Something that has been bothering me for a while now

[dzheremi]

I certainly don’t feel bad. Edwin has no authority to declare me anything, I just don’t want him to get the wrong idea about why I started this thread and what it is that I believe if he is going to continue to ask me to answer him.

 

[SSTeacher]

From the Sermon on the Mount:

No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.

According to Our Lord it’s possible to raise money to a level above the Triune God and then worship it. So I guess that for some people money could actually be a false god? Perhaps you even know people who have fallen into that sorry state. Do you suppose it’s possible for the human mind willingly to embrace just about anything that comes along and make whatever takes its fancy – whether it’s real or imaginary – into a false god? If it is, then it would presumably mean for the person who knowingly decided to do such a thing that the Triune God would in reality be totally excluded from his or her life.

Helpfully,
Mick

 

[Godfollower]

Well, they think it was God so it’s Muhammad they really follow.

Yes, I think they worship a “god” of Muhammad’s invention. You don’t think that people in their pride and arrogance do no create manmade gods to their specifications and desires? Isn’t that exactly what Muhammad did? You don’t think that it really matters how people perceive God to their advantage? How they distort his commands by legalizing same-sex “marriage” and declaring it “holy” for instance?

Vickie

.

Of course it matters. That’s why Islam is full of inaccuracies and wrong. But we can’t deny that they got some stuff right (incidentally, they condemn same-sex marriage just as strongly as the Catholic Church does, and for the same reasons).

The only question here is the accuracy of the Church’s teaching that Muslims “adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” There is in fact only one God; He is in fact merciful; He will in fact be mankind’s judge on the last day; and Muslims adore Him. Accordingly, the Church is telling the truth.

As St. Justin Martyr said with respect to Jewish beliefs that conflict with Christian beliefs,

“There will be no other God, O Trypho, nor was there from eternity any other existing” (I thus addressed him), “but He who made and disposed all this universe. Nor do we think that there is one God for us, another for you, but that He alone is God who led your fathers out from Egypt with a strong hand and a high arm. Nor have we trusted in any other (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob.”

There is no other god but God. They’ve been misled about God’s nature because of Mohammed’s Quran. But Muslims are correct in saying that there’s only one God, and He is to be worshiped.

 

[PJM]

=Godfollower;-If you’re right, then Jews also are not worshiping the same God as Catholics and Christians, because they clearly deny the reality of a “TRIUNE God-Head.”

And that doesn’t make sense.

(Plus, it requires the Catholic Church to have taught error, both in Lumen Gentium and in the Catechism).

Ergo, your understanding is incorrect.

Jews worship the same God Catholics do. They deny His triune nature; they deny Jesus’ divinity; they deny a LOT of Jesus’ teachings; they deny the veracity of the New Testament; in short, they deny a lot of our Faith.

The same goes for Muslims.

But they all worship THE ONLY GOD THERE IS, EVER WAS, AND EVER WILL BE.

They aren’t guaranteed salvation (of course, who is?), but that’s not the point of CCC ¶ 841. All it says is that they adore the one, true God.

Catechism of the Catholic Church ¶¶ 2096-97.

They do that. There’s a lot they get wrong, but they adore God.

Thanks friend:thumbsup:

That is a different understanding than mine, but upon reflection I find you to be right and me wrong!

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[Booklover]

Well, I’m trying to help in my poor, inadequate way.

Maybe this is just an instance in which good, faithful Catholics need to simply acknowledge the Church’s official teaching, despite their inability to agree with it – much like people who disagree with the ban on artificial birth control or abortion or same-sex marriage are expected to follow the Church’s teaching.

Or maybe someone else can explain it better than I can. Or maybe I’ll stumble upon a better explanation as I keep trying. As for which argument is the valid Catholic teaching, all I can say is, here’s the quote from Lumen Gentium:

Lumen Gentium ¶ 16.

What do you make of this statement from Lumen Gentium.

“But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.”

I think that applies to Muhammad very well. Supposing that an angel of darkness appeared to Muhammad under the guise of an “angel of light” and this demon was Muhammad’s real inspiration for the Quran? How do you see that? Would it still be the one true God they follow because they think it is?

Vickie

 

[tomarin]

Supposing that an angel of darkness appeared to Muhammad under the guise of an “angel of light” and this demon was Muhammad’s real inspiration for the Quran? How do you see that? Would it still be the one true God they follow because they think it is?

The triumph of Islam in the Arabian peninsula represented a victory of monotheism over polytheism. Why would the devil want that? Doesn’t that bring those affected closer to the truth about God?

 

[tomarin]

Throughout my year or so here I have been disabused of a great many preconceived notions regarding religion, both Catholicism and other. But for the first time, starting about a month ago, I’ve actually come to disbelieve in something I previously believed in rather self-evident and hence elemental manner.

Dzheremi, is the trouble you’re having that you don’t agree with the direction the Church took after Vatican II with respect to ecumenism and dialogue?

 

[Contarini]

I never said it didn’t. My original post does not talk about Jews at all. You brought up the Jews.

Of course you didn’t. I did. That’s how arguments work. You propose an idea, and people who disagree with you introduce arguments showing why you are wrong. You don’t want to talk about the Jews, because the existence of the Jews refutes your argument. They don’t believe in the Trinity, but they worship our God.

I think I have clarified my position in subsequent posts

No, you haven’t.

What about what I’ve subsequently written? Why don’t YOU instead address that, as some of these “other issues” are involved there.

Because you haven’t defended your original argument, which was based on the Trinity. Are you willing to withdraw that argument and admit that it was mistaken?

God help me, since you’ve continued to rudely insinuate that I am a heretic, I am really struggling not to respond rudely to this particular point.

I don’t care whether you are are rude or not. I don’t care whether you think I am rude or not. I care about truth. Do you?

None of what you say is relevant to the argument you originally made about the Trinity. Do you continue to defend that argument? If so, then you must face the implications of what you are saying for the Jews. They do not worship the Trinity.

The question of whether merely believing in “one God” constitutes belief in the true God is a much more complex one. I would be happy to discuss that question with you. But I would like first to settle the issue *you *brought up. Can someone who does not believe in the Trinity believe in the true God?

Do you agree with me that this is possible (as the example of the Jews shows), and therefore that your OP was mistaken?

Edwin

 

[Booklover]

Of course it matters. That’s why Islam is full of inaccuracies and wrong. But we can’t deny that they got some stuff right (incidentally, they condemn same-sex marriage just as strongly as the Catholic Church does, and for the same reasons).

The only question here is the accuracy of the Church’s teaching that Muslims “adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” There is in fact only one God; He is in fact merciful; He will in fact be mankind’s judge on the last day; and Muslims adore Him. Accordingly, the Church is telling the truth.

As St. Justin Martyr said with respect to Jewish beliefs that conflict with Christian beliefs,

There is no other god but God. They’ve been misled about God’s nature because of Mohammed’s Quran. But Muslims are correct in saying that there’s only one God, and He is to be worshiped.

I still think that it isn’t as simple as you state. And Jews and Christians knew about the one true God before Muhammad came along! You sound as if it was Muslims who first declared it! Oh, yes, and Allah has to be worshipped and has to be invoked while cutting off the heads of infidels, but it doesn’t matter because it’s the real god they worship, they’re just misled, and don’t even bother to find what the truth is.

Vickie

 

[PJM]

=2nd Adam;5851159]Well, it’s a choice of Sacred Scripture over Sacred Tradition. As a Protestant, I believe Sacred Scripture is the authorative Word of God, and it is by God the Holy Spirit who illuminates our minds to understand the Scriptures. That is the Protestant perspective of sola scriptura; therefore Reformation Day is a great day for us! It’s interesting to watch your struggles on a very basic Christian truth.

My dear friend in Christ,

If you are going to claim the position of Sola Scriptura, does in not include the absolute mandate to at the minimum at least use the ENTIRE BIBLE as actually inspired by God:shrug:

**2 Thess. 2: 13 **“But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. 14 To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.
**
2 Thess. 6 **Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us

1 Cor. 11 2: 2 ** “I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you”
**
2 Thess. 3: 6-7 “ Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us; we were not idle when we were with you,”

Like many others I am astounded that one can hold a postion not found found in the Bible, and further select only those parts that support you’re postion, and call yourself a “practicing Christian.”

1 Peter 4: 17 For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? 18 And “If the righteous man is scarcely saved, where will the impious and sinner appear?”
**
2 Peter 3: 14 –17 **14 Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

Love and prayers dear friend,
Pat

 

[SSTeacher]

Well, I’m trying to help in my poor, inadequate way.

You are helping by putting up a point of view and then discussing it. I was hoping you’d be an encourager, too.

Maybe this is just an instance in which good, faithful Catholics need to simply acknowledge the Church’s official teaching, despite their inability to agree with it – much like people who disagree with the ban on artificial birth control or abortion or same-sex marriage are expected to follow the Church’s teaching.

But isn’t this the dilemma for dzheremi? For him, the Church’s official teaching is either not entirely clear or even suspect and he therefore sees some implications that are far reaching.

Or maybe someone else can explain it better than I can. Or maybe I’ll stumble upon a better explanation as I keep trying.

Or maybe you’ll even change your mind? A mind is a wonderful thing to change. Didn’t one of those American politicians say that a few years ago?

Nostalgically,
Mick

 

[Booklover]

The triumph of Islam in the Arabian peninsula represented a victory of monotheism over polytheism. Why would the devil want that? Doesn’t that bring those affected closer to the truth about God?

In my opinion those polytheists haven’t caused as much strife to the world as Muhammad’s warped monetheism has.

As for the devil, I cannot think of a better way for him to mislead people than under the guise of a “religion” which appears pious and modest on the surface but is rotten to the core on the inside. Make of that what you will!

Vickie

 

[SSTeacher]

The triumph of Islam in the Arabian peninsula represented a victory of monotheism over polytheism. Why would the devil want that? Doesn’t that bring those affected closer to the truth about God?

Good questions. Perhaps you ought to start a new thread?

Cordially,
Mick

 

[CDNowak]

No, the description of God in the Quran is an inaccurate description of the only God who ever existed. Mohammed made it all up. But there is only one God. And the Muslims worship Him. Perfectly? No. And the rest of the Catechism makes clear that salvation does not come from Islam.

All CCC ¶ 841 says is that they adore the only God Who exists.

It doesn’t say they understand Him.

It doesn’t say they teach facts about Him correctly.

It doesn’t say Mohammed was a prophet of any kind.

It doesn’t say the Quran is correct. Or even inspired.

It doesn’t say that Islam is the way (or even a way) to salvation.

It just says that they adore God.

Yes, you’re absolutely correct. Mohammad made it all up.

They aren’t worshiping a false god; they’re misled about God. No “god” told Muslims to do anything; Mohammed did.

You need to remember that the Quran is a work of fiction. By claiming that the Muslims worship a different god, you’re elevating fiction to reality status. That’s a bad idea, both practically and theologically.

There is one God, but man has worshiped many gods. As far as the existence of some of these gods, I don’t doubt that some of them have been powers and principalities. As I posted before I think that it is possible that a Muslim worships the true God, though he know it not. What I do not think possible is that the Q’ran describes the same God that true worship goes to.

As to the origin of the Q’ran, I have no proof that it was not (diabolically) inspired. Yes, it may be an invention of Mohammed but the other possibility also exists. Regardless, to dismiss it as a work of fiction (and there is a whole realm of issues regarding the value of fiction left untouched here) when there is the possibility of it being something more is a bit rash.

 

[Godfollower]

What do you make of this statement from Lumen Gentium.

“But often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.”

I agree with it.

I think that applies to Muhammad very well.

Yes, it might. He might’ve been misled by the devil; or he might’ve made it up for other reasons.

Supposing that an angel of darkness appeared to Muhammad under the guise of an “angel of light” and this demon was Muhammad’s real inspiration for the Quran? How do you see that? Would it still be the one true God they follow because they think it is?

Vickie

The point I’m making is that it doesn’t matter why Mohammed made it up. For all I know, he made it up as a joke. Or he hated Christianity for some reason. Or he just said what he had to to survive. Or he was insane, or he was misled by a demon (as he once claimed).

But the question is, do the current Muslims “adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day”? The Catholic Church says they do, and I agree. The Catechism does not say that they have described God correctly, or that they understand Him; it just says they adore Him. That’s all.

 

[Booklover]

I agree with it.

Yes, it might. He might’ve been misled by the devil; or he might’ve made it up for other reasons.

The point I’m making is that it doesn’t matter why Mohammed made it up. For all I know, he made it up as a joke. Or he hated Christianity for some reason. Or he just said what he had to to survive. Or he was insane, or he was misled by a demon (as he once claimed).

But the question is, do the current Muslims “adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day”? The Catholic Church says they do, and I agree. The Catechism does not say that they have described God correctly, or that they understand Him; it just says they adore Him. That’s all.

All I can say is that the Catholic Church is much more charitable to Islam and Muslims than they are to us! It’s too conciliatory to Islam. Islam doesn’t need that, it needs to be confronted and resisted.

Vickie

 

[Godfollower]

I still think that it isn’t as simple as you state. And Jews and Christians knew about the one true God before Muhammad came along! You sound as if it was Muslims who first declared it! Oh, yes, and Allah has to be worshipped and has to be invoked while cutting off the heads of infidels, but it doesn’t matter because it’s the real god they worship, they’re just misled, and don’t even bother to find what the truth is.

Vickie

Yes, Jews and Christians knew about God first. In particular, Jews knew about God before Christians did. They also deny the Trinity; are they worshiping some other god?

Go back and read my previous posts; I think I’ve made it very clear that I’m not saying Muslims are correct. In fact, I’ve pointed out quite a few errors in Islam. They are in fact misled; but I’ve never said they have no duty to seek the truth. We all have the duty to seek the truth.

ALL I’m saying is that there is only one God, and Muslims worship Him. They worship Him imperfectly, but they worship Him.

Which is what Holy Mother Church says.

 

[CDNowak]

Which is what Holy Mother Church says.

You have heard of the argument from authority, yes? How it is a fallacy when the authority is inappropriate and the weakest of arguments even when from true authority?

 

[dzheremi]

Dzheremi, is the trouble you’re having that you don’t agree with the direction the Church took after Vatican II with respect to ecumenism and dialogue?

I’m not sure, Tomarin. I am admittedly not involved in “traditionalist” movements as others here might be, so I probably don’t know as much about the arguments against Vatican II as they might. So I would hesitate to blame VII for anything. From what I’ve read and been told about it, it certainly wasn’t all bad, even if the after-effects certainly haven’t been all good, either. Hmmm.

I think it’s more the gut-level idea that I can’t maintain the opposition to the idea that the Hindu trinity is somehow analogous to the Holy Trinity (which was the source of my argument in the “We are all Hindus now” thread, which I still stand by) while simultaneously affirming this “any god is God because there’s only one” stance that is part of modern Catholicism. If in Hinduism we have a situation where they have a trinity which is their god, and the second person of it incarnates as a human and is born of a virgin, that would seem to parallel the Christian idea rather closely. As near as I can tell, that was the basis of the (now banned) Hindu poster’s contention in that thread that the Christian Trinity is somehow derivative of the Hindu trinity, and from there the insinuation that Christianity is somehow a cheap imitation or bastardization of Hinduism. My recourse against this vile idea was to point out that even if the Hindus have a trinity, they don’t have the Holy Trinity of Christianity, which is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In other words, it was an argument derived from the idea that it is not only number that matters, but also form and character (in as much as we can appropriately describe such aspects of the Divine).

The poster in question in that thread, it should be noted, eventually appealed to the Catholic idea that others are advancing here: That non-Catholic religions have in them some aspect or aspects of truth, and that as there is only one God to begin with, all religions are simply discribing the One True God in different ways, consistent with whatever their respective theologies are. As much as I can agree with the first presupposition, I cannot agree with the second. I effectively argued myself out of my previously held position!

 

[Godfollower]

You are helping by putting up a point of view and then discussing it. I was hoping you’d be an encourager, too.

Well, I’m trying. Some would say I’m very trying.

But isn’t this the dilemma for dzheremi? For him, the Church’s official teaching is either not entirely clear or even suspect and he therefore sees some implications that are far reaching.

Right. That’s why I’m trying to help. Dzheremi is bothered by the implications of this statement, and I’m trying to state my reasons for understanding it differently.

Or maybe you’ll even change your mind? A mind is a wonderful thing to change. Didn’t one of those American politicians say that a few years ago?

Nostalgically,
Mick

Well, the odds of my mind changing on this issue are slim, given that I’m trying to explain the Church’s teaching. To paraphrase an old theologian, if the document I’m reading causes me to believe that the Church teaches error, then I should begin with the assumption that either (A) my copy of the document is faulty; (B) the translation of the document was erroneous; or (C) I have misunderstood the meaning of the text.

As the Catechism makes clear, Islam is not the path to salvation.

To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood

Catechism ¶ 845.

All CCC ¶ 841 says is that the Muslims adore God. They’re still separated and misled, and they have exchanged the truth of God for a lie. But they adore God.

That’s not really a huge shock.