Posted on 08/25/2017 2:16:50 PM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
This ecumenical Pope will lead his followers down the road of a one world religion very soon.
The signs are all around us if you just care to glance.
POPE FRANCIS NOW SAYS RIGHTS FOR MUSLIM MIGRANTS MORE IMPORTANT THAN A COUNTRY’S NATIONAL SECURITY
Allah is a cheap copy, made by Akkadians, of a false god that was a part of Sumerian mythology.
Reminds me of a plot device in a kids’ book I read in elementary school.
Tashlan was a fictional character invented by Shift to reinforce his pretense that Aslan and Tash were really two different names for the same person.
Islam is a blasphemous lie concocted by satan to created a wide smooth superhighway to hell for millions of fools.
Doesn’t work for me. Not for the Real Jesus either.
The Bible predates Islam. The last book (Revelation) was written about 550 years before the coran. Yet Islam attempts to say that all its differences are corrections of mistakes in the Bible. “allah” is a foreign usurper. That is to say, a pagan deity. As in not worth a piece of organic refuse.
You got it first.
Whoever believes that is an idiot.
Correct!
And those who join together with it share in it’s folly.
“National Catholic Reporter” is a commie rag which has been repeatedly ordered by their bishop to drop the word “Catholic” from their name.
Muslims for Jesus. They share an office with Jews for Jesus.
Joel Osteen absolutely does not preach “Chrislam”; you would know this if you watched any of his broadcasts—any.
A Muslim Jesus is an impossibility. Christianity is just that, founded by Jesus Christ as a new and perfect law. Islam is pure evil founded by a child molester
Well, despite attempts to spin/interpret your interpreter, both the CCC and your "bishops" says that Muslim worship the same god as Catholics, and with the USCCB promoting egregious ecumenicism towards Muslims.
Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium 16, November 21, 1964 “But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place among whom are the Muslims: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day .”
Note that this does not say Muslims simply profess to adore the one, merciful God, but that they worship the same one, merciful God of Catholics.
In Nostra Aetate Rome also says Muslims the worship the same God as Catholics, "They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth ." And "They strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden decrees of God, just as Abraham submitted himself to God’s plan , to whose faith Muslims eagerly link their own. " -Second Vatican Council, Nostra Aetate 3, October 28, 1965
And with Allah, we are not dealing with an utterly ambiguous "unknown god" as in Acts 17, which had no express revelation and could be said to represent the true God they were looking for. But Allah is a theologically defined as a distinct God, and in the name of this false deity are the contradictory and skewed Biblical stories of the Qur'an, besides adding its own, and which denies the very essence of the gospel, that of the Divine Son of God procuring salvation with His own sinless shed blood! Yet again and again popes comfort Muslims by assuring them they have the true God, while any gospel is largely replaced by platitudes for peace.
The American bishops have this to add:
We feel sure that as representatives of Islam, you join in our prayers to the Almighty, that he may grant all African believers the desire for pardon and reconciliation so often commended in the Gospels and in the Qur’an... We gladly recall also those confessors of the Muslim faith who were the first to suffer death, in the year 1848, for refusing to transgress the precepts of their religion.” — Paul VI, address to the Islamic communities of Uganda, August 1, 1969.
“I deliberately address you as brothers: that is certainly what we are, because we are members of the same human family, whose efforts, whether people realize it or not, tend toward God and the truth that comes from him. But we are especially brothers in God, who created us and whom we are trying to reach, in our own ways, through faith, prayer and worship, through the keeping of his law and through submission to his designs...
“Dear Muslims, my brothers: I would like to add that we Christians, just like you, seek the basis and model of mercy in God himself, the God to whom your Book gives the very beautiful name of al-Rahman, while the Bible calls him al-Rahum, the Merciful One.” - John Paul II, address to representatives of Muslims of the Philippines, February 20, 1981
“As Christians and Muslims, we encounter one another in faith in the one God, our Creator and guide, our just and merciful judge. - John Paul II, address to representatives of the Muslims of Belgium, May 19, 1985
We believe in the same God, the one God, the living God, the God who created the world and brings his creatures to their perfection...Both of us believe in one God, the only God, - John Paul II , address to the young Muslims of Morocco, August 19, 1985
Christians and Muslims, together with the followers of the Jewish religion, belong to what can be called ‘the tradition of Abraham.’..Our Creator and our final judge desires that we live together. Our God is a God of peace, who desires peace among those who live according to His commandments. Our God is the holy God who desires that those who call upon Him live in ways that are holy and upright. -John Paul II, address to Islamic leaders of Senegal, Dakar, February 22, 1992 -http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/interreligious/islam/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-on-islam.cfm
Meanwhile, Rome has a history of opposing Hebrew statehood.
► Papal–Israel relations
Until 1948 the Pope was motivated by the traditional Vatican opposition to Zionism. Vatican opposition to a Jewish homeland stemmed largely from theological doctrines regarding Judaism.[40] In 1904, the Zionist leader Theodor Herzl obtained an audience with Pope Pius X in the hope of persuading the pontiff to support the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The pope's response was: "Non possumus"--"We cannot." In 1917, Pius X's successor, Pope Benedict XV, equally refused to support any concept for a Jewish state. Minerbi writes that when a League of Nations mandate were being proposed for Palestine, the Vatican was disturbed by the prospect of a (Protestant) British mandate over the Holy Land, but a Jewish state was anathema to it.[27][41]
On 22 June 1943, Amleto Giovanni Cicognani, the Apostolic Delegate to Washington D.C. wrote to US President Franklin Roosevelt, asking him to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. ...
If the greater part of Palestine is given to the Jewish people, this would be a severe blow to the religious attachment of Catholics to this land. To have the Jewish people in the majority would be to interfere with the peaceful exercise of these rights in the Holy Land already vested in Catholics.
It is true that at one time Palestine was inhabited by the Hebrew Race, but there is no axiom in history to substantiate the necessity of a people returning to a country they left nineteen centuries before.[42]
The Vatican view of the Near East was dominated by a Cold War perception that Arab Muslims are conservative but religious, whereas Israeli Zionists are modernist but atheists. The Vatican's then Foreign Minister, Domenico Tardini (without being even a bishop, but a close collaborator of Pius XII) said to the French ambassador in November 1957, according to an Israeli diplomatic dispatch from Rome to Jerusalem:
"I have always been of the opinion that there never was an overriding reason for this state to be established. It was the fault of the western states. Its existence is an inherent risk factor for war in the Middle East. Now, Israel exists, and there is certainly no way to destroy it, but every day we pay the price of this error."[45]
by initially siding with Palestinian claims for compensations on political, social and financial levels, the Vatican shaped its Middle Eastern policy since 1948 upon two pillars. One was based on political and theological reservations against Zionism,... the Holy See has also maintained reservations of its own. The more established the Zionist Yishuv became in Mandatory Palestine, the more political reservations the Vatican added to its initial theological inhibitions.[51]
On 26 May 1955, when the Israeli Philharmonic Orchestra performed Beethoven's Seventh Symphony at the Vatican as an act of respect for Pius XII, the Vatican still refrained from mentioning the name of the State, preferring instead to describe the orchestra as a collection of "Jewish musicians of fourteen different nationalities."[53]
Paul VI was Pope from 21 June 1963 to 6 August 1978. He strongly defended inter-religious dialogue in the spirit of Nostra Aetate. He was also the first Pope to mention the Palestinian people by name...On 15 January 1973, the Pope met Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir at the Vatican, which was the first meeting between a Pope and an Israeli Prime Minister. At the meeting, the Pope brought up the issues of peace in the Middle East, refugees and the status of the holy places, but no agreement was reached.[58] According to Meir's own account of the meeting, the Pope criticized the Israeli government for its treatment of the Palestinians, and she said in reply: Your Holiness, do you know what my earliest memory is? A pogrom in Kiev. When we were merciful and when we had no homeland and when we were weak, we were led to the gas chambers.[59]
Relations since 1993[edit]
The opening towards the State of Israel by the Vatican was partially a result of Israel's effective control over the entire Holy City since 1967. This forced the Vatican to introduce a pragmatic dimension to its well-known declaratory policy of political denial. Hence, since 1967, Vatican diplomacy vis-à-vis Israel began to waver between two parameters:
A policy of strict and consequent non-recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem, far beyond the usual interpretation of international law, as the Holy See still embraces its own ideas regarding the special status of Jerusalem.
A pragmatic policy, through which Catholic interests can best be served by having a working relationship with the party who exercises effective authority and control in Jerusalem.
The establishment of full diplomatic relations in 1993–94, on the other hand, was a belated political consequence of the theological change towards Judaism as reflected in Nostra Aetate. It was also a result of the new political reality, which began with the Madrid COnference and later continued with the Oslo peace process, after which the Vatican could not continue to ignore a State that even the Palestinians had initiated formal relations with.
Pope Benedict XVI has declared that he wishes to maintain a positive Christian-Jewish and Vatican-Israel relationship. Indeed, on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Jewish state, Benedict stated: "The Holy See joins you in giving thanks to the Lord that the aspirations of the Jewish people for a home in the land of their fathers have been fulfilled,"[72] which may be seen as a theological justification of the return of the Jewish People to Israel – indeed, an acceptance that has placed all previous Catholic denials of Zionism in the shade. On the other hand, he has also stressed the political neutrality of the Holy See in internal Mideast conflicts. Like John Paul II, he was disappointed by the non-resolution of the 1993 Fundamental Accord; and like his predecessor, he also expressed support for a Palestinian state alongside Israel. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_See%E2%80%93Israel_relations
Of all the things Roman Catholicism gets wrong, this may be one of the biggest errors.
The search is over? Found an outfit less Catholic than the Pope.
Hold on -maybe not? They don't promote so-called 'Chrislam', do they?
Keep looking. You'll find somebody eventually.
But ask Sal about being baptized 'Catholic' and indelible marks. The man was born a Catholic, is a Jesuit, was a bishop of the RCC, and was elected by 'College of Cardinals' to be Pope, but people around here tell me Bergoglio is not a [Roman] Catholic?
The Pope may need to find a priest "to have all his questions answered". Ask the freeper known as "Salvation" what that means...
The Quran confuses Mary, the mother of the Lord Jesus, with Miriam the sister of Moses. The Quran identifies Mary as the sister of Aaron, the daughter of Imran, whose mother was the wife of Imran:
When the wife of Imran said, 'Lord, I have vowed to Thee, in dedication, what is within my womb. Receive Thou this from me; Thou hearest, and knowest.' And when she gave birth to her she said, 'Lord, I have given birth to her, a female.' (And God knew very well what she had given birth to; the male is not as the female.) 'And I have named her Mary, and commend her to Thee with her seed, to protect them from the accursed Satan.' S. 3:35-36 Arberry
Then she brought the child to her folk carrying him; and they said, 'Mary, thou hast surely committed a monstrous thing! Sister of Aaron, thy father was not a wicked man, nor was thy mother a woman unchaste.' S. 19:27-28
And Mary, Imran's daughter, who guarded her virginity, so We breathed into her of Our Spirit, and she confirmed the Words of her Lord and His Books, and became one of the obedient. S. 66:12
Compare this to what the Holy Bible says:
"Then Mary (Hebrew- Mariam), the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the timbrel in her hand…" Exodus 15:20
"The name of Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt; and to Amram she bore Aaron and Moses and their sister Miriam." Numbers 26:49
"The children of Amram: Aaron, Moses, and Miriam. The sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar." 1 Chronicles 6:3
"For I brought you up from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam." Micah 6:4
"Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman. And they said, ‘Has the LORD indeed spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?" And the LORD heard it. Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth. And suddenly the LORD said to Moses and to Aaron and Miriam, ‘Come out, you three, to the tent of meeting.’ And the three of them came out. And the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the tent and called Aaron and Miriam, and they both came forward… When the cloud removed from over the tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, like snow. And Aaron turned toward Miriam, and behold, she was leprous. And Aaron said to Moses, ‘Oh, my lord, do not punish us because we have done foolishly and have sinned. Let her not be as one dead, whose flesh is half eaten away when he comes out of his mother's womb.’ And Moses cried to the LORD, ‘O God, please heal her--please.’ But the LORD said to Moses, ‘If her father had but spit in her face, should she not be shamed seven days? Let her be shut outside the camp seven days, and after that she may be brought in again." So Miriam was shut outside the camp seven days, and the people did not set out on the march till Miriam was brought in again." Numbers 12:1-5, 10-15
It is very hard to accept the idea that the Quran wasn’t identifying Jesus’ mother with the sister of Moses in light of the fact that both these Marys had brothers named Aaron and fathers named Imran/Amram! It is rather obvious to any unbiased reader that Muhammad has clearly confused the identity of Jesus’ mother with the sister of Aaron and Moses. He mistakenly thought that the mother of the Lord Jesus was the sister of Moses and Aaron.
Some Muslims try very hard to get around this and have sought to refute the assertion that the Quran is mistaken:
http://bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Contra/External/sister_of_aaron.htm
But to no avail. The Muslim responses have been thoroughly addressed and refuted in the following papers:
http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qbhc06.html
http://answering-islam.org/Silas/mary.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/davids_seed.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi-jesus3.htm
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/god.htm http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/sister_of_aaron.htmBut Muham-mad's confusion did not begin or end there, but likely under influence from likewise Biblically illiterate Catholics, or at least heretical Collyridians, said,
And when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen. — Qur'an, sura 5 (Al-Ma'ida), ayat 116
In his book, "The Original Sources Of The Qur'an," W. St. Clair Tisdall states,
...Muhammad heard certain Christians make that there are three Gods, that is to say God the Father, Mary, and Jesus. It is perfectly plain from these verses that Muhammad really did believe that the Christian doctrine inculcated belief in three separate Divine persons, Jesus and Mary being two of them. But our third quotation implies that Muhammad - probably from what he had seen of "Christian" worship - thought that the order was Jesus, Mary, God, or Mary, Jesus, God. No reasonable man will wonder at the indignation with which Muhammad in God's name abjures such blasphemy. We must all feel regret that the idolatrous worship offered to Mary led Muhammad to believe that people who called her "Queen of Heaven" and "Mother of God" really attributed to her Divine attributes. /font>
It should be noticed, however, that, though the undue exaltation of the Virgin Mary, which led Muhammad astray as to the true doctrine of the Bible, is contrary to the Christian faith, yet such false ideas and practices are distinctly encouraged by the teaching of many of the later apocryphal Gospels, particularly by those which formed the ultimate sources of Muhammad's knowledge of Christianity. We mention this to prevent the possibility of any Muhammadan reader supposing that he can find a way out of his difficulty by endeavonring to prove that such books as "The Nativity of Mary," "The Protevangelium of James the less," and the Arabic "Gospel of the Infancy" are more authentic monuments of the early Christian faith as taught by Christ than are the canonical books or the New Testament! (Tisdall, "The Original Sources Of The Qur'an ," pp. 49,50)
Even the Anglican but basically Sabellian Orientalist scholar and Muslim sympathizer William Montgomery Watt (14 March 1909 – 24 October 2006) states in his book Muhammad At Medina:
One of the remarkable features of the relationship between Muslims and Christians is that neither Muhammad nor any of the Companions seems to have been aware of some of the fundamental Christian doctrines. ...The early Muslims gave Jesus the title of Messiah (Masth) but did not appreciate that it involved a claim to be 'God's anointed'. They did not understand the distinctive work of Jesus in redeem- ing the world and atoning for its sins. They did not realize that the Holy Spirit was regarded by Christians as the third person in the Godhead. It is indeed remarkable that there should have been among the Muslims over such a wide area this absence of know- ledge of Christianity. The blame for this state of affairs probably rests on those Christians with whom Muhammad and his Com- panions were in contact, who may themselves have had little appreciation of the doctrines mentioned.
CRI responds to this issuesaying.
It is easy to understand how Muhammad became confused about this. While visiting Jerusalem around the beginning of the seventh century, Muhammad would have observed a strong devotion to Mary. Combining this with his ignorance of sound Christian teaching and biblical revelation while operating on an unchallenged assumption of Unitarianism (discussed below), Muhammad could only have seen Christians as promoting a form of polytheism, with Jesus and Mary as gods. Muhammad argued that Jesus and Mary were human because they ate food. He assumed that everyone understood that God does not, and cannot, eat food. Of course, the Christian who understands that Jesus is the God-man, fully God and fully man, knows this objection is baseless. The difficult task is communicating this truth to Muslims, who follow the errors their religion’s founder made many centuries ago. - http://www.equip.org/article/examining-islamic-apologetics-part-2 /
It is also of note that while proselytizing in Mecca, Muhammad saw Christians and Jews as "People of the Book" but required political loyalty in return for religious and cultural autonomy. However, after his migration to Medina, Muhammad's attitude towards Christians and Jews changed to being mutual persecutors of them.
Thanks!
National Catholic Reporter: "Muslim Jesus provides common ground for Christians" [Chrislam]
Yeah...
Sure...
"It is not befitting to Allah that he should beget a son."
NOW what they gonna do??
ha!
well, its still AWFUL for anyone, especially a Christian cleric (of any denomination) to try to admix the Satanic IslamoNazi cult into Christian faith
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.