What was the source of Mohammad's Revelations?

[Dan_Daly]

Would you mind sharing your views on why that seems more plausible?

People who suffer from hallucinations or similar mental illness generally don’t function very well in society. Mohammad’s success seems to indicate that he wasn’t simply insane.

An examination of the tenants of Islam, such as denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ, shows that is in alignment with the aims of the fallen angels, namely the damnation of souls. There is no way to heaven except through Jesus. So whether or not Mohammad was demonically possessed himself, I find it quite likely that demons have supported and worked through his ideology.

I want to be clear that I am speaking against Mohammadenism (Islam) not against Mohammadans (Muslims). People are people- all made in the image and likeness of God. The battle of faiths is not between people, it is FOR people. For souls. The Catholic’s objective isn’t to “defeat” the Muslim. It is to save him.

Pax and God Bless.

 

[Marybeloved]

People who suffer from hallucinations or similar mental illness generally don’t function very well in society. Mohammad’s success seems to indicate that he wasn’t simply insane.

An examination of the tenants of Islam, such as denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ, shows that is in alignment with the aims of the fallen angels, namely the damnation of souls. There is no way to heaven except through Jesus. So whether or not Mohammad was demonically possessed himself, I find it quite likely that demons have supported and worked through his ideology.

I want to be clear that I am speaking against Mohammadenism (Islam) not against Mohammadans (Muslims). People are people- all made in the image and likeness of God. The battle of faiths is not between people, it is FOR people. For souls. The Catholic’s objective isn’t to “defeat” the Muslim. It is to save him.

Pax and God Bless.

Well, it seems the consensus is no. 4- The master work of the Devil.

Now, for no. 5, couldn’t the usual problems associated with such an illness have been explained away by his people as “super-natural”? Remember this is 7th Century Arabia without the benefit of modern psychiatric wisdom.

Also, if it was the devil, don’t you think he may have been able to “perform some feats” for the benefit of Mohammed’s followers? But what you find in his stories are really what I could best describe as childhood fantasy and children stories- Such as the story that he defeated a jinn, while in prayer at night and intended to tie it to the pillars of he mosque so that people could see it in the morning but he remembered some story about Solomon, demons and forgiveness so he let the thing go.

Now, obviously, for anyone who knows basic philosophy and the most basic difference between the physical world of matter and the invisible spiritual realm, knows that these other creatures, good or evil, are spiritual beings and that story is ridiculous. How exactly would you fasten a demon to a pillar, and suppose you did, how would other people see it??? Many of his imaginations do not strike me as that of a man who had real encounters with the spiritual realm- like you hear with people coming out of the occult.

What do you think?

 

[Eric_Hyom]

The test is 1500 years later, a billion people seem to take fasting more seriously than we do, they pray 5 times a day, and modesty is important.

Is this the work the devil wants to promote?

Peace

Eric

 

[Marybeloved]

The test is 1500 years later, a billion people seem to take fasting more seriously than we do, they pray 5 times a day, and modesty is important.

Is this the work the devil wants to promote?

Peace

Eric

Well, actually about half of Muslims don’t really practice their faith, this is something people just assume about Islam.

But let me ask, those who do the things you say, still deny Christ and are taught that Jews are as close to evil as anyone could get. Where they are the majority, Christians are killed virtually ever other day. Right now there’s an underground silent campaign to destroy Christians in the islamic world, and where the christians are still allowed to exist in the open, they live like 2nd class citizens with little to no rights. History shows that where this religion has advanced, Christianity has died or been reduced to near oblivion and Christians have suffered untold atrocities. More than communism, and other enemies of the Church, this particular religion has proved to be the most successful weapon against Christianity.

So I could ask you a similar question. Is this a work God would want to promote?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Well, actually about half of Muslims don’t really practice their faith, this is something people just assume about Islam.

But let me ask, those who do the things you say, still deny Christ and are taught that Jews are as close to evil as anyone could get. Where they are the majority, Christians are killed virtually ever other day. Right now there’s an underground silent campaign to destroy Christians in the islamic world, and where the christians are still allowed to exist in the open, they live like 2nd class citizens with little to no rights. History shows that where this religion has advanced, Christianity has died or been reduced to near oblivion and Christians have suffered untold atrocities. More than communism, and other enemies of the Church, this particular religion has proved to be the most successful weapon against Christianity.

So I could ask you a similar question. Is this a work God would want to promote?

Persecution of the Jews/Christianity has never ended. Its started in Egypt, to Romes Circus and if last century is any indication of the future, then it will get darker before there is light. Much to my amazement the desecration of Gods Church actually seems to bring joy to a portion of the world.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Hello Marybeloved;

So I could ask you a similar question. Is this a work God would want to promote?

I am not sure that you can judge Christianity because of the way some Christians behave, I am not sure that you can judge Islam because of the way some Muslims behave.

Our greatest response to anything and under any conditions, is that we strive to live the greatest commandments.

peace

Eric

 

[Marybeloved]

Hello Marybeloved;

Hello to you, Eric

I am not sure that you can judge Christianity because of the way some Christians behave, I am not sure that you can judge Islam because of the way some Muslims behave.

Our greatest response to anything and under any conditions, is that we strive to live the greatest commandments.

But don’t you see, Eric, that you’re not applying your “test” consistently? Before you sought to judge Islam by its good fruit, now you don’t want to judge it by its evil fruit.

To the comparison with Christianity, I honestly don’t see how it’s the same. Christians may have used religion to advance political and nationalist aims, to the great harm of many people as well as to the church herself. That’s why the church now strictly enforces separation of her clergy from any political business. She has learned a difficult lesson, which is…to stray from the christian mandate into other business, to “join the world” rather than strive to evangelize it is the definition of disaster because rather than following the Lord’s teaching and example as well as that o the Apostles, churchmen soon become political leaders and commanders of armed forces and are forced to abandon the sole Rule of the Christian (Jesus Christ) in their business in order to be shrewd military and political leaders.

Now Islam may have also its fair share of “churchmen” who use religion for political, nationalist and military purposes, but I ask you…Where is it’s Jesus Christ? Where is the example of uncompromising total love and tolerance necessary to aid it in correcting its sins and striving for peace? They have only Mohammed and his example, so tell me how they’re going to get rid of the weeds and retain only the wheat.

 

[jakasaki]

Volume 1, Book 1, Number 2: Narrated 'Aisha: (the mother of the faithful believers)

Al-Harith bin Hisham asked Allah’s Apostle
**
“O Allah’s Apostle! How is the Divine Inspiration revealed to you?” **

Allah’s Apostle replied, **"Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes ’ off after I have grasped what is inspired. **

**Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I grasp whatever he says." **

'Aisha added: Verily I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the Sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over).

AbdurRahman.Org

Islamic Knowledge - Islam, Sunnah, Salafiyyah

abdurrahman.org

Bukhari collection

 

[Rabbity]

As for the topic of the original post, I don’t know if Mohammad was sincere or trying to pull a fast one. He seemed content to live a life of being Khadijah’s devoted husband so I think he was more likely sincere.

As to what he saw or thought he saw he may have been schizophrenic or had some other mental condition that cause one to hallucinate or hear voices. Also the environment is very dry and food was scarce, he could have been dehydrated and hungry which can also cause one to see and hear things, especially in a desert environment where all kinds of different mirages are common.

He may have had an episode or several episodes of hypnogogic or hypnopompic hallucinations (vivid, sometimes near full-sensory “waking dreams” that can occur when someone is waking up or falling asleep. They can continue after someone has been awake for a while).

Just tossing that out there.

 

[Rabbity]

[Rats, too late to edit the previous post]

Or perhaps he ingested some kind of hallucinogenic substance. Medieval mushrooms?

At any rate, I have no reason to believe he had contact with any alledged creatures of supernatural origin.

He probably had some hallucinations of some kind and, combined with a vivid imagination, a set of beliefs that encourage the idea of various forms of what they thought of as divine revelations, and the support of others around him who believed the same and had severely limited knowledge of anatomy, physiology, psychology and the natural world and probably couldn’t have known any better, he ran with it.

Just my two ducats.

 

[Contarini]

I wonder if you have heard of the idea that the Devil never teaches naked error or suggest plain evil because he knows that the human would recognize it immediately and take flight. So he tends to “give a little”, dress the evil in attractive garb and hide the error in some truth in order to ensnare the human.

I’ve certainly heard it. It is, for instance, a very convenient way for fundamentalist Protestants to explain away the evident beauty, truth, and goodness found in Catholicism

One would think that this would make Catholics more critical about it than some of them seem to be:shrug:

What do you suppose of the supposition that the Devil couched his intended lie/evil (Denial of Christ) in the monotheism that he taught Mohammed, that is if we were to go by the “It was all the Devil” option?

The basic problem here is that Manicheanism is a heresy. Evil is not a substance or a nature. And thus evil, in itself, cannot produce anything, only corrupt it. It is perfectly legitimate to suggest that the corruption of Muhammad’s monotheism came from the Devil–not that monotheism itself did, or that the mandate to care for widows and orphans, or any of the other true and good things found in the Qur’an. Even if the “angel” Muhammad encountered were a demon, and even if it were possible for a demon to tell people to tell others to care for widows and orphans (I’m not sure that a being of so utterly a depraved a will as we generally consider demons to be could do even that), the admonition would still, in every way that mattered, come from God. If you can’t imagine a demon saying anything that came from God, then you can’t imagine a demon telling people the true things that Muhammad’s source of inspiration told him. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Certainly interesting. But my understanding of the angels is that they are these super-beings with vastly superior intellects to our own and great power, beauty as well as absolute submission to God (the good ones, of course) so the idea of the errors originating from the angel would strike me as unorthodox. What do you think?

I think you’re probably right. It certainly goes against the Thomistic view of angels. I think it’s possible that early Christians were right in thinking that angels and demons do have some kind of body made of air/ether. Fourth Lateran condemned this opinion, I believe, so possibly members of your Communion can’t hold it, and I’m certainly not deeply wedded to it. But if that view is true, then maybe angels are a bit more like us and less like God than the dominant Western view supposes. But as I said, this is really more of a “sci/fi” speculation than anything else. I have sometimes daydreamed about writing a series of historical/fantasy novels that took the supernatural traditions of various cultures and religions seriously while placing them in a Christian framework. And I came up with this wacky idea in that context.

I see. So you’re going with the 2nd option.

I’m open to it. But I think that it’s also possible that nothing supernatural happened at all. I don’t think that requires one to diagnose Muhammad with some kind of modern psychiatric label. The experience was a solitary and subjective one–very unlike the Christian claims about the resurrection of Jesus or even the claims about the sun “dancing” at Fatima. We don’t need an explanation as far as I can see, and we certainly have no solid basis for one.

For that matter, one could go really historical-critical on this and question whether the hadith that describe the experience have any historical validity in the first place!

I think that for a message from an angel to be botched so deeply, some other entity might be involved…so perhaps a combined no. 2 and 3 hypothesis?

Certainly a possibility. I do not rule out demonic intervention. But as I said, the bottom line is that goodness and truth come from God, period.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

But don’t you see, Eric, that you’re not applying your “test” consistently? Before you sought to judge Islam by its good fruit, now you don’t want to judge it by its evil fruit.

Because of the difference between good and evil. As Lewis said, Bad cannot even succeed in being Bad in the way Good is Good. Good comes from God. Evil is a falling short, a privation in the good. Insofar as Islam has an essence, it must be good because all essences are good. Islam doesn’t have a will, which can be depraved–only individuals have wills in the strict sense. I think that the best approach is to refrain from essentializing Islam at all. Islam is a historical phenomenon. That may be different from Eric’s approach, but I think Eric’s approach is a metaphysically consistent one. Essentializing Islam and declaring that essence to be evil, though, is outright heresy.

To the comparison with Christianity, I honestly don’t see how it’s the same. Christians may have used religion to advance political and nationalist aims, to the great harm of many people as well as to the church herself. That’s why the church now strictly enforces separation of her clergy from any political business.

I don’t think that’s true–it’s certainly not the impression most non-Catholics have. It’s not what I read in the Pope’s address to the German parliament, and it’s not what I hear when Catholic bishops address the question of abortion.

If you mean narrowly that the clergy shouldn’t themselves hold political office, sure. But the Church certainly does meddle in political questions. And the Church is quite right to do so.

Now Islam may have also its fair share of “churchmen” who use religion for political, nationalist and military purposes, but I ask you…Where is it’s Jesus Christ? Where is the example of uncompromising total love and tolerance necessary to aid it in correcting its sins and striving for peace? They have only Mohammed and his example, so tell me how they’re going to get rid of the weeds and retain only the wheat.

I think this is a good question. And I think the basic answer is: through the Holy Spirit working with all people of good will. (Also, the simple answer is that the Jesus Christ of Muslims is Jesus Christ, whom Muslims greatly revere even though they understand Him imperfectly.) Certainly Islam would have to change radically from its historical shape in order to get rid of the weeds. It would in fact cease to be a separate religion from Christianity altogether, while perhaps retaining certain distinctive emphases and rituals. I don’t see that happening any time soon!

But good is good. Many things are complicated, but this is simple. People who love the good will seek after it and find it. They will emphasize the good aspects of Islam and downplay or reinterpret the others. And you find a lot of Muslims doing just that, with no help from a lot of conservative Christians who bizarrely decree that only fundamentalist Muslims are “real Muslims.”

Edwin

 

[Marybeloved]

My friend!! I’m afraid my intellect is nowhere as sophisticated as yours evidently is, much as I may pretend otherwise …You’ll have to slow down a bit with the deep philosophy. In any case I have to read everything you’ve written here slooooowly, if I can hope to answer any of it properly.

I’ve certainly heard it. It is, for instance, a very convenient way for fundamentalist Protestants to explain away the evident beauty, truth, and goodness found in Catholicism One would think that this would make Catholics more critical about it than some of them seem to be:shrug:

True…But the fact that it can and has been misused doesn’t mean it’s never true. Certainly Islam flatly denies all the fundamentals that define the phenomenon called Christianity, of which I am a believer. Our own scripture warns us of false prophets who are to come after christ whose chief distinction (sign) would be the very denial that we find in Islam. Catholics can hardly be blamed for being skeptical of the “good” in Islam and see it simply as a clever ploy to veil the arrow shot at the very heart of their faith!

The basic problem here is that Manicheanism is a heresy. Evil is not a substance or a nature. And thus evil, in itself, cannot produce anything, only corrupt it. It is perfectly legitimate to suggest that the corruption of Muhammad’s monotheism came from the Devil–not that monotheism itself did, or that the mandate to care for widows and orphans, or any of the other true and good things found in the Qur’an. Even if the “angel” Muhammad encountered were a demon, and even if it were possible for a demon to tell people to tell others to care for widows and orphans (I’m not sure that a being of so utterly a depraved a will as we generally consider demons to be could do even that), the admonition would still, in every way that mattered, come from God. If you can’t imagine a demon saying anything that came from God, then you can’t imagine a demon telling people the true things that Muhammad’s source of inspiration told him. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

I understand that all being is good and that evil is a privation of being, so we are good here:thumbsup:. I’m still not sure how it relates to the discussion?? I don’t think I said that “the devil” option (which, by the way, I haven’t said is my own personal leaning) is about the Devil creating/giving being to anything.

What I said was that the Devil tells lies…and his strategy is to hide it in some truth so that it will not be out-rightly rejected…which is very shrewd on his part. I don’t think that’s any thing revolutionary. The saints have said it for 2 millenia. The mystic Saints and doctors, in particular…(And who better to consult on matters mystical and supernatural than they?)…all warn us to be weary of the supernatural experiences for the same reason that the Devil is very clever and no one knows when they are being deceived because he always entices spiritual pride and never makes it obvious. That’s why they all advise us to ignore those occurrences and depend entirely on sound spiritual direction to avoid the devil’s deceptions.

The Church also acknowledges this in practice with the skepticism she demonstrates in dealing with cases of claimed apparitions and other supernatural phenomena. She uses a rigorous system of checking not just the scientific issues involved but the theology taught and will reject entirely any such occurrence where the theology (which is certainly never as deviant from Christian orthodoxy as Islam is) contradicts the truths of Christian faith. Both the scripture and the Church warn that the Devil comes as an angel of light, and this is the reason the church uses to explain her caution toward claimed apparitions. So I don’t think that acknowledging that the Devil does operate this way in deceptions, mixing some truth with error in order to make it palatable to the “deceived” is saying anything that does not agree with Christian faith and tradition. Besides, it was Satan in the Desert who quoted truth right out of scripture to our lord, wasn’t it? And his purposes there were certainly completely evil and meant to deceive.

 

[Marybeloved]

I think you’re probably right. It certainly goes against the Thomistic view of angels. I think it’s possible that early Christians were right in thinking that angels and demons do have some kind of body made of air/ether. Fourth Lateran condemned this opinion, I believe, so possibly members of your Communion can’t hold it, and I’m certainly not deeply wedded to it. But if that view is true, then maybe angels are a bit more like us and less like God than the dominant Western view supposes. But as I said, this is really more of a “sci/fi” speculation than anything else. I have sometimes daydreamed about writing a series of historical/fantasy novels that took the supernatural traditions of various cultures and religions seriously while placing them in a Christian framework. And I came up with this wacky idea in that context.

I should like to read that if you write it. I’m a fan of sci/fi and fantasy.

I’m open to it. But I think that it’s also possible that nothing supernatural happened at all. I don’t think that requires one to diagnose Muhammad with some kind of modern psychiatric label. The experience was a solitary and subjective one–very unlike the Christian claims about the resurrection of Jesus or even the claims about the sun “dancing” at Fatima. We don’t need an explanation as far as I can see, and we certainly have no solid basis for one.

True…but it does make for very interesting discussion/conversations don’t you think?

For that matter, one could go really historical-critical on this and question whether the hadith that describe the experience have any historical validity in the first place!

Interesting, but then the Qur’an would have no historical grounding and would become meaningless.

Certainly a possibility. I do not rule out demonic intervention. But as I said, the bottom line is that goodness and truth come from God, period.

Again, true. But the Devil must operate in existence…what will he use to do evil if not God’s own work??? His lies are twisted truths or errors mixed with lies and his evils are corruptions of what is good. I think I agree with Tolkien’s view in his epic. Evil cannot create but it sure can corrupt, and this was his explanation for the Orks, Gollum and other evil creatures in middle-Earth.

 

[Marybeloved]

Because of the difference between good and evil. As Lewis said, Bad cannot even succeed in being Bad in the way Good is Good. Good comes from God. Evil is a falling short, a privation in the good. Insofar as Islam has an essence, it must be good because all essences are good. Islam doesn’t have a will, which can be depraved–only individuals have wills in the strict sense. I think that the best approach is to refrain from essentializing Islam at all. Islam is a historical phenomenon. That may be different from Eric’s approach, but I think Eric’s approach is a metaphysically consistent one. Essentializing Islam and declaring that essence to be evil, though, is outright heresy.

Now this is where you fried my brain circuits, my friend! I have no idea what you mean…essentializing Islam? If you mean giving a sense of “being” to it…well, I didn’t mean to. But a belief system can certainly be judged as to its origins in good or evil workings based on the fruits it effects in society. If not, then we have no basis of condemning communism or Nazism as evil in any way. I understood Eric as using the “by your fruits you shall know them” principle for judging Islam as “good” based on the reasons he outlined. I was pointing out that it’s dishonest to use that rule in such a one-sided way. The world is now dealing with problems that have their origin in Islam, and if we are to credit it for the good we see that we can trace directly to its teachings, then why can we not do the same with the bad that we can trace directly to those same teachings?.

I don’t think that’s true–it’s certainly not the impression most non-Catholics have. It’s not what I read in the Pope’s address to the German parliament, and it’s not what I hear when Catholic bishops address the question of abortion. If you mean narrowly that the clergy shouldn’t themselves hold political office, sure. But the Church certainly does meddle in political questions. And the Church is quite right to do so.

True, but the Church is well within her rights as a teacher and voice for morality to tell the truth to the people and the nations in which she still has such a voice. In this way she’s following in the footsteps of her Lord and all the prophets of old, including st. john the baptist who was beheaded for telling the truth to the king about his indiscretions. It’s part of her mission. What I meant was St. John the Baptized deposing Herod and ruling Israel in his stead. God put an end to this when he allowed Israel to have a King, and the prophets (and church) are simply voices of truth. As long as the Church has the voice, she cannot hesitate and neither should Christians, to speak the truth.

I think this is a good question. And I think the basic answer is: through the Holy Spirit working with all people of good will. (Also, the simple answer is that the Jesus Christ of Muslims is Jesus Christ, whom Muslims greatly revere even though they understand Him imperfectly.) Certainly Islam would have to change radically from its historical shape in order to get rid of the weeds. It would in fact cease to be a separate religion from Christianity altogether, while perhaps retaining certain distinctive emphases and rituals. I don’t see that happening any time soon!

I honestly don’t see it happening at all. But hope is always better than pessimism.

But the Jesus of Islam is not the Christ we find in the New testament! He’s a muslim! as much subject to and obedient to the will of Allah and Shariah as any good Muslim. Certainly he’s not an example to be emulated above Mohammad whom the Qur’an calls that very example for mankind. Again no difference either way, because that Jesus is subject to God’s law as the Muslim understands as any other good Muslim.

But good is good. Many things are complicated, but this is simple. People who love the good will seek after it and find it. They will emphasize the good aspects of Islam and downplay or reinterpret the others. And you find a lot of Muslims doing just that, with no help from a lot of conservative Christians who bizarrely decree that only fundamentalist Muslims are “real Muslims.”

I certainly hope you’re right. But if you are, i believe it will take a war within Islam for such a version of Islam to prevail over the dominant one we have today. I just don’t know if most such Muslims are willing to pay such a price:shrug:.

 

[Contarini]

True…But the fact that it can and has been misused doesn’t mean it’s never true.

But we must ask in what the misuse consists. I think the misuse consists in an attempt to negate the obvious empirical appeal of virtue and truth, by explaining them away as a satanic deception. And frankly, if anything is a satanic deception, then a way of thinking that makes you distrust the true and good would fit the bill!

So to go back to the anti-Catholic example. A person who is told that Pope Benedict’s evident love for Jesus is a Satanic deception doesn’t need to refute the other anti-Catholic claims to know that that one is false. When I read Ratzinger’s description in Introduction to Christianity of floating over the abyss tied to the Cross, I know I’m reading authentic Christian piety. And if someone tells me that the man who wrote these words couldn’t really love Jesus because he “worships” Mary, then I know they are wrong regardless of what I believe about Mary. And so on.

What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

What is good is good. What is true is true. Anything that makes you believe otherwise really is from Satan.

Catholics can hardly be blamed for being skeptical of the “good” in Islam

You can be blamed for putting “good” in scare quotes. The word “relativism” gets thrown around a lot on this forum, but putting good in scare quotes really is relativism.

Loving your neighbor is good. Period. Caring for widows and orphans is good, period. Praising God the Creator for His compassion is good, period.

Scare quotes are blasphemous in this context.

Of course Satan and/or human error can use what is good. No dispute about that. But characterizing Islam as a whole as evil or from the devil is simply wrong. And wrong in a disastrous way, because once we start calling good evil or evil good we have lost our bearings altogether.

Why on earth can’t we say that Islam is a mixed human phenomenon and leave it at that? Why this need to go further? It’s theologically untenable, logically incoherent, and spiritually destructive to the person who does it. The fact that it also promotes division and violence among human beings is a further reason to be wary of it, of course

I understand that all being is good and that evil is a privation of being, so we are good here:thumbsup:. I’m still not sure how it relates to the discussion?? I don’t think I said that “the devil” option (which, by the way, I haven’t said is my own personal leaning) is about the Devil creating/giving being to anything.

It’s about the Devil originating good.

Arabs worshiped many gods.
Muhammad said, “There is one God, the Creator, who is just and compassionate–worship Him alone.”

That cannot come from the Devil.

Arabs left female children to die if they didn’t want them.
Muhammad said: “This is unjust and evil–stop it.”

That cannot come from the Devil.

And so on.

What I said was that the Devil tells lies…and his strategy is to hide it in some truth so that it will not be out-rightly rejected…which is very shrewd on his part.

But the truth can’t come from the Devil. And thus the whole can’t be said to come from the Devil.

I don’t think that’s any thing revolutionary. The saints have said it for 2 millenia. The mystic Saints and doctors, in particular…(And who better to consult on matters mystical and supernatural than they?)…all warn us to be weary of the supernatural experiences for the same reason that the Devil is very clever and no one knows when they are being deceived because he always entices spiritual pride and never makes it obvious. That’s why they all advise us to ignore those occurrences and depend entirely on sound spiritual direction to avoid the devil’s deceptions.

Yes, but a “spiritual experience” isn’t, in itself, good. If it appeals to pride it is not virtuous.

Again, it may well be that a demon appeared to Muhammad and persuaded him that he was a prophet, leading him away from humbly accepting the truth of the Gospel.

But the truths that Muhammad taught did not themselves come from the Devil. And since these truths are central to historic Islam, it would be utterly false to say that Islam as a whole came from the Devil, even if Muhammad’s prophetic claims did.

I see no conclusive reason to think that they did. It seems like the most natural thing in the world that a person who felt called to lead his people away from idols to the one God would come to see himself as a prophet. And it is at least possible that, as you said, there was some kind of true revelation originally involved which got twisted.

So again, I fail to see how any of this is helpful for determining the Christian attitude to Islam.

So I don’t think that acknowledging that the Devil does operate this way in deceptions, mixing some truth with error in order to make it palatable to the “deceived” is saying anything that does not agree with Christian faith and tradition.

If you say “mixing error with truth” then I have no problem with what you are saying But the truth can’t come from the Devil. Period. Truth belongs to God and no one else.

Besides, it was Satan in the Desert who quoted truth right out of scripture to our lord, wasn’t it? And his purposes there were certainly completely evil and meant to deceive.

Yes, but Scripture did not thereby become evil!

Edwin

 

[Eric_Hyom]

Hello Marybeloved;

But don’t you see, Eric, that you’re not applying your “test” consistently? Before you sought to judge Islam by its good fruit, now you don’t want to judge it by its evil fruit.

Jesus prayed on the cross, that even the people who were responsible for his death, should be forgiven, and they certainly did not believe Jesus to be our saviour. Jesus forgave people that we would struggle to forgive, and if I am to achieve salvation, it will not be through my efforts, rather it will be because of the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We will be judged in the way we judge other people, I have friends and family who are of no faith and a number of different faiths. I pray that every one will achieve eternal salvation despite all our differences.

Peace

Eric

 

[Marybeloved]

And frankly, if anything is a satanic deception, then a way of thinking that makes you distrust the true and good would fit the bill!..And if someone tells me that the man who wrote these words couldn’t really love Jesus because he “worships” Mary, then I know they are wrong regardless of what I believe about Mary. And so on. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

The Apostles warned us of people who would deny the truth about Christ, not the Virgin. What is good is good. What is true is true. Anything that makes you believe otherwise really is from Satan. You can be blamed for putting “good” in scare quotes. The word “relativism” gets thrown around a lot on this forum, but putting good in scare quotes really is relativism. Loving your neighbor is good. Period. Caring for widows and orphans is good, period. Praising God the Creator for His compassion is good, period.
Scare quotes are blasphemous in this context.

Come now, Edwin, Your position is one legitimate view among many legitimate views. Don’t accuse people who disagree with you of satanic deception and/or blasphemy :tsktsk:Especially when those opposite views are grounded in scripture, christian tradition and practice and the teaching of the saints. That is truly not cool.

You seem to want us to conclude that the religion of Islam is not a work of the Devil simply because they have some truth??? Are we then to conclude that the temptations of our Lord were not the work of the devil, because the Devil spoke some truth??? Had Christ fallen for it and believed in what the devil told him, would that have made it any less the work of the Devil?? Those who believe Islam is the devil’s work believe that that unlike Christ, Muhammad did fall for it and what’s more, taught it to others. Putting “good” like so is meant to suggest a sinister use in the context, and that that good is no reason to embrace that proposition/movement blindly as it is meant as bait for the devil’s trap. Sorry if it bothers you, it really wasn’t meant to.

Of course Satan and/or human error can use what is good. No dispute about that. But characterizing Islam as a whole as evil or from the devil is simply wrong. And wrong in a disastrous way, because once we start calling good evil or evil good we have lost our bearings altogether.

Now I don’t know what it is we are arguing about over here. It seems both of us agree that the Devil uses truth and good to perpetuate his designs. You haven’ convinced me that Islam is not one such design seeing as it denies Christian faith entirely and seeing as we have been warned specifically about false prophets who claim to follow Christ while denying him at the same time. Our scriptures tell us of the devil showing himself as an angel of light. Our own practice is to “test” every spirit as the apostles tell us and one of the tests used is to test the theology preached in the apparition/revelation against the truth and rejecting completely all such revelations when they fail, regardless of the fact that they are never as far from christian truth as Islam itself is.

Why on earth can’t we say that Islam is a mixed human phenomenon and leave it at that? Why this need to go further? It’s theologically untenable, logically incoherent, and spiritually destructive to the person who does it. The fact that it also promotes division and violence among human beings is a further reason to be wary of it, of course

Ummmh…Well, the church does it all the time, the Apostles tell us to test every spirit, and this particular one purports to reduce Christ to a mere “good man” while claiming it comes from God himself, which fits the bill of the scripture’s warning. And how does it perpetuate violence?? Oh yeah, because this religion also cultivates in its adherents an attitude of intolerance to criticism and scrutiny of any kind.

 

[Marybeloved]

It’s about the Devil originating good. Arabs worshiped many gods. Muhammad said, “There is one God, the Creator, who is just and compassionate–worship Him alone.” That cannot come from the Devil. Arabs left female children to die if they didn’t want them. Muhammad said: “This is unjust and evil–stop it.” That cannot come from the Devil. And so on. But the truth can’t come from the Devil. And thus the whole can’t be said to come from the Devil. Yes, but a “spiritual experience” isn’t, in itself, good. If it appeals to pride it is not virtuous…But the truths that Muhammad taught did not themselves come from the Devil. And since these truths are central to historic Islam, it would be utterly false to say that Islam as a whole came from the Devil, even if Muhammad’s prophetic claims did.

The argument of the origin of truth and good in God really is a red herring…no one is denying that God is the sole author of all good…What is being said is that the devil does his evil work (deception) by twisting the truth, and mixing lies with truth, and seeing what the scriptures warn, it is suggested that Islam is one such work of the devil.

I see no conclusive reason to think that they did. It seems like the most natural thing in the world that a person who felt called to lead his people away from idols to the one God would come to see himself as a prophet. And it is at least possible that, as you said, there was some kind of true revelation originally involved which got twisted.

I most certainly see a very good reason for concluding so, that’s why I listed it as one of the options. If the outright denial of virtually the entire Apostles creed is not good enough a reason to doubt claims to someone’s prophet-hood, then I don’t know what is.

Yes, but Scripture did not thereby become evil!

No, no one is saying it did. No one is saying that there’s more than one God or that he alone is not worthy of worship. Certainly, no Orthodox catholic would utter such a thing. I don’t know why you think that this is in dispute. You have drawn a conclusion that says that a belief system/movement where some truths exist cannot be said to be a work of the Devil. Others disagree:shrug: Again, their view has sound grounding in Christian practice and scripture and tradition and the experience of the saints. I’m sure I could find some truth in Wicca if I really looked, some good it has brought to its adherents (otherwise it wouldn’t exist) or even the New age or secular humanism, for that matter. Doesn’t mean I can’t believe that behind these movements is the devil:shrug:.

 

[Marybeloved]

Hello Marybeloved;

Jesus prayed on the cross, that even the people who were responsible for his death, should be forgiven, and they certainly did not believe Jesus to be our saviour. Jesus forgave people that we would struggle to forgive, and if I am to achieve salvation, it will not be through my efforts, rather it will be because of the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We will be judged in the way we judge other people, I have friends and family who are of no faith and a number of different faiths. I pray that every one will achieve eternal salvation despite all our differences.

Peace

Eric

Hello, Eric.

Why do you consider a discussion about the religion of Islam and it’s origins “judgment of others”? This thread is not about Muslims, it’s about Islam. The Church has many many positive things to say about muslims, there’s a section in the catechism dedicated to he Church’s relationship with them. The Church tells us that they adore the one true God and profess to hold Abraham’s faith. The Church also says that all revelation purporting to replace, or correct the revelation of Christ is to be rejected. See the difference?

We’re not discussing whether Muslims are evil, or even if they’re cut off from salvation (The Church clearly says in the Catechism that they are not), but we’re not talking about Mohammad’s innocent believers, are we? We’re talking about the religion that he created and it’s origin. The Church clearly rejects out rightly that said revelation, that’s no question here (unless you’re not catholic), we’re asking then, it didn’t come from God, where did it come from?