Mohammed and false Apparitions

[Khalid]

That’s not funny!

Yeah, that is funny - although to the Muslim they’re going to Hell because Muhammad was drawn - no, because men and women are dancing. The Congo Line is enough to distract them from men and women touching, that being enough to distract them from the false prophet, and that being enough to distract them from the blind leading the blind.

People who don’t find that funny give Western fuel to the fire of rioting for Koran “desecration” and depictions of Muhammad. I’m not a Westerner (except by full-hearted adoption, like the precise inverse of Edward Said), and I was a Muslim, and even I got it!

 

[PumpkinSeed]

Sorry for the picture guys, I didn’t tend to offend, I just though it was silly. Excuse my sense of humor. Anyways… 1 John 2: 20-23

**“And who is a liar? Anyone who says that Jesus is not the Christ. Anyone who denies the father and the son is an antichrist. Anyone who denies the son doesn’t have the father.” **

What did Mohammad do? He denied Jesus as the son of God, He denies that Jesus is our savior and He denied that Jesus was crucified.

 

[MartinJordan]

Sorry for the picture guys, I didn’t tend to offend, I just though it was silly. Excuse my sense of humor. Anyways… 1 John 2: 20-23

**“And who is a liar? Anyone who says that Jesus is not the Christ. Anyone who denies the father and the son is an antichrist. Anyone who denies the son doesn’t have the father.” **

What did Mohammad do? He denied Jesus as the son of God, He denies that Jesus is our savior and He denied that Jesus was crucified.

Hi Pumpkinseed, do you think that we’ll have to put Jews also in this bracket too?

MJ

 

[Sam_777]

Hi Pumpkinseed, do you think that we’ll have to put Jews also in this bracket too?

MJ

Catechism of the Catholic Church 839:

*“Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.” The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, "the first to hear the Word of God."The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ”,“for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.” *

 

[rinnie]

Sorry for the picture guys, I didn’t tend to offend, I just though it was silly. Excuse my sense of humor. Anyways… 1 John 2: 20-23

**“And who is a liar? Anyone who says that Jesus is not the Christ. Anyone who denies the father and the son is an antichrist. Anyone who denies the son doesn’t have the father.” **

What did Mohammad do? He denied Jesus as the son of God, He denies that Jesus is our savior and He denied that Jesus was crucified.

I agree, we must accept Christ as the Son of God, but also as it was pointed out we must first be taught the truth before we can even begin to accept it.

With that said, I think the point that is forgotten here, is not that we can indeed have a visit from God in our dreams, as the Blessed Mother indeed had, but we must remember the words Christ taught, no New Revelation will be given.

With that said, go back to when the Blessed Mother appeared to the Children, she told them to go a pray to her Son, there is nothing New there. The Gospel always told us to pray to our Lord.

The point is there was nothing that was given or told that is in direct conflict with the word of God,

Actually why would it be Hard to believe that the Blessed Mother told children to pray? It would not.

That is the big difference though, we are taught from the word of God that we are not to believe in anything that goes against or is different from the word of God. All Revelation has been given.

But if someone believes that had a message from God, that is why the Church must investigate it very closely to make sure that it does not direct one from the true word of God.

 

[PumpkinSeed]

See, to me, the problem with Islam is that its not necessary. Why would God start a whole new revelation when Jesus’s revelations to us were perfect? Why was there a need for another prophet or another book? I don’t understand why people think Jesus’s crucifixion wasn’t good enough. The lessons he taught us, and dying for our sins is 100% good enough. We did not need a new revelation, for we had gotten the truth already.

So what was the purpose of Mohammad? Did we really need him? No. After Jesus had come to do what he needed to do, there was no point in prophets after him. But thats just how I see it.

 

[aicirt]

See, to me, the problem with Islam is that its not necessary. Why would God start a whole new revelation when Jesus’s revelations to us were perfect? Why was there a need for another prophet or another book? I don’t understand why people think Jesus’s crucifixion wasn’t good enough. The lessons he taught us, and dying for our sins is 100% good enough. We did not need a new revelation, for we had gotten the truth already.

So what was the purpose of Mohammad? Did we really need him? No. After Jesus had come to do what he needed to do, there was no point in prophets after him. But thats just how I see it.

Christ established the one true Church. He said He was the Truth. There can only be one Truth and one Church. No, it does not make sense that if Christ established the Church, there would be another religion established by God 600 years after Christ’s death.

 

[aschaefer]

Amen!!!

 

[PumpkinSeed]

Christ established the one true Church. He said He was the Truth. There can only be one Truth and one Church. No, it does not make sense that if Christ established the Church, there would be another religion established by God 600 years after Christ’s death.

Yep exactly. Which is why i dont see Mohammad as being a prophet even necessary. And of course, we also know that hes false.

 

[Dorothy]

I have often wondered the same thing regarding the apparition of Saint Gabriel to Mohamed. As you are aware, demons can take any form which suits their purpose and will mix truth with lies in order to confuse people and appear ‘genuine’. As for apparitions of Our Blessed Lady, I tend to only listen to those approved by the church, such as Lourdes and Fatima.

God bless

If he Mohammed claimed to see an angel, it may very well have been a bad angel. They are all too willing to deceive people.

It could have also been schizophrenia or delusions. In any case, it was not of God.

 

[MartinJordan]

Yep exactly. Which is why i dont see Mohammad as being a prophet even necessary. And of course, we also know that hes false.

I agree ofcourse. Notice the Muslims profess the faith of Abraham, and Christians must be charitable to those who sincerely try to follow Abraham’s faith, but certainly not the extremist of Islamists.

Notice also the CCC doesn’t mention Mohammed

MJ

 

[Marybeloved]

I agree ofcourse. Notice the Muslims profess the faith of Abraham, and Christians must be charitable to those who sincerely try to follow Abraham’s faith, but certainly not the extremist of Islamists.

This statement here is certainly wrong. While we are of course, obligated to be charitable to Muslims, saying that per CCC, Muslims “profess the faith of Abraham” is misleading.

The CCC says that Muslims profess to follow/hold the faith of Abraham- not that they actually DO hold/profess the faith of Abraham. In other words, it’s an acknowledged CLAIM of the Muslims- The Church nowhere says that this claim/profession is true.

 

[Bballer32]

Saint Paul`s letter to the Galatians needs to be quoted:

Strong words!

…or an entity claiming to be the archangel Gabriel…
…or an entity claiming to be a resurrected personage…
…or an entity claiming to be the Blessed Virgin Mary; and who contradicts Church teaching…
Etc.

Public Revelation ceased when Saint John (the Evangelist) died.

Thank you thank you thank you :extrahappy:

That’s basically all the proof you need!!

 

[MartinJordan]

This statement here is certainly wrong.

The CCC says that Muslims** PROFESS** to follow the faith of Abraham- not that they actually DO. So, saying that per CCC, Muslims “profess the faith of Abraham” is misleading. In other words, it’s an acknowledged CLAIM of the Muslims- The Church nowhere says that this claim/profession is true.

I read the CCC statement as giving benefit of the doubt to sincere Muslims. Yes, profess is not the same as truly believing.

MJ

 

[exoflare]

Summary of the overhyped CCC 841

You can truly say that nothing written in that passage is incorrect, but only because there’s nothing of any actual substance written there to begin with. It’s a lot of diplomatic sophistry.

 

[Armyvet007]

Summary of the overhyped CCC 841

You can truly say that nothing written in that passage is incorrect, but only because there’s nothing of any actual substance written there to begin with. It’s a lot of diplomatic sophistry.

Blessed John Paul the Great-
“The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved June 25th last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion.”

Yeah, I seriously doubt he would have a meaningless passage included in the CCC or allow a “wink wink, we really don’t mean this” passage included either. But hey, maybe you know better. What other portions of the Catholic doctrine is really just a bunch of “fluff” meant to appease those within and without the faith that disagree with its teachings?

 

[MartinJordan]

Summary of the overhyped CCC 841

You can truly say that nothing written in that passage is incorrect, but only because there’s nothing of any actual substance written there to begin with. It’s a lot of diplomatic sophistry.

The CCC’s statement is actually only a part of a whole from the Council’s clarifications of those of non-Catholic faith.

Muslims are more like non-Jewish theists and I understand that the Lumen Gentium and Dominus Jesus (from Doctrine of the Faith) and Nostra Aetate 3 (from where the 841 is actually derived from) have more info on this.

MJ

 

[Marybeloved]

Yeah, I seriously doubt he would have a meaningless passage included in the CCC or allow a “wink wink, we really don’t mean this” passage included either. But hey, maybe you know better. What other portions of the Catholic doctrine is really just a bunch of “fluff” meant to appease those within and without the faith that disagree with its teachings?

The problem with that statement in bold is that what Muslims believe/not is NOT a matter of Catholic faith or doctrine.

The Magisterium can teach what constitutes the Revelation of Christ/The deposit of faith- what other faiths teach or believe or not is not part of Catholic faith or doctrine nor is it a question of truth that the Magisterium has authority to define. It’s merely a factual statement based on observation- could be right or wrong, not infallible. Also, the CCC points merely to the relationship we ought to have with Muslims. It cannot be said to be infallible when it tells us that this or that non-Christian group believes/teaches this or that- That’s not part of the deposit of faith. They (magisterium) tell us infallibly what the revelation of Christ teaches, who God is and his will for us, who we are, what our relationship with him is/ought to be and how to get there.

They don’t have infallibility to tell us what other faiths believe- That’s just a matter of observation which could be right or wrong.

 

[Sam_777]

Amen!!!

 

[Armyvet007]

The problem with that statement in bold is that what Muslims believe/not is NOT a matter of Catholic faith or doctrine.

The Magisterium can teach what constitutes the Revelation of Christ/The deposit of faith- what other faiths teach or believe or not is not part of Catholic faith or doctrine nor is it a question of truth that the Magisterium has authority to define. It’s merely a factual statement based on observation- could be right or wrong, not infallible. Also, the CCC points merely to the relationship we ought to have with Muslims. It cannot be said to be infallible when it tells us that this or that non-Christian group believes/teaches this or that- That’s not part of the deposit of faith. They (magisterium) tell us infallibly what the revelation of Christ teaches, who God is and his will for us, who we are, what our relationship with him is/ought to be and how to get there.

They don’t have infallibility to tell us what other faiths believe- That’s just a matter of observation which could be right or wrong.

“You can truly say that nothing written in that passage is incorrect, but only because there’s nothing of any actual substance written there to begin with. It’s a lot of diplomatic sophistry.”

Please tell me how your response was designed to defend the above statement, or in any way refute the portion of my comment that you bolded.