T
Thorolfr
Guest
Maybe it came from the angel Gabriel like the Muslims say it did.
- Status
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
I don’t know about Lutheran theology, but Catholic theology doesn’t hold that to be possible.Maybe it came from the angel Gabriel like the Muslims say it did.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
And we are back to this peculiar problem in which you keep imagining things rather than reading what I am actually saying. Why on Earth do you make this hugely illogical leap from “it is uncharitable to accuse him of making it up when you do not know that” to “he didn’t make it up”? The first does not imply the second.
Let me see whether I can clarify this:
- We do not and cannot know the precise origin of the message.
- Therefore, any view about its origin is necessarily speculative.
- Therefore, any choice to accuse Muhammad of lying means selecting the morally worst of the possible choices and is thus uncharitable.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
- I assume your position is based on Anglican theology. It’s all well and good for those who accept Anglican theology, but for those of us who accept Catholic or Jewish theology (which both hold that Anglicanism is a man-made faith) such an assumption is incorrect. Those who accept Catholicism or Judaism as the “true faith” can know the origin of the Quran, or at the very least know that the origin wasn’t God. They can know this because both faiths hold Islam to be a man-made faith.
- Once again only true if one holds your position which I assume is based on Anglican theology.
- I’m pretty sure I’ve presented options in which Muhammad made up the Quran based upon him doing so without a dishonest intent (i.e. lying). Odd you seem to ignore these options and instead continue to assign the morally worse possible intent to every claim that Muhammad made up the Quran. Additionally, if the origin can not be know, as you argue, than how exactly is stating Muhammad made it up the morally worst of the possible choices? Wouldn’t Muhammad being in league with a demonic source to falsely present the demonically authored Quran as coming from God in order to lead people astray be the morally worst of the possible choices?
P
Picky_Picky
Guest
Where do you think it lies in Anglican theology? It looks to me like logic plus ethics.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Well I had assumed that Anglicanism at the very least denied the divinity of the Quran. Apparently it has somehow created a theology which on the one hand invalidates the idea of the Quran, which contradicts the Bible, being divinely authored and on the other hand allows for the possibility that it was authored by God. In effect- “God didn’t author the Quran, but you can’t say He didn’t author the Quran because declaring something to be true because your faith tells you it is true is uncharitable.”
P
Picky_Picky
Guest
Except that isn’t what he’s saying. Try post 160 again.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
What do you think he is saying in post 160?
S
SjMelnychuk
Guest
Oh I’m certain there is some truth in the Qu’ran but you cannot claim Jesus as both Lord and Savior and hold up Islam as God’s Kingdom. Every Muslim holds up Muhammed as the supreme Prophet and Jesus as a lesser Prophet.
If Jesus is Lord AND Saviour, and KING and God that God’s Kingdom is with Jesus as not only the Supreme Prophet but Supreme King and God! So God’s Kingdom was established through the Church Jesus established which Islam dogma opposes. You can’t combine faiths like you think you can in the Ba’hia faith, it’s just not logical especially with Islam, Christianity, and Jewish faith. There are truths in all but the truth is only fulfilled and completed and made whole in the Catholic Church. the Church Jesus established.
You cannot say that Muhammed and Jesus are equal and yet Muslims lift up Muhammed as the Supreme and final Prophet. If Jesus is Lord and Savior than the lineage of blessing flowed through Jacob NOT Esau. And from Jacob through to Jessie and eventually through to King David and from King David Jesus ensuring Davids House would rain forever … That Promise fulfilled in Jesus. The Qu’ran doesn’t teach that Jacob received the blessing normally given to the oldest son but the Qu’ran says Esau got the blessing. So which are you going to hold to as being TRUE?
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Exactly. Islam and Catholicism both make mutually exclusive claims concerning Christ. Both can’t be right.
A
Adonia
Guest
I’ll pass on the Ramadan fast, thank you very much. We have Lent, the 40 days leading up to the passion of Christ, the Incarnate Word.
A
Adonia
Guest
But is it the same God? Read the Koran, the book Mohammad says he received from “on high”. Would the real God command his prophet to preach anything but love?
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
You do understand that your above is based upon the Quran holding the same level of authority on the truth as the Church right? What is theologically correct in the Quran is theologically correct based upon the what the Church (which does have authority on understanding the truth and God) states to be true and not because it is in the Quran; and what is theologically incorrect in the Quran is theologically incorrect based upon what the Church states to be incorrect and not because it is in the Quran.
S
SjMelnychuk
Guest
The CORRECT Catholic response is in honoring truth when truth is spoken. Islam is a religion of partial truth but they are children of Abraham and follow OT history to the best of their knowledge. So Islam follows a faith stemming from Adam so Islam is Adamic so is the Jewish and Christian (Protestant/Catholic) faith so we all share in common the belief that Adam and Eve were the first people. We also all share in common being an Abrahamic faith as we are all in faith children of Abraham. Jewish faith, Muslim faith, and Christian (Protestant/Catholic) faith… We’re all spiritually by faith children of Abraham. Muslims also have a high regard for Mary. So Islam in accordance with what the Catholic Church teaches is a religion of partial truth, they worship the God of the Old Testament just like Jews worship the God of the Old Testament and just like Christians who worship the God of the Old Testament. The difference is Jews and Muslims don’t accept Jesus as Messiah and reject the claims of Jesus resurrecting from the dead and while Muslims follow a false Prophet we are all worshiping the God of the Old Testament. Does that all make sense or do you need further explanation?
S
Servant19
Guest
Well the question now is “do you believe that the OT is authored by God?”…given some of the historical inaccuracies within it?
.
S
Servant19
Guest
This does not really answer the question dear Sj.
We are not talking about who is the blessed ones in a family lineage.
The question is how does one objectively come to the conclusion that the OT is Truth, and the Quran is false (or misguided)?
Convince me please, using rational argument.
One cannot go around calling other peoples family members “misguided” based on a hunch or a “belief” or that “someone I trust told me”.
In a similar vein one cannot do the same with the Holy Book of a billion people, so many of which live exemplary lives of piety and loving devotion.
.
.
S
Servant19
Guest
…and so does Judaism. Maybe both Catholicism and Judaism cannot both be right too?
.
S
Servant19
Guest
Maybe the God that massacred the Canaanite peoples is a different God too?
Too many Christians forget that it was Jesus (as God) who instructed the death of so many innocents in the OT.
It seems unfair to focus so much attention on the violence in the Quran, yet brush aside the violence in the OT.
.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
-No the question still remains as to why you are asking me for something you apparently already have for a claim that you apparently already agree with.
-And I’m pretty sure I’ve already covered why the OT was inspired by God (the faith claiming God authored their book would Islam hence the need for the Quran to be completely error free and hence why the historical errors you already know about and accept would mean you can’t believe it is authored by God).
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Judaism post-Christ isn’t right; and post-Christ Jewish theology contains errors. Judaism pre-Christ is right, just incomplete with Christianity completing it; and pre-Christ Jewish theology doesn’t contain errors, it’s just incomplete.
This is rather different from Islam’s view of Judaism and Christianity which it claims to be the continuation and completion of, but it also claims that pre-Islam Judaism and Christianity have theological errors (which is different from just being incomplete).
If the prior faith is the foundation of a house and the current faith the house itself, Christianity has built a house on a firm and rot free foundation (Judaism is incomplete)where as Islam has built a house on a rotten foundation (Judaism and Christianity are in error/have errors in their theology).
- Status