It is not that the Reformers borrowed directly from Islam – but that Islam contributed certain key notions that have, in time, become foundational for certain segments of contemporary Christianity. The Bible is not the Christian Holy Book... The movement from authoritative Church to authoritative book that occurs over the 15th and 16th centuries (the Protestant Reformation), should not be considered apart from the dialog with Islam in the two or three centuries that preceded it. .
..Martin Luther’s, “Hier, stehe ich!” (demanding that only a Scriptural argument would be an acceptable response to his position) would have been unimaginable four or five hundred years before. The “Bible” had not yet become a Christian Quran. Today, however, many Christians are indeed, “People of the Book.”
That is absurd and as valid as saying that since the devil quoted from the Bible - slightly misrendering it -as authoritative in Mt. 4, then the Lord adopted this idea of a book as supreme from the devil! Which explains why He so often referenced Scripture and established His Truth claims upon Scriptural substantiation, which even miracles were part of.
If Christianity was not a religion of a book, why did the preaching of the church rely upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power to establish it, and reference the OT about 250 times?
What not just quote oral tradition and not reprove ignorance of Scripture?
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. For Moses said.. (Mark 7:9,10)
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29)
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. (Matthew 22:44-46)
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (Luke 24:44-45)
And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, (Acts 17:2)
For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ. (Acts 18:28)
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)
And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. (Acts 28:23)
I think this "father" reads little of the Bible, and instead the centrality of "that which is written being borrowed from Islam, the latter is simply the devil is again using a text (from an oral tradition as authoritative), as Christ did, but this time it is a text later written which partly depends upon misrendering Bible texts again, as the devil knows where the power lies.
The Christian community predates its own texts (the New Testament) and is not described as in any way having a foundation on the Scriptures
What blindness! It is easily shown that the Lord and His apostles and the NT church established their oral and written Truth claims upon what was written. href="http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Bible/2Tim_3.html#Partial ">Go thru the NT and see Thus while oral tradition preceded some of what was later written, it was dependent upon conformity with it.
The exaltation of the sovereignty of God and the working of the Divine Will (predestination) are hallmarks of Muslim thought. They eventually become hallmarks within certain forms of Christian scholasticism.
More nonsense, as by this logic the Psalmist and Paul were influenced by Islam:
But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased. (Psalms 115:3)
O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen. (Romans 11:33-36)
And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. (1 Peter 2:8)
Jews were circumcised and made part of the Covenant people before ever a word of Scripture was written. God revealed Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob some hundreds of years before Moses ever wrote a line.
Indeed, and souls were thus not as accountable as after the giving of the Law, as to whomsoever much is given (grace), much shall be required. (LK. 12:48) And the Lord revealed Himself thru nature and men of God with supernatural attestation, most supremely thru His Law-giver Moses, the man of God.
But as the written word appeared, it is abundantly evidenced that Scripture was the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.
And which testifies (Lk. 24:27,44, etc.) to writings of God being recognized and established as being so (essentially due to their unique and enduring heavenly qualities and attestation), and thus they materially provide for a canon of Scripture (as well as for reason, the church, etc.)
Christianity is not submission to God.. His invitation to become a child of the Father is not a demand to submit to the Supreme Being. It is why there can be no conversion at the point of a sword in Christianity,
Here a false dilemma is employed, yet to confess the Lord Jesus is a confession of submission, but which does not mean compelled such as under Rome's "coercive jurisdiction." . How one can have Christ as Lord and not indicating submission may be modern, but it is not Biblical.
The absence of a true ecclesiology in contemporary Christianity is a hallmark of its Islamification.
Which is neither an infallible perpetuated papal office nor EO "priests," both of which are contrary to Scripture, and thus the attempt to marginalize Scripture and elevate men "above that which is written."
And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. (1 Corinthians 4:6)
This gibberish does nothing but prove exactly how little the Papists think of God’s word.
That is right, if it is not written in scripture we do not need it.
Well stated, thank you.
Do you ever get the impression reading threads like this that some people try to cover up their ignorance of sacred Scripture by appealing to and relying on their religion’s leadership authority in its place? It’s almost like they are afraid to trust the Holy Spirit to lead them in understanding the God’s word, preferring to let “them” explain it all. And they call “us” lazy?!