Saint Paul and Islam

[Reuben_J]

Obedience is rewarded with paradise and sin is rewarded with hell. Not with death. If it is not a symbolic language then the above words of R J about death are wrong.
Death is for every body, good or bad, obedient or disobedient. Every one will die. Death is not only for the sinners. It is for all people, good or bad people. Do the obedient people not die? They all do.

Which part of my post are you referring to?

Gen 1:17 " … you are surely doomed to die."

 

[R_not]

Obedience is rewarded with paradise and sin is rewarded with hell. Not with death. If it is not a symbolic language then the above words of R J about death are wrong.
Death is for every body, good or bad, obedient or disobedient. Every one will die. Death is not only for the sinners. It is for all people, good or bad people. Do the obedient people not die? They all do.

What if obedience means killing those who are not of your faith? With ‘shirk’ being the worst sin over and above killing someone - this definition is misleading for some. We think that our definition of sin also applies to those others and they let us think that since if they are in a land not under their laws - they consider it the ‘land of war’ which means that they justify deception of what their religion is all about. (war is deception, mohammed and also Sun Tzu said in the ‘Art of War’)

Shirk:
hotair.com/archives/2007/09/30/blogging-the-qur%e2%80%99an-sura-6-%e2%80%9ccattle%e2%80%9d-verses-1-83/

 

[R_not]

Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have both prayed in a mosque. Pope Benedict XVI has also kissed the Holy Quran.

Do you have proof of this putrid act, either the kissing of a koran or praying in a mosque? The praying in a mosque actually does not bother me unless he prayed like a muslim does, but the kissing of a book that is nothing but a book of battle tactics against us I find chillish.

If this is true it just goes to show that, once again, our ‘scholars’ know absolutely nothing of islam - its violent history both past and present, its telling of the followers to deceive while in our lands (the land of war or dar al harb), and its imperialistic goals.

 

[paarsurrey]

If this is true it just goes to show that, once again, our ‘scholars’ know absolutely nothing of islam - its violent history both past and present, its telling of the followers to deceive while in our lands (the land of war or dar al harb), and its imperialistic goals.

Hi

I don’t agree with you. To know about a Revealed Religion, one must quote, I think, from its primary source after seeing and verifying from the context carefully.

Kindly quote from Quran, after seeing the context, to prove your point.

Thanks

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Do you have proof of this putrid act, either the kissing of a koran or praying in a mosque? The praying in a mosque actually does not bother me unless he prayed like a muslim does, but the kissing of a book that is nothing but a book of battle tactics against us I find chillish.

If this is true it just goes to show that, once again, our ‘scholars’ know absolutely nothing of islam - its violent history both past and present, its telling of the followers to deceive while in our lands (the land of war or dar al harb), and its imperialistic goals.

http://www.john1135.com/catholic-pope-kissing-koran.jpg

 

[planten]

R_Not:

If this is true it just goes to show that, once again, our ‘scholars’ know absolutely nothing of islam - its violent history both past and present, its telling of the followers to deceive while in our lands (the land of war or dar al harb), and its imperialistic goals.

For whatever reason the Pope did that, it is the duty of the Catholics to see to it, to know about it and not to criticise it. Otherwise they will be having more knowledge than the Pope.

He must have had a good idea before kissing the Book of Allah.
]

 

[Lapell]

Yeah but you aren’t going to be having women popes any time soon right? So there is still some segregation there in RCC, if not all of Christianity.

Well, if a woman were ordained, the ordination would be invalid, whether she will like it or not. It’s one of the requirements, just as a priest in Judaism was required to be of Aaron’s descent! That was even more restricted. Why did God ask it through Moses? Do you yourself happen to know why?
That segregation accusation is rather too easy to be a true one!

 

[Lapell]

Jesus was never talking about being God in the first place, but being greater than Abraham in his Melchizedek Priesthood. We all, even Abraham, have to go through Jesus the High Priest to get to God, that’s what makes Jesus greater than Abraham but still a servant of God.

Again you are just trying to mash and squish God and Jesus together when that’s not what we’re told.

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

So I mean really, do you know what “between” means and what “the man” means? It means a man that is not God, but between man and God as a mediator.

Just because he didn’t say “I am God the Son” in those very words doesn’t mean he never said anything meaning the same thing! But here, I realise, FaithOfAbraham, that you seem to be searching for PROOFS that Jesus really said so or is so.
You don’t accept the ways he has said it in the Gospel, and probably even less from the bok of Revelation, is it because it’s veiled? If you want us to PROVE you beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus is God, well, we can’t! It’s still true, but it pertains to matters of faith. If you want us to explain God, or how Jesus is God, or the Trinity, we can’t! God is a mystery! Even in our lives, how we came to life, with our sight, hearing, conscience, thinking, etc., is already a great mystery. Some of the how was discovered, but not all of it. And certainly not the whole why!
But if you were asking God to reveal whether Jesus really is God the Son, distinct from God the Father and from the Holy Spirit but still one with them (where One is there, all Three persons are there), maybe He will have mercy on you and tell you. If you sincerely ask Him, He will somehow, I am sure of it.
Just discussing a mystery can take a lifetime, and you want to go on with your life, don’t you?

 

[Deusdonat]

Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have both prayed in a mosque. Pope Benedict XVI has also kissed the Holy Quran.

Actually, you have it wrong, as has already been shown. It is the late Pope JP II who allegedly kissed the Qur’an. Although I’m not sure he ever did. The photo could just as easily been him looking at it up close. There are some very suspicious accounts of what happened, but regardless, it was JP II and not our Holy Father, Pope Benedict (may God grant him a hundred years).

His Holiness Pope Benedict did indeed conduct a silent prayer inside a mosque, as well as at another Mulsim venue while in Turkey. His prayer was most likely for the safety of Christians in Muslim lands, as that was the purpose of his visit. He did not “join” Muslims in prayer or have anything do do with their particular worship.

 

[swariffin]

For whatever reason the Pope did that, it is the duty of the Catholics to see to it, to know about it and not to criticise it. Otherwise they will be having more knowledge than the Pope.

He must have had a good idea before kissing the Book of Allah.
]

Your book of Allah is indeed has something good in it, not just the beautiful caligraphy. But some of irresponsible muslims twisted those verses and created bad image to Islam. While I do have some agreements in some topics with many muslims I know, you still have your share of promoting the goods of Islam rather than merely asking us to believe, while you do nothing.

 

[planten]

Your book of Allah is indeed has something good in it, not just the beautiful caligraphy. But some of irresponsible muslims twisted those verses and created bad image to Islam. While I do have some agreements in some topics with many muslims I know, you still have your share of promoting the goods of Islam rather than merely asking us to believe, while you do nothing.

I could not understand you. I believe that Jesus was a man of God. He was taught the Torah and given the Injeel (Bible NT). He had come for the Jews. He was a prophet of Allah just like all the other prophets in the long line of the israeli prophets, nothing more. He was the last prophet in the line of Issac children.

Because the nation (His people, the Jews) did not recognise him and did not accept him. The blessings from the children of Jacob were taken away for ever. they were deprived of any spiritual blessings for ever. The followers of Jesus were highly persecuted for a long time. In the meantime they lost the message of Jesus.

The followers got lost by the works of paul. Most of the bible NT belongs to paul. The four gospels are equal to one book only because they are the same subject. These four gospels were written much after 80 A.D. They do not even mention paul even though paul had been executed in 64 A.D. Paul was the first one who came in the name of Jesus and preached his own philosophy.

The gospel writers should have mentioned the conversion of paul. It could have been a miracle of Jesus. Because they did not mention paul, his credibility goes down. Muslims do not know paul and his teachings are notin line with those of Jesus.

 

[planten]

I admit that some of the present day Muslims are not proper Muslims. They have misunderstandings. There are high grade Muslim leaders who are misusing the youth. Wecan call them as our pauls.

 

[ralphinal]

Planten,

I think that this has been mentioned before but it may have gotten lost. One dating system has the Gospels written that late. Others have them all finished before the year 72. Either way, Paul was not an origional follower of Christ, so he would not be included in the Gospels. If the earliest dating is correct, and the first Gospel was written before 36 A.D., then Paul would not be in there.

As for it being another miracle of Christ, John tells us that all of Jesus’s works were not recorded, only enough for you to believe. Besides, all Christians believe Paul’s conversion was a miracle.

And I know that you might be getting tired of this question, but can you please point us to a site that shows which teachings of Paul are not supported in the Gospels?

 

[Reuben_J]

http://www.john1135.com/catholic-pope-kissing-koran.jpg

This gesture shows how great this man is. His greatness is not fully realized during his lifetime by his adversaries but during his death it came to bloom. Many Muslim clerics attended his funeral and went through the entire Catholic funeral mass. It could be diplomatic thing but it demonstrated his influence on the world at large.

For the Muslims to step foot in the Cathedral of St Peter to participate in the mass perhaps is no different than when the Pope kissed the Koran - a sign of respect for each other. We can never imagine Muslim clerics would step into St Peter had it not been for the magnanimity of the Pope during his lifetime.

His would be murderer was personally forgiven by him, and the man as a result could only said good words about the Pope. This is, I guess, the fruit of Jesus’ teaching - if a man hits you on one cheek, offer him the other.

Love and peace overcome Communism. Many commentators credit the Pope as the forerunner of turning Communist Europe into capitalism. The fall of Communism was prophecied in Fatima by Mary through the vision of the three children at that time.

Thus God is still at work to save his people.

 

[Reuben_J]

And this is how Paul difined what love is:

1 Cor 13: 4-8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails …

It is strange indeed for a false disciple to say something like this.

 

[Lapell]

I could not understand you. I believe that Jesus was a man of God.
The followers got lost by the works of Paul. Most of the bible NT belongs to Paul. The four gospels are equal to one book only because they are the same subject. These four gospels were written much after 80 A.D. They do not even mention paul even though Paul had been executed in 64 A.D. Paul was the first one who came in the name of Jesus and preached his own philosophy.
The gospel writers should have mentioned the conversion of Paul. It could have been a miracle of Jesus. Because they did not mention Paul, his credibility goes down. Muslims do not know paul and his teachings are notin line with those of Jesus.

Ignorance. Ignorance. Ignorance. Don’t you know that the Acts of the Apostles were written by Luke and that it was some kind of a Gospel according to Luke, part 2? Read the beginning, and you’ll see that it’s the continuation of the Gospel! And it contains the story of Paul’s conversion. And twice after it did Paul tell the people about it. You probably never read it, nor know what this book of the NT is all about!

 

[Lapell]

Who is allah?
-mohammed even brought in the 3 goddesses at one point - al-lat, al-uzza, and manat, but was advised to take them out.
-islam is the ancient fertility cult (gee, no wonder they are so concerned with the afterlife being very carnal, and the over concern with women and men’s sexual behaviors)
-allah was the high god in a pantheon of deities.
-allah was one of many
-allah, known as habul, and was a statue on top of the kabaa, the moon god.
-‘allah’ replaced ‘habul’.

Maybe, just maybe, R_not would be interested to learn that Arab Christians before Muhammed’s time used to call God: Allah!
That’s the Arabic form of the name Elohim. Please remember that Arabic is a Semitic language just as Hebrew is…

 

[Lapell]

(funny I have to tell a muslim about his own koran - or is it that he is practicing deception again!)

Maybe I am just waking up… Is FaithOfAbraham a Muslim? All these days I was assuming I was replying to a Jew!
Some Jews have a good knowledge of the Qoran, such as Andre Chouraqui, who wrote a French version of the Bible (OT and NT, which is remarkable for a Jew!) trying to offer a rendition helping us to get the flavour of the original Hebrew way of expressing things, either in Hebrew or in Greek… so I thought it could have been the same thing with FoA. Well… what of it, really?

 

[Lapell]

I guess we need to also take all Christian apocrypha as truth too. No, many Hadith are nonsense, and many Muslims will tell you the same.

I am grateful to you, FoA, that you take the “Christian” apocrypha for what they are, not pertaining to the canon of our New Testament.
It seems to me that you mostly respond to what you see as being erroneous. You seem to me a person who is searching for authentic truth, whichever side it comes from, and for the sake of truth you try to make us see what might be wrong in our approach, a bit like Socrates, even though not quite the same way as he does. Even then, I think you deserve my admiration, and I wish the objective Truth will reveal itself (or Himself) to you. Sincerely! God bless you in your walk of life, you and your family.

 

[Lapell]

So you maybe should explain why loving Jesus, if he is and always has been God, allowed things like that. Before you start in on the Quran. Don’t you think?

Great question here, it’s Job’s question indeed: Why do bad things happen to good people? It’s also the question that Jewish survivors of the Holocaust asked God, at least many of them. Maybe the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki must have asked the same question. And since in their case it was caused by humans, they came to protest against any other genocide or bomb attack, they say: No more mass destruction! No more wars! Let there be peace on earth! Apparently they have begun to see it the way God does…
For God had not willed the Holocaust, nor the catastrophies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nor the genocides… man’s actions can lead to that, though!