|
0 members (),
1,639
guests, and
98
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,508
Posts417,509
Members6,159
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342 |
The reason that the Church of the East florished was because of the schism between that Church and the Catholic Church. Yuhannon: Christ is Risen!! Indeed He is Risen!!! Christ is in our midst!! He is and always will be!!! Actually it seems to me to be rather logical why the Church of the East survived and flourished in the Persian Empire. Christians inside that empire couldn't look like they were tied to a foreign power or to the official religion of a foreign power or they might be perceived as spies or a fifth column. But simply proclaiming Christ and focusing on Him alone, without being involved in the controversies of another rival empire, would allow them to pursue the Great Commission without drawing animosity within the place they lived. In Christ, BOB Shlomo Bob, That is correct concerning the Church of the East. Also, with the continual wars between Byzantium and Persia, and the hatred of the Christians in the Middle East and Egypt towards Byzantium it also made them ripe for the picking. Poosh BaShlomo, Yuhannon
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 110
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 110 |
The Zorastrians were never heavy persecutors of Christians. Shlomo Yuhannon, There is a period in the Church of the East, which was in the Persian empire, called the "forty year persecution", which lasted from 339 to 379. It was carried out by the Persian Zoroastrians under Shapur II. One estimate says that as many as 190,000 Persian Christians died in the persecution. There is some information here under the heading "The Great Persecution": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Eastern_Christianity_in_AsiaGod bless, Rony
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,342 |
The Zorastrians were never heavy persecutors of Christians. Shlomo Yuhannon, There is a period in the Church of the East, which was in the Persian empire, called the "forty year persecution", which lasted from 339 to 379. It was carried out by the Persian Zoroastrians under Shapur II. One estimate says that as many as 190,000 Persian Christians died in the persecution. There is some information here under the heading "The Great Persecution": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Eastern_Christianity_in_AsiaGod bless, Rony Shlomo Rony, Thank you for the information. Poosh BaShlomo, Yuhannon
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 131 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 131 Likes: 6 |
Oh please.... I would think that the only kind of prophet we could recognize Muhummad as being is a false prophet. There have been plenty of those in history and there will doubtless be plenty more. Outside of the Antichrist to be revealed at the end of time, Muhummad does seem to be the false prophet with the largest following. Well,well...So there is no reason for the Christian-Moslem dialogue?!?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
I am a dreamer myself - but recognizing Mohammed as a "prophet" is more of a nightmare.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
To recognize Muhammad as a prophet would be to set him up as the voice of God. This request reminds me too much of the options once forced upon Christians to choose between conversion or Dhimmitude. There were other Christians who didn't have either option.
To even consider Muhammad as a prophet in the line of Isaiah and Jeremiah is dangerous to the soul.
Terry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
|
|
Za myr z'wysot ... Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,125 Likes: 1 |
Well,well...So there is no reason for the Christian-Moslem dialogue?!? Kry, I for one certainly believe in Christian-Muslim dialogue, in fact I had suggested earlier in this thread that the Pope could use this new challenge as an opportunity to turn the tables on them and ask, why should we accept Muhammad as a prophet of God? (i.e., given what we believe about Jesus Christ.) After all, dialogue is all about getting clear with regard to what we do and don't believe.  Peace, Deacon Richard
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 648
Orthodox domilsean Member
|
|
Orthodox domilsean Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 648 |
Fr. Deacon,
We can only hope that the Muslims would actually "dialog". I have a sneaky feeling that if the Pope asked your question, the answer would be something along the lines of "Because Mohammed is the prophet of God". Muslim dialog, I fear, does not usually allow dialog, as such. Plus, any Muslim scholar willing to debate would be under intense scrutiny from the radicals, and therefore subject to fatwa and a likely execution from the radical elements. I fear that mainstream Islam lives in fear of its extreme elements.
Maybe I'm a pessimist.
I see it this way, working with Muslims from across the globe on a daily basis: The ones from super-Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia might not buy into it all, but publicly, they certainly do. They know that appearance is what matters in these things.
Those from less-radical countries, like Turkey, are either Muslim by birth, but have given up on religion -- like, I'd argue, many US Christians -- or they use Islam to their advantage.
Then those from Africa approach Islam more like we do. Worry about your own soul and don't judge others.
That's stereotyping, of course, but it's what I see on a regular basis. Of course, the Saudi-types think they're "more Muslim" than the rest -- especially Turks and Africans. Other Arabs seem to be a bit higher in esteem, but not equal to Saudis.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
�The ones from super-Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia might not buy into it all, but publicly, they certainly do.�
That sounds much like those in China and the USSR who embraced Maoism and Marxism-Leninism for self-preservation; they would be publicly fervent with ideology but privately cynical or pious to their conscience if it was formed.
Terry
Last edited by Terry Bohannon; 04/10/08 10:21 AM. Reason: (Marxism not Marxist)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 131 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 131 Likes: 6 |
To recognize Muhammad as a prophet would be to set him up as the voice of God. A prophet of Islam - anyway?!? After all: Muhammad might have been a tool for God...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 704
Bill from Pgh Member
|
|
Bill from Pgh Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 704 |
The simple words of +Pope John Paul II of blessed and eternal memory: www.catholic.net/rcc/POPE/HopeBook/chap15.html [ catholic.net] I know the topic of Christian, Jewish and Muslim worship of the same God has come up before. I will only say I think Islam worships the same God as Christianity without fully knowing or recognizing the same God. Why and how I can state this ...because there is only One and no other God. There never has been nor will there ever will be a recognition of Muhammed as a prophet.
|
|
|
|
|
