Muslims4Lent

[Tom_Baum]

I was referring to after the creation of Adam and Eve and prior to the Fall.

In that time period, “after the creation of Adam and Eve and prior to the Fall”, as opposed to when God said, “Let Us make man (humanity) in Our Image and…”, according to the bible there was NO “belief system” concerning God since they (Adam and Eve) seemed to be on a basis of “knowing” God, not believing in God.

Question concerning “to when God said, “Let Us make man (humanity) in Our Image and…”,”, doesn’t this seem to say quite clearly and simply that it is concerning ALL OF HUMANITY?

 

[Mystophilus]

No, it’s your interpretation of what my faith teaches which identifies it as the product of demonic influence. If we use the standard you are using in interpreting the CCC we end up with Henry 8 and Luther both being under demonic influence.

Again, no, because the “standard” which I am using is that of actually reading the Catechism. This is what allows me to see that the part which refers to people’s being “deceived by the Evil One” is in the section which refers to “non-Christians” and “non-Christian religions”, terms which the Catechism explicitly excludes from use for Protestants and Protestantism (see section 818). Therefore, it is not relevant to Henry VIII or to Luther, at least not in official Catholic teaching.

If you want to see the original context, it is from part 16 of Lumen Gentium, which describes this deception by the Evil One as the cause for evangelism to Muslims. Nowhere does it suggest that Muhammad made any of it up.

 

[arthra]

From the Independent, Muslims on social media are taking up self-denial for Lent as a deliberately ecumenical act.

Note to self: (try to) fast during Ramadan this year.

Well it’s interesting… If you say were to observe not eating any solid food or drinking liquids for forty days between sunrise and sunset it would be a challenge… Both Moses and Jesus were believed to have fasted for forty days and nights.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Again, no, because the “standard” which I am using is that of actually reading the Catechism. This is what allows me to see that the part which refers to people’s being “deceived by the Evil One” is in the section which refers to “non-Christians” and “non-Christian religions”, terms which the Catechism explicitly excludes from use for Protestants and Protestantism (see section 818). Therefore, it is not relevant to Henry VIII or to Luther, at least not in official Catholic teaching.

If you want to see the original context, it is from part 16 of Lumen Gentium, which describes this deception by the Evil One as the cause for evangelism to Muslims. Nowhere does it suggest that Muhammad made any of it up.

-Ok, let’s go with your interpretation. That would mean that Henry 8 and Luther who both perverted the Catholic faith for personal gains weren’t somehow under demonic influence, but that Jews who faithfully maintain the Old Covenant out of ignorance of Christ (i.e. still a valid relationship with God since God didn’t null and void the Old Covenant) are somehow under demonic influence. Yeah, that sounds logical to me.
-So you’re claiming that the source of the Quran was demonic?

 

[Mystophilus]

-Ok, let’s go with your interpretation. That would mean that Henry 8 and Luther who both perverted the Catholic faith for personal gains weren’t somehow under demonic influence, but that Jews who faithfully maintain the Old Covenant out of ignorance of Christ (i.e. still a valid relationship with God since God didn’t null and void the Old Covenant) are somehow under demonic influence.
-So you’re claiming that the source of the Quran was demonic?

Wow! That is an impressive example of eisegesis.

1. It’s not my interpretation: it’s your church’s Catechism and your church’s Dogmatic Constitution.
2. It says that nothing about non-Catholic Christians, because it does not address us in that part. I have yet to see any official Catholic teaching which describes non-Catholic Christians as deceived by the Devil.
3. It says that non-Christians, and especially Muslims, are led into incorrect belief by diabolical influence, “deceived by the Evil One”, not that they continue to be “under demonic influence” in some sort of permanent fashion.
4. Regarding the Qu’ran, the most relevant part of Lumen Gentium would appear to be “Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel. She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.” This suggests that there is “good or truth” to be found in Islam, even if that is not all that is found there.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Wow! That is an impressive example of eisegesis.

1. It’s not my interpretation: it’s your church’s Catechism and your church’s Dogmatic Constitution.
2. It says that nothing about non-Catholic Christians, because it does not address us in that part. I have yet to see any official Catholic teaching which describes non-Catholic Christians as deceived by the Devil.
3. It says that non-Christians, and especially Muslims, are led into incorrect belief by diabolical influence, “deceived by the Evil One”, not that they continue to be “under demonic influence” in some sort of permanent fashion.
4. Regarding the Qu’ran, the most relevant part of Lumen Gentium would appear to be “Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel. She knows that it is given by Him who enlightens all men so that they may finally have life.” This suggests that there is “good or truth” to be found in Islam, even if that is not all that is found there.

-It doesn’t actually say “especially Muslims” are led into incorrect belief by diabolical influence. That would be your interpretation. The order goes- Judaism, Islam, all other non-Christian faiths, then 844 which you repeatedly seem to forget to also mention states- “In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:”
-And you failed to answer my query concerning Jews who out of ignorance faithfully maintain the still valid Old Covenant. Perhaps you’ve failed to answer this query because your interpretation of the CCC has Satan “tricking” Jews to worship God correctly but incompletely (Judaism) instead of correctly and completely (Christianity which didn’t replace the Old Covenant but fulfilled it). Yeah, how diabolical.
-You also failed to answer my query as to what your belief is on the authorship of the Quran. Who wrote it- God, Muhammad, or Satan or some other demon?

 

[jakasaki]

Muslims for Lent… hmmmm… interesting!

Who’s Lent?

Catholics?
Eastern Orthodox?
Coptic?
Greek Orthodox?
Protestant?

All of the above have different fasting practices

 

[jakasaki]

God did not write the Quran

Muhammad did not write the Quran

Satan did not write the Quran

Demon(s) did not write the Quran

In a nut shell…

The Quran was first compiled by Abu Bakr.
Upon this death, it was given to Umar.
When he died it was passed on to Hafsa, Umars daughter and Muhammads widow.

Then Uthman comes along and creates what is known today as “Uthmans Quran”

 

[Mystophilus]

-It doesn’t actually say “especially Muslims” are led into incorrect belief by diabolical influence. That would be your interpretation.

Still no. The “especially” is a reference to the topic under discussion in this thread.

The order goes- Judaism, Islam, all other non-Christian faiths, then 844 which you repeatedly seem to forget to also mention states- “In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:”

Actually, I posted context*whole *, having previously quoted 844 in its entirety, whereas it is your quotation here of 844 which omits the explanatory clauses: “844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them: Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.”

-And you failed to answer my query concerning Jews who out of ignorance faithfully maintain the still valid Old Covenant. Perhaps you’ve failed to answer this query because your interpretation of the CCC has Satan “tricking” Jews to worship God correctly but incompletely (Judaism) instead of correctly and completely (Christianity which didn’t replace the Old Covenant but fulfilled it).

Again, no. The Catechism is the answer, because it states what your church teaches about this, which is what we are discussing.

-You also failed to answer my query as to what your belief is on the authorship of the Quran. Who wrote it- God, Muhammad, or Satan or some other demon?

Again, no. The Catechism is the answer, because it states what your church teaches about this, which is what we are discussing.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Still no. The “especially” is a reference to the topic under discussion in this thread.

Actually, I posted a link to the *whole *context, having previously quoted 844 in its entirety, whereas it is your quotation here of 844 which omits the explanatory clauses: “844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them: Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.”

Again, no. The Catechism is the answer, because it states what your church teaches about this, which is what we are discussing.

Again, no. The Catechism is the answer, because it states what your church teaches about this, which is what we are discussing.

So who wrote the Quran?

 

[Lucy107]

So who wrote the Quran?

Clearly, it was men, out of the sheer evilness of their hearts.

 

[Mystophilus]

So who wrote the Quran?

Islam says that Allah revealed it, via Jibreel, to Muhammad, who dictated it to scribes, and it was then compiled at some point between then and the reign of Abu Bakr.

Historically speaking, there are no extant contradictory records, which leaves us with “apparently dictated to scribes by Muhammad, and compiled by others.”

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Islam says that Allah revealed it, via Jibreel, to Muhammad, who dictated it to scribes, and it was then compiled at some point between then and the reign of Abu Bakr.

Historically speaking, there are no extant contradictory records, which leaves us with “apparently dictated to scribes by Muhammad, and compiled by others.”

Yes, and I’m asking for who you think wrote the Quran. You seem to have no issue objecting to people stating that Muhammad made it up, so I’d assume you would have no issue sharing who you think wrote it.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Clearly, it was men, out of the sheer evilness of their hearts.

The “out of the sheer evilness of their hearts” part is more of a possibility than a for certain. The Quran could have been created with a dishonest intent, but it could have also been created with an honest but misguided intent.

 

[Servant19]

The “out of the sheer evilness of their hearts” part is more of a possibility than a for certain. The Quran could have been created with a dishonest intent, but it could have also been created with an honest but misguided intent.

From what can be gleaned by objective readers there is little difference in “violent undertones” seen in the Quran compared to the OT.

What are some of the reasons you see that the Quran is an honest, yet misguided book, yet not the OT?

.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

From what can be gleaned by objective readers there is little difference in “violent undertones” seen in the Quran compared to the OT.

What are some of the reasons you see that the Quran is an honest, yet misguided book, yet not the OT?

.

-The answer to your question would be the formation of my faith and how I determined which faith is true.
-“Violent undertones” would only work as criteria for determining how true a faith is if we assume that all violence is by default unjust. The concept of self-defense and defense of others as well as the specific concept of unjust causing of death in all three Abrahamic faiths invalidate this idea that all violence is by default unjust. Therefore, one can’t just use the existence of “violent undertones” in the holy texts of the three faiths as the sole criteria in determining if the texts are divinely inspired and/or true.

 

[Servant19]

-The answer to your question would be the formation of my faith and how I determined which faith is true.

Which is great

How does a Christian come to that determination? Maybe you can explain your own personal steps you came to determine Truth between the the OT and the Quran

-“Violent undertones” would only work as criteria for determining how true a faith is if we assume that all violence is by default unjust. The concept of self-defense and defense of others as well as the specific concept of unjust causing of death in all three Abrahamic faiths invalidate this idea that all violence is by default unjust. Therefore, one can’t just use the existence of “violent undertones” in the holy texts of the three faiths as the sole criteria in determining if the texts are divinely inspired and/or true.

So by what justification does a Christian come to the conclusion that the Quran is from a different source than the OT?

.

 

[oldcatholicguy]

So by what justification does a Christian come to the conclusion that the Quran is from a different source than the OT?

.

We could start with the fact that Islam teaches that Christ was just a Prophet. If that is not enough, we could move into the various aspects of Islamic theology that contradict Jewish and Christian theology, the necessary assumption in order to hold Islam to be valid that both Judaism and Christianity have been perverted from their now lost true forms, the fluidity of God’s commands and teachings found in Islam but not in Judaism or Christianity (I’m referring to the abrogation in Islam), the logical disconnect between God abrogating in Islam and Judaism and Christianity true forms being lost instead of abrogated, the non-universal nature of God’s ability to communicate with us (that the Quran has to be in Arabic because meaning is lost when it is translated), and I can go on from here if necessary.

 

[SteveVH]

Which is great

How does a Christian come to that determination? Maybe you can explain your own personal steps you came to determine Truth between the the OT and the Quran

So by what justification does a Christian come to the conclusion that the Quran is from a different source than the OT?

We believe that the OT is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus Christ, God’s final revelation of himself to man. Thus, anyone subsequent to Jesus Christ who preaches a Gospel other than what was given to the Apostles, who denies the crucifixion and bodily resurrection of Jesus and who denies that our salvation lies in Christ alone is a false prophet. Therefore the Quran, if written by a false prophet, is from a different source than the OT, which we believe to be the inerrant word of God.

 

[Servant19]

We could start with the fact that Islam teaches that Christ was just a Prophet. If that is not enough, we could move into the various aspects of Islamic theology that contradict Jewish and Christian theology, the necessary assumption in order to hold Islam to be valid that both Judaism and Christianity have been perverted from their now lost true forms, the fluidity of God’s commands and teachings found in Islam but not in Judaism or Christianity (I’m referring to the abrogation in Islam), the logical disconnect between God abrogating in Islam and Judaism and Christianity true forms being lost instead of abrogated, the non-universal nature of God’s ability to communicate with us (that the Quran has to be in Arabic because meaning is lost when it is translated), and I can go on from here if necessary.

…so would you mind sharing how one can determine that the OT is true therefore?

.