Is Islam true; how do I know it is not

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicMan17
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CatholicMan17

Guest
How do I know Catholicism is the Truth and not Islam? It is very clear the gospels are inaccurate. Right now Catholicism seems false to me. Also the whole Trinity in the New Testament seems really over exaggerated and contradictory to the OT. The prophecies of Jesus are not negligible but another prophet who was expected is merged with the messiah in Christianity. Catholics seem to be capable of arguing when it comes to doctrine like confession, baptism, etc but when it comes to the basic teaching Catholicism falls apart because no one can argue for Trinitarianism without relying on the Bible which the can only say is inspired because the Church is given authority…in the bible. The argument is circular
 
CatholicMan17 said:
It is very clear the gospels are inaccurate.
Click to expand...
How so? I’m not aware of how clear it is that they’re inaccurate. Please cite examples of this.
CatholicMan17 said:
Also the whole Trinity in the New Testament seems really over exaggerated and contradictory to the OT.
Click to expand...
Have you ever actually read the New Testament? The Trinity isn’t actually all that fleshed out. It took several centuries’ worth of church councils to fully draw out the teaching.

I think what happened is that you have read a website about Islam, and, not being well grounded in Catholicism or the Bible, have let it shake you. Is that about right? Why don’t you learn what the Church really teaches before throwing it all out? I’ve read the Quran, and it repeatedly misrepresents Christian belief.

-Fr ACEGC
 
Islam considers Jesus Christ just a prophet not THE Son of God, but a son of God. In order to be Christian you must believe Christ is THE Son of God.
How do you know which book is true, New Testament or the Quaran - prayer my friend, prayer. May God illumine you!
 
Sorry, this may become a long reply. I tried to keep my post short but I made it badly. I was saying people are overexageratting when they say the Trinity is clearly from the New Testament not that the Trinity is overexagerrated when mentioned in the new testament. Hope I didn’t confuse you there. The thing about what people say about the Quran and the prophet is it is often half truths and stretches.

The gospels are innacurate because they contradict. John the Baptist says he isnt Elijah Jesus says he is. Multiple Genealogies of Jesus.
Multiple resurrection accounts. Jesus says different last words (I believe, correct me if I’m wrong). And yes, I have read the new testament. Probably the whole thing 2 or 3 times over 2 years.

Yes, I did read websites. I read multiple and have talked to catholics and Muslims multiple times on different sites but it always ends the same. The Muslims are kind and explain things WITH THE BIBLE (and I read the whole chapter later) and logic. The Catholics on the other hand use easily disproven arguments and half truths. They then personally attack me and try to say I’m evil and possessed for reading the Quran in thr first place. If the bible is the word of God I should be able to have read most of the bible and the whole Quran and consider both and not be convinced the bible is a collection of archaic texts and the Qur’an is one immaculate text
 
Last edited:
I’d start with stripping away all rites, rituals, and human translations and looking at the teachings attributed to Jesus vs the teachings attributed to Mohammed. Jesus said to love each other and forgive. All Christian denominations agree on this. Mohammed said the same. But then said to treat non-believers as 2d class subjects and to make them pay a protection tax. Then he said to kill non-believers wherever they’re found.

Which set of actions sounds more like how God, the creator would want us, His creations, to treat each other?
CatholicMan17 said:
… Catholicism falls apart because no one can argue for Trinitarianism without relying on the Bible which the can only say is inspired because the Church is given authority…in the bible. The argument is circular
Click to expand...
This same argument can be made for Islam. One is supposed to submit and behave a certain way because Mohammed said to. It say so in the Koran. Which was written by someone transcribing what Mohammed told them.
 
So Islam thinks it can come around hundreds of years later and know Jesus more than those who lived in the same generation or within the first couple of generations of Jesus? That’s not very logical at all. The Bible IS not the only sources to know who Jesus was. The Catholic Church had witnesses in EVERY generation.
 
So Christianity can come along hundreds of years later and know the Jewish God better than the Jews who witnessed the Passover? That is not very logical at all.
 
I have prayed and every time a verse would not fail to come to mind. It would always be from the Quran and would say not to worship any one but Allah or be about Divine Justice (I.e. the day of Reckoning). Without any other verses coming to mind but these and other verses that apply. This was before I read the book so it couldnt have been my mind knowing what was there and choosing verses. Such verses also came like 16:18 and 6:153. The book is supposed to be from a false prophet but it says to WORSHIP GOD AND ONLY GOD WITH NOONE ELSE AND TO GIVE CHARITY AND TO BE GOOD.
 
One avenue I would take to disprove Islam is to compare its foundation to other cults which co-opt Christian and Jewish trappings…

A few points of comparison between Islam and Mormonism (among others) are:
  • Claiming that the church which has a historical claim to being founded by Jesus Christ is in fact corrupted (despite the lack of any historical evidence to support that claim.)
  • Claiming that the sexual ethic espoused by Christianity and Judaism is false, and that God has given the new prophet private revelation that he and his followers have the right to take multiple wives. (This is a common thread among many false religions, as it plays to man’s basest instinct.)
  • The claim that the use of violence is permissible, if not promoted, for the protection and spread of the religion.
That’s just three off the top of my head. Another common trend among new cults, especially when they draw from a preexisting religious context, is to claim that the new prophet is receiving a private revelation from God which directly contradicts the revelations which came before. (Similar in method to the abrogation of the sexual ethic).

There also the issue with Mohammad claiming that certain rhetorical events did not happen, such as the crucifixion. There are multiple extra-biblical sources which attest to the crucifixion, and all the supposed circumvention (swooning theory, impostor theory, etc.) don’t holdup to scrutiny.

To top it all off, I’d say that the way the two religions have operated in the world give more than ample testimony about which of them is from God, and which of them isn’t. Christianity, in general, spread peacefully. It was persecuted, but still managed to bring about conversion of the ancient world through the example of the lives of early Christians. Islam has historically always spread through violence and conquest. As the Lord tells us, “You shall know them by their fruits.”
 
Last edited:
Prove that Jesus is God no one can. It is not like we have explicit historical evidence that he claimed it.
 
CatholicMan17 said:
Prove that Jesus is God no one can. It is not like we have explicit historical evidence that he claimed it.
Click to expand...
Except for the Gospels, the testimony of what He did and said on Earth… where He literally took the name “I AM” for himself…

There’s a reason they wanted to kill him after that. For a man to do that is the highest blasphemy.

If you’re willing to simply dismiss the single strongest piece of evidence then nothing will convince you, and you’re not really seeking real answers.
 
Last edited:
CatholicMan17 said:
How do I know Catholicism is the Truth and not Islam?
Click to expand...
I would ask you to consider this: ‘We have assigned a law and a path to each of you. If God had so willed, He would have made you one community, but He wanted to test you through that which He has given you, so race to do good: you will all return to God and He will make clear to you the matters you differed about.’ (Al-Ma’ida: 48).

You should assume that the path chosen for you is the one you are already on. You are clearly unhappy; but that is a state most of us (if not all of us) experience from time to time.

There are (to state the obvious) some serious differences between my Faith and yours.

Where there is disagreement we have a duty – it seems to me – to study what is said about this or that; to reflect upon what we have learned; and then to follow our conscience…to be the best we can; true to our particular (chosen) Faith. The trick is to have a conscience that is well-informed.

I would advise – as your first step – that you to discuss your feelings (your reservations) with a priest; or with a fellow Catholic whose knowledge of the Church, and of its teaching, is also sound; one you can trust to be objective. God willing, this will ease your heart, and confirm you in your Faith. Only if this fails should you consider some other path.

I hope this helps.

May the Exalted guide you along the path that He has chosen for you.
 
Last edited:
Which I have not heard an explanation for why it contradicts or how we know it is the word of God. I’ve asked Catholics and protestants over the period of a month and a half but they don’t answer well
 
CatholicMan17 said:
Which I have not heard an explanation for why it contradicts or how we know it is the word of God.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t contradict. You were literally given an explanation for the supposed contradictions you saw earlier in this very thread. If you’re not going to listen to answers when they’re given then there is nothing we can do to help you because you’ve rendered yourself incapable of learning.

As for it being the word of God, that is a matter of faith. There’s no empirical / scientific test we can perform to prove it.

Jesus claimed to be God. He performed miracles and signs to accompany that claim, most notably of which is the Resurrection. If you accept this as evidence, then you similarly accept that His teaching is the word of God. If you don’t accept the evidence, then you won’t view it as such.
 
CatholicMan17 said:
So Christianity can come along hundreds of years later and know the Jewish God better than the Jews who witnessed the Passover?
Click to expand...
Are you forgetting that Jesus and the 12 were all Jews who celebrated the Passover and other holy days? They didn’t come along hundreds of years later.
 
The only prophecy fulfilled by Mohammed was the one given by Jesus, who Predicted the coming of false prophets. Jesus fulfilled hundreds of prophecies, performed miracles witnessed by thousands, as was His resurrection. Jesus Himself spoke about the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus founded His Church to teach in His name throughout the ages.
 
To claim that the NT contradicts without proper evidence, and then throwing out supposed evidence that has been easily disproved for near two thousand years, shows a lack of real knowledge in the NT and the OT. Christians don’t just rely on the NT to prove Jesus is God. We have the OT prophecies as well. The greatest being Isaiah 9:7 which clearly calls the Messiah Mighty God. Islam would have a cow if this was in the Quran. They cannot believe that another person can be the Mighty God but Allah. And then combining the OT prophecies with the NT record, which is the best preserved document from antiquity, shows that Jesus is God the Son. Islam must deny the OT and the NT to get around this, or do what must Islamic scholars do and claim corruption on the text.
My question is: When was the OT and NT corrupted? Prove to me that it was corrupted. It is that same argument i use against Mormons. Show me when this worldwide conspiracy to change the NT happened? Where are copies that show the true record? Did scribes and translators all around the world decide one day to change to the NT? Islam affirms the Injil, or Gospel. But then claims corruption because the gospels refute them. A little to convenient to me.
 
Mohammed was by all accounts an immoral person. Jesus was by all accounts total morality. Whether you belive either of them was by God I think that fact alone speaks for Jesus and Christianity. I wouldn’t want an overlord that has less moral than myself as a creature.
 
Last edited:
SeekerOfTruth7 said:
My question is: When was the OT and NT corrupted? Prove to me that it was corrupted.
Click to expand...
One example from the NT:

The King James Bible (including the American Version); the King James 2000 Bible; the Jubilee Bible 2000; the Douay-Rheims Bible; the Webster’s Bible Translation; and the Young’s Literal Translation contain what is known as the ‘Comma Ioanneum’. For the benefit of those who have never heard of it, here it is (emphasised):

‘For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth , the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.’

Anthony and Richard Hanson write: ‘It (the ‘Comma Ioanneum’) was added by some enterprising person or persons in the ancient Church who felt that the New Testament was sadly deficient in direct witness to the kind of doctrine of the Trinity which he favoured and who determined to remedy that defect . . . It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament.’ (‘Reasonable Belief: A Survey of the Christian Faith; page 171).

The ‘Comma Ioanneum’ is spurious, and yet for centuries the Church insisted it be included in 1 John 5: 7-8; on the grounds that it had become official Church teaching.

In 1927, the Holy Office declared: ‘After careful examination of the whole circumstances that its genuineness could be denied’ (Ludwig Ott: ‘Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma’, page 56).

This is why one of my Bibles (the Jerusalem Bible – a Catholic version, as you know) reads: ‘So there are three witnesses, the Spirit, water and blood; and the three of them coincide.’ Another Catholic version of mine – the Douay-Rheims – does contain the ‘Comma Ioanneum’. So which of these two is the uncorrupted: the former or the latter?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top