finalized the whole coercive enterprise.

,
Click to expand...
The reason is that the question of “do Christians and Muslims worship the same God of Abraham?” is not a theological question as such. It may seem to be that way, but it is not. It is merely a question of fact.

Sometimes questions address an issue that is so fundamental or foundational that the question does not rise to a level where any person with both a basic knowledge of the religion and logical thinking will necessarily accept the answer as a “given.”

For example:

No one (no one with basic knowledge and logical thinking) would say that Catholics and Lutherans worship different Gods. No theologian would even consider that to be a legitimate question. A simple “yes they do” suffices; or at least, should.

Now, fanatics on either side might present their cases. One says “the Catholic God told the popes to sell indulgences therefore we believe in a different God.” Another says “Luther’s God told him to take books out of the Bible, therefore we believe in different Gods.”

Statements like that, reasoning like that, is immediately dismissed off-hand. It does not rise to the level of being something debatable.

Same thing applies here. The question “what God do Muslims worship?” is not a complicated question. It requires only a basic understanding of Christianity and Islam to know immediately that the 2 religions worship the same One God, albeit in different ways, and saying different things about that One God.

Someone can say “Islam says different things about God” all day long. That won’t change the fact that the God they claim is identified as the God of Abraham. This is true because such thinking immediately changes the question from “what God?” to “what do they say about God?”

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, this question is not one that is debatable. Not because it has been defined as a dogma or doctrine, but because it is a known fact.

I can go on all day providing examples of the fact that the Catholic Church knows and does not hesitate to affirm that Christians and Muslims worship the same God of Abraham. How many such examples should be necessary to prove that basic point? The Church accepts this as a given.

The debate part comes later. What that exactly that means going forward into the details of Christian-Muslim relations is the part that is open to debate and discussion.
 
I agree with you. More importantly, it is when we explain this issue to non-Catholics. An arrogant take or leave it attitude is not the way to do this.

Personally I am looking for ways to answers questions, the ones posed here are valid ones really. Obviously we do
not have strong argument for them. It really takes humility to see that.
 
FrDavid96 said:
The reason is that the question of “do Christians and Muslims worship the same God of Abraham?” is not a theological question as such. It may seem to be that way, but it is not. It is merely a question of fact.
Click to expand...
The opposite is true. Those of us who believe in the God of Abraham, do not believe that God would make Mohammed His prophet. And that is the only way that we could be worshipping the same God.
  1. Either God sent Mohammed and we’re worshipping the same God or
  2. God did not send Mohammed, and he lied and Muslims are worshipping a figment of Mohammed’s imagination.
 
FrDavid96 said:
No one (no one with basic knowledge and logical thinking) would say that Catholics and Lutherans worship different Gods. No theologian would even consider that to be a legitimate question. A simple “yes they do” suffices; or at least, should.
Click to expand...
That’s a straw man that you are going to knock down. No one is talking about Lutherans. We are talking about the fact that Mohammed’s God is totally different from the Christian God. We are talking about the fact that God would not send Mohammed to be His Prophet. We are talking about the fact that no Christian believes that Mohammed had a real revelation.
 
Not me but Tim Staples. He is blending two questions into one like you say many posters are on this thread. You didn’t address what Tim Staples wrote. It seemed a convenient gloss over to me.
 
Last edited:
It’s quite plain really. We believe the Jews, why, we use their scripture - we take the revelation given to them as truth from truthful resources.

We cannot do that with Muhammad though. We do not believe his resources. The contention here is we believe just because he claimed to receive the revelations from God.

This topic is a stalemate. Thinking Catholics would still use their gray matter to think rather than swallow everything that’s being shoved down their throats.
 
Hi, Reuben!

It is not about using gray matter.

It is about distinguishing things.

While the Church’s premise is correct; it is only correct as far as Islam diverts itself from Yahweh God.

This is the problem with “scholars” and “theologians.”

An absolute, yes monotheism; an absolute, yes, same Yahweh God.

Yet, any agency that denies the Son cannot have the Father–this is “absolute” by God’s Own Decree. Hence, the three religions are not compatible!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
Reuben_J said:
This topic is a stalemate. Thinking Catholics would still use their gray matter to think rather than swallow everything that’s being shoved down their throats.
Click to expand...
No. It is not a stalemate.

Some people are simply wrong. That really is all there is to it.

People are ignorant of the subject and refuse to think reasonably. That’s doesn’t constitute a “stalemate.”

Some people just choose to add stubbornness to their ignorance.

The Catholic Church knows the answer. Catholics and Muslims do worship the same God of Abraham. Whether or not some people happen to like it is irrelevant. It doesn’t change the truth.
 
FrDavid96 said:
40.png
Reuben_J:
This topic is a stalemate. Thinking Catholics would still use their gray matter to think rather than swallow everything that’s being shoved down their throats.
Click to expand...
No. It is not a stalemate.

Some people are simply wrong. That really is all there is to it.

People are ignorant of the subject and refuse to think reasonably. That’s doesn’t constitute a “stalemate.”

Some people just choose to add stubbornness to their ignorance.

The Catholic Church knows the answer. Catholics and Muslims do worship the same God of Abraham. Whether or not some people happen to like it is irrelevant. It doesn’t change the truth.
Click to expand...
What I meant it was a stalemate because those who disagree still disagree with the Church’s line of argument on this.

Personally, yes, I will use the official Church’s line in explaining this concept to those who ask, especially non-Catholics, but knowing that the argument is weak and that I am not thoroughly convinced.

So we are supposed to say that Muslims worship the same God as us because they worship the God of Abraham.

You have to explain:
  1. How do you know that they worship the God of Abraham?
  2. How do you know that they (the Arabs) are spiritual descendants of Ishmael?
  3. What are the evidence of historical connection between Muslims and the worship of the God of Abraham?
  4. If you get your information from the teaching of the Quran which was revealed to Muhammad, that means you believe it was divine revelation. It has to be if you believe that. Would you then say that Muhammad’s source (the so-called angel Gabriel) of revelation is divinely originated?
  5. If you do not think it is divinely originated, then what is your basis of saying that Muslims are worshipping the God of Abraham, which if they really do, makes them worshipping the same God as us?
  6. You have to be certain that they really worship the God of Abraham as how we are certain that the Jews do. Are you certain?
  7. Now, believing what Muhammad’s claim as a basis of us saying that Muslims worship the God of Abraham, then what about if other prophets X, Y and Z, make similar claim? Are we going to say that they too, worship the God of Abraham?
  8. Those are questions that need to be addressed and if we ourselves are not convinced to answer this properly due to our stubbornness and ignorance, is not that also asking us to believe it blindly?
  9. What was the Church stance on Muslims in the seventh century when Islam was formed and invaded Christendom?
We can explain Transubstantiation, the Immaculate Conception, the primacy of Peter and the Sacraments, because there are basis for them from the Magisterium, Tradition and even the Bible.

Not so with saying the Muslims worship the God of Abraham. Just give us some facts as to why this is so. For example, God sent angel Gabriel to inform Muhammad of this.
 
Reuben_J said:
What I meant it was a stalemate because those who disagree still disagree with the Church’s line of argument on this.
…
Click to expand...
It is not an “argument.” It is a statement of fact.

Please understand the difference between the two.

An argument occurs when there are 2 (or more) possible answers to a question. That does not apply here.

As to your questions:
I’ve already explained that earlier. Search the thread and read it. I’m not going to type it out again.

Half of your questions are nonsense and therefore do not “need” to be addressed. You try to equate knowledge of facts and history with belief that the Koran is divinely inspired: which is literally non-sensical. It’s almost comical in its absurdity. It demonstrates a complete absence of any critical adult-level thinking.
 
FrDavid96 said:
40.png
Reuben_J:
What I meant it was a stalemate because those who disagree still disagree with the Church’s line of argument on this.
…
Click to expand...
It is not an “argument.” It is a statement of fact.

Please understand the difference between the two.

An argument occurs when there are 2 (or more) possible answers to a question. That does not apply here.

As to your questions:
I’ve already explained that earlier. Search the thread and read it. I’m not going to type it out again.

Half of your questions are nonsense and therefore do not “need” to be addressed. You try to equate knowledge of facts and history with belief that the Koran is divinely inspired: which is literally non-sensical. It’s almost comical in its absurdity. It demonstrates a complete absence of any critical adult-level thinking.
Click to expand...
Thank you for trying so hard to explain to the nonsensical. You’d know that I merely responded to your post, that’s all.

Catholics would still be divided on this issue for a long time to come. And no matter what insulting names you called us, and you are a priest, that would not change the reality of this most controversial issue in the light of today situation Catholics vis-a-vis Islam.

Here is one example of such thought:

One of the big mysteries of our day is how so many supposedly enlightened Catholics have managed to get it so wrong about Islam for so long. It’s understandable that in the 1960s, when the Islamic world was relatively quiescent, Catholics might entertain the high hopes for Islamic-Catholic relations expressed in Nostra Aetate. But this is 2017 and in the intervening half century a lot of water has passed under the bridge.

Given all that has transpired in the interim—9/11, daily terror attacks, the accelerating Islamization of Europe, and the development of nuclear weapons by Pakistan and Iran—it seems that Catholics deserve to know more about Islam than the brief treatment presented in Nostra Aetate or the even briefer treatment in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Catechism’s forty-four words on the subject end with the reassurance that “together with us they [Muslims] adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day” (842). Unfortunately, that has been interpreted by a good many clergy and laymen to mean “go back to sleep and don’t worry about a thing.”

To get an idea of how nonchalant the Church leadership has been about providing guidance on Islam, consider that the Catechismdevotes about five times as much space to a discussion of man’s relationship with animals than it does to the Church’s relationship with Muslims.

www.lifesitenews.com

Islam: A giant step backwards for humanity - LifeSite

One of the big mysteries of our day is how so many supposedly enlightened Catholics have managed to get it so wrong about Islam for so long.
www.lifesitenews.com www.lifesitenews.com

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/islam-a-giant-step-backwards-for-humanity
 
Reuben_J said:
Thank you for trying so hard to explain to the nonsensical. You’d know that I merely responded to your post, that’s all.

Catholics would still be divided on this issue for a long time to come. And no matter what insulting names you called us, and you are a priest, that would not change the reality of this most controversial issue in the light of today situation Catholics vis-a-vis Islam.

Here is one example of such thought:

One of the big mysteries of our day is how so many supposedly enlightened Catholics have managed to get it so wrong about Islam for so long. It’s understandable that in the 1960s, when the Islamic world was relatively quiescent, Catholics might entertain the high hopes for Islamic-Catholic relations expressed in Nostra Aetate. But this is 2017 and in the intervening half century a lot of water has passed under the bridge.

Given all that has transpired in the interim—9/11, daily terror attacks, the accelerating Islamization of Europe, and the development of nuclear weapons by Pakistan and Iran—it seems that Catholics deserve to know more about Islam than the brief treatment presented in Nostra Aetate or the even briefer treatment in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Catechism’s forty-four words on the subject end with the reassurance that “together with us they [Muslims] adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day” (842). Unfortunately, that has been interpreted by a good many clergy and laymen to mean “go back to sleep and don’t worry about a thing.”

To get an idea of how nonchalant the Church leadership has been about providing guidance on Islam, consider that the Catechismdevotes about five times as much space to a discussion of man’s relationship with animals than it does to the Church’s relationship with Muslims.
Click to expand...
Which only further proves that you have no clue, absolutely no clue at all of what I’m even writing here.

It’s amazing. You have not the slightest idea of anything I’m saying here. Nothing.

The post of yours here proves that beyond any doubt.
 
FrDavid96 said:
No. It is not a stalemate.

Some people are simply wrong. That really is all there is to it.

People are ignorant of the subject and refuse to think reasonably. That’s doesn’t constitute a “stalemate.”

Some people just choose to add stubbornness to their ignorance.

The Catholic Church knows the answer. Catholics and Muslims do worship the same God of Abraham. Whether or not some people happen to like it is irrelevant. It doesn’t change the truth.
Click to expand...
What you write is very true, Father, regarding many issues encountered in this forum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top