Article is written by Theodore shoebat, son of famous ex muslim walid sheobat and can be found on walid shoebat's website, an exmuslim who knows all things Islam and now a Christian.

The Catholic Church Did Not Invent Islam
By TedonFebruary 4, 2014in General
By Theodore Shoebat


The Catholic Church did not invent Islam. I have heard this countless times, and have received innumerable messages from people, that Islam was founded by the Catholic Church. I don’t have the time to respond to every individual who tells me this assertion, so I have decided to write this essay to deal with it.
[size=13pt]The idea that Islam was conceived by the Catholic Church is traced back to a conspiracy theorist named Alberto Rivera, a con-artist who claimed to be a Jesuit (I know how many messages I will receive about how I slandered “brother Alberto”).
[/size]

Alberto Rivera
Alberto said that the “the Pope” commissioned Muhammad to do three missions:

1. Eliminate the Jews and Christians (true believers, which they called infidels).
2. Protect the Augustinian Monks and Roman Catholics.
3. Conquer Jerusalem for “His Holiness” in the Vatican.
These commands, for one thing, cannot be found in any primary account whatsoever. What is a primary account? We need to know this if we are going to understand the nature of our inquiry. When trying to reach an historical conclusion, or make historical observations, one must focus first on one type of evidence: first hand accounts, or primary sources.

A primary source is a document written in, or around the time, of the particular historical event in question, being based on eye-witness accounts and first hand materials. To use an example that we are all familiar with, I will ask a simple question: The Exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt, how do we know that it happened? Because Moses, who was the leader of Israel’s liberation, wrote about it. We would never know about the Exodus, if Moses never wrote a book about it. Exodus, then, is a primary source account. Would you, then, rather read the Book of Exodus, or a modern book on the Exodus? The only way to fully comprehend the Exodus, is to read Exodus.
So then, how would we learn about the invention of Islam? We would need to read ancient documents, both Islamic and non-Islamic. We would have to read the primary source accounts. And when reading on the origins of Islam, based on the primary source accounts, we have absolutely zero substantiation for any of Rivera’s claims.

Now, Rivera says that he learned of Islam’s Catholic inventors from one Cardinal Bea. [size=13pt] But when we research the statement that Rivera attributes to Bea, all we find are books and articles, written by anti-Catholic polemics, and not one statement from anything ever written by Bea. [/size]

Therefore, to simply conclude Rivera’s quoting of Bea as factual, is both empty of scholarship and absent of any cognitive reasoning expected of the historian.

When my walid shoebat exposes Obama’s family, or reveals an unknown plan of the jihadists, he does not simply claim that it is true, nor does he say that he met so and so, and so and so said such and such, and thats it. He goes to the primary sources, searching and finding documents in Arab, Israeli, American, and other records.
He spends countless hours sifting through innumerable sources, trying to find reliable information on the particular subject he is writing on.
Truth is found through both will and reasoning, not sensation or exciting novelties.

That the Catholic Church invented Islam, is just that, a sensational novelty. And in regards to the rest of the rubbish Alberto said in regards to Islam’s creation, there is not one piece of primary evidence (I dare anyone to show me just one).



[size=13pt]If we are going to analyze the origins of Islam, what must be first comprehended is the innate focal point of Islamic theology: Islam is a religion of a book; it is primarily revolved around the Koran, and secondarily fixated on what interpretation Muslim authorities deduce on the Koran.
Without the Koran, there is no Islam. Therefore, in order to understand the origins of Islamic theology, one must read the Koran. [/size]

And when we do, what we find is not evidence of a Catholic creation, but actually statements that are openly anti-Catholic.

One of the most quoted Koranic verses by exposers of Islam, is Surah 9:29, which states:
Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture and believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
But when one reads the verse in conjunction with the subsequent verses, one finds that the Christians it is commanding to war with, are in fact Catholics.

Here is the full verse:
Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture and believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low. And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they! They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis andtheir monksand the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One God. There is no god save Him. Be He glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! (Surah 9:29-31)

The existence of the wordmonks, in the verse, signifies that it is referring to Catholics, both Eastern and Western. How do we know this? Let us look to the interpretation of this verse by Abu Bakr, the successor to Muhammad, and one who was amongst the most elite of Muhammad’s companions. Before invading Syria, he declared:

[size=13pt]
You will meet people who have set themselves apart in hermitages; leave them to accomplish the purpose for which they have done this. …You will meet people who have shaved the crowns of their heads, leaving a band of hair around it. Strike them with the sword.
Those who have their hair shaven to the shape of a crown, can only be referring to Catholic monks; for the tradition behind this hairstyle, symbolizing the crown of glory given to the martyrs, and the crown of thorns placed on Christ’s head, is purely one of Catholic origin.
The first people that Abu Bakr mentions, the ones who “set themselves apart in hermitages”, were the heretical Christians, or the Arians, Nestorians, and other subscribers to false doctrines.
So, when Rivera claims that “the Pope” commissioned Muhammad to kill the Jews and the “true Christians,” the only Christians that the Koran initially commanded to kill are the Catholics. Why would the Catholics create a system that is innately adverse toward the Catholic Church? It makes no sense, and anyone who upholds such an ahistorical statement, is not committed to historical truth and reasoning, but a mere opinion that is both groundless and ignominious. [/size]

Those who believe this slanderous lie will argue that the Muslims broke off from Rome and began to fight Catholics; and to those who say this, I will ask you to bring me one primary source account that proves this claim.
Furthermore, the idea that Islam was invented by the Catholic Church is void of any evidence in the writings of the Church Fathers. In order to understand Islam’s history, we read the Koran and the Hadith; in order to understand Catholic history, we read the Church Fathers. We find absolutely nothing close to what Rivera claims in any book written by any of the Church Fathers or ancient Catholic theologians who lived closest to the early days of Islam.
In fact, in looking to the earliest Christian opinion on Islam, what we find are Catholics writing against Muhammad as a damnable heretic and enemy to Rome. One of the best examples of this are the writings of Theodore Abu Qurrah, the bishop of Harran who lived in the 9th century, when Islam was still quite a young cult.

Theodore affirmed the primacy of the Roman Church, and viewed Islam as an enemy toward the Church. On the primacy of the Church of Rome, Theodore writes:
Do you not see that St. Peter is the foundation of the church, selected to shepherd it, that those who believe in his faith will never lose their faith, and that he was ordered to have compassion on his brethren and to strengthen them? As for Christ’s words, “I prayed for you, that you not lose your faith; but you, have compassion on your brethren, at that time, and strengthen them,” [Luke 22:32-33] we do not think that he meant St. Peter himself [and the apostles themselves]. Rather, he meant nothing other than the holders of the seat of St. Peter, that is, Rome, [and the holders of the seats of the apostles]. (1)

Theodore goes on to write how when the heresy of Arianism (the denial of Christ’s divinity) arose, [size=13pt] the Church commenced the Council of Nicaea to combat it; when Nestorianism (the denial that God became flesh in Mary’s womb) arose, the Church of Rome commanded the Council of Ephesus. (2) Islam intrinsically coincides with both of these heresies, in that it rejects Christ’s divinity, and the Incarnation of God in Mary’s womb.
Since the Church of Rome was the one that first commenced the two councils that went against these two false doctrines and their followers, it is therefore impossible that the Catholic Church would then turn around and create a heresy that upholds them and desires to kill the very people (Catholics) who were adverse to these heresies [/size]

John the Deacon, an ancient Catholic theologian who had direct access to the material of Theodore Abu Qurrah, declares the primacy of St. Peter’s See, deems Muslims as enemies to the Church, and then describes how the bishop Theodore wrote against the heresies of Islam:
And because the Lord had promised Peter, the chief of the apostolic choir, that he would lay the church’s foundation on the unshaken rock of his confession, and because he had assured the church that she would overcome the gates of hell, so the opponents of God, up to the present, struggles against the church. …I am speaking of the most blessed and most philosophical bishop of Haran in Coele Syria, Theodore. In his writings, which were truly inspired by God, he worthily held up to public scorn the impiousreligion of the Agarenes [Muslims]and showed to all that it was worthy of complete derision. (3)

[size=13pt]
The Catholic Church preserved and protected the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and in so doing it condemned and fought against Islam more than any other institution in history (if you don’t believe me, read any detailed history book on the Crusades) [/size]

The first Church leader to lead and organize a crusade against Islam was St. Pope Leo IV who, in the year 849, led a battle against Muslims who were trying to sack the Vatican.

As soon as Arianism came about, the Church combated it; and when Islam arose, with its very Arian doctrine, the Church combated it. Catholicism’s war against Islam is a continuation of its war against Arianism. There is therefore no evidence or documentation to prove that the Catholic Church suddenly decided to invent an extension of the very doctrine it was bent on crushing and suppressing.


Islam has its roots in Arian doctrines, not Catholicism; and yet many today wish to turn it round, and reverse this very historical fact. Constantine Porphyrogentinitus, the fourth emperor of the Byzantine Empire, wrote in the 10th century, in hisAdministrando Imperio, that
he [Muhammad] was believed because a certain Arain, who pretended to be a monk, testified falsely in his support for love of gain. (4)
John the Deacon also recounts an Arian origin to Islam:
The Saracens [Muslims] are intent and zealous to deny the divinity of the Word of God. On all sides, they array themselves against him, eager to show that he is neither God nor the Son of God. Indeed, it was only because their false prophet [Muhammad] was the disciple of an Arian that he gave them this godless and impious teaching. (5)
For the Catholic Church inventing Islam, we have no evidence. What we do have, however, are an abundance of ancient records of Catholics fighting Muslims, and Muslims striving to destroy Christendom and the Catholic Church, a goal which, to this day, they have not given up.
[size=13pt]
They contine to slaughter Christians every day, which is why you should donate to our rescue team to save Christian lives. [/size]

To learn more about the great war between Christians and Muslims, get my new DVD series on Christian militancy.
FOLLOW ME ON FACEBOOK
(1) Theodore Abu Qurrah, Discerning the True Church, B164, trans. John C. Lamoreaux*
(2) *Ibid, B165-B166*
(3) *Refutations of the Saracens by Theodore Abu Qurrah, the Bishop of Haran, as Reported by John the Deacon, GK86-88, trans. John C. Lamoreaux*
(4) *Constantine Porphyrogentinitus, De Administrando Imperio, 14, trans. R.J.H. Jenkins, brackets mine*
(5) *Refutations of the Saracens by Theodore Abu Qurrah, the Bishop of Haran, as Reported by John the Deacon, GKh118, trans. John C. Lamoreaux*


Link : http://shoebat.com/2014/02/04/catholic-church-invent-islam-2/

Cc OLAADEGBU

I still haven't got why these people always involve Islam in their sectarian differences. what to say, I don't know!
BTW, so Shoebats didn't even convert to Christianity, but Catholicism... learned new thing

parisbookaddict:
Article is written by Theodore shoebat, son of famous ex muslim walid sheobat and can be found on walid shoebat's website, an exmuslim who knows all things Islam and now a Christian.

The Catholic Church Did Not Invent Islam
By TedonFebruary 4, 2014in General
By Theodore Shoebat


The Catholic Church did not invent Islam. I have heard this countless times, and have received innumerable messages from people, that Islam was founded by the Catholic Church. I don’t have the time to respond to every individual who tells me this assertion, so I have decided to write this essay to deal with it.
[size=13pt]The idea that Islam was conceived by the Catholic Church is traced back to a conspiracy theorist named Alberto Rivera, a con-artist who claimed to be a Jesuit (I know how many messages I will receive about how I slandered “brother Alberto”).
[/size]

Alberto Rivera
Alberto said that the “the Pope” commissioned Muhammad to do three missions:

1. Eliminate the Jews and Christians (true believers, which they called infidels).
2. Protect the Augustinian Monks and Roman Catholics.
3. Conquer Jerusalem for “His Holiness” in the Vatican.
These commands, for one thing, cannot be found in any primary account whatsoever. What is a primary account? We need to know this if we are going to understand the nature of our inquiry. When trying to reach an historical conclusion, or make historical observations, one must focus first on one type of evidence: first hand accounts, or primary sources.

A primary source is a document written in, or around the time, of the particular historical event in question, being based on eye-witness accounts and first hand materials. To use an example that we are all familiar with, I will ask a simple question: The Exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt, how do we know that it happened? Because Moses, who was the leader of Israel’s liberation, wrote about it. We would never know about the Exodus, if Moses never wrote a book about it. Exodus, then, is a primary source account. Would you, then, rather read the Book of Exodus, or a modern book on the Exodus? The only way to fully comprehend the Exodus, is to read Exodus.
So then, how would we learn about the invention of Islam? We would need to read ancient documents, both Islamic and non-Islamic. We would have to read the primary source accounts. And when reading on the origins of Islam, based on the primary source accounts, we have absolutely zero substantiation for any of Rivera’s claims.

Now, Rivera says that he learned of Islam’s Catholic inventors from one Cardinal Bea. [size=13pt] But when we research the statement that Rivera attributes to Bea, all we find are books and articles, written by anti-Catholic polemics, and not one statement from anything ever written by Bea. [/size]

Therefore, to simply conclude Rivera’s quoting of Bea as factual, is both empty of scholarship and absent of any cognitive reasoning expected of the historian.

When my walid shoebat exposes Obama’s family, or reveals an unknown plan of the jihadists, he does not simply claim that it is true, nor does he say that he met so and so, and so and so said such and such, and thats it. He goes to the primary sources, searching and finding documents in Arab, Israeli, American, and other records.
He spends countless hours sifting through innumerable sources, trying to find reliable information on the particular subject he is writing on.
Truth is found through both will and reasoning, not sensation or exciting novelties.

That the Catholic Church invented Islam, is just that, a sensational novelty. And in regards to the rest of the rubbish Alberto said in regards to Islam’s creation, there is not one piece of primary evidence (I dare anyone to show me just one).



[size=13pt]If we are going to analyze the origins of Islam, what must be first comprehended is the innate focal point of Islamic theology: Islam is a religion of a book; it is primarily revolved around the Koran, and secondarily fixated on what interpretation Muslim authorities deduce on the Koran.
Without the Koran, there is no Islam. Therefore, in order to understand the origins of Islamic theology, one must read the Koran. [/size]

And when we do, what we find is not evidence of a Catholic creation, but actually statements that are openly anti-Catholic.

One of the most quoted Koranic verses by exposers of Islam, is Surah 9:29, which states:
Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture and believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
But when one reads the verse in conjunction with the subsequent verses, one finds that the Christians it is commanding to war with, are in fact Catholics.

Here is the full verse:
Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture and believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low. And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they! They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis andtheir monksand the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One God. There is no god save Him. Be He glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! (Surah 9:29-31)

The existence of the wordmonks, in the verse, signifies that it is referring to Catholics, both Eastern and Western. How do we know this? Let us look to the interpretation of this verse by Abu Bakr, the successor to Muhammad, and one who was amongst the most elite of Muhammad’s companions. Before invading Syria, he declared:

[size=13pt]
You will meet people who have set themselves apart in hermitages; leave them to accomplish the purpose for which they have done this. …You will meet people who have shaved the crowns of their heads, leaving a band of hair around it. Strike them with the sword.
Those who have their hair shaven to the shape of a crown, can only be referring to Catholic monks; for the tradition behind this hairstyle, symbolizing the crown of glory given to the martyrs, and the crown of thorns placed on Christ’s head, is purely one of Catholic origin.
The first people that Abu Bakr mentions, the ones who “set themselves apart in hermitages”, were the heretical Christians, or the Arians, Nestorians, and other subscribers to false doctrines.
So, when Rivera claims that “the Pope” commissioned Muhammad to kill the Jews and the “true Christians,” the only Christians that the Koran initially commanded to kill are the Catholics. Why would the Catholics create a system that is innately adverse toward the Catholic Church? It makes no sense, and anyone who upholds such an ahistorical statement, is not committed to historical truth and reasoning, but a mere opinion that is both groundless and ignominious. [/size]

Those who believe this slanderous lie will argue that the Muslims broke off from Rome and began to fight Catholics; and to those who say this, I will ask you to bring me one primary source account that proves this claim.
Furthermore, the idea that Islam was invented by the Catholic Church is void of any evidence in the writings of the Church Fathers. In order to understand Islam’s history, we read the Koran and the Hadith; in order to understand Catholic history, we read the Church Fathers. We find absolutely nothing close to what Rivera claims in any book written by any of the Church Fathers or ancient Catholic theologians who lived closest to the early days of Islam.
In fact, in looking to the earliest Christian opinion on Islam, what we find are Catholics writing against Muhammad as a damnable heretic and enemy to Rome. One of the best examples of this are the writings of Theodore Abu Qurrah, the bishop of Harran who lived in the 9th century, when Islam was still quite a young cult.

Theodore affirmed the primacy of the Roman Church, and viewed Islam as an enemy toward the Church. On the primacy of the Church of Rome, Theodore writes:
Do you not see that St. Peter is the foundation of the church, selected to shepherd it, that those who believe in his faith will never lose their faith, and that he was ordered to have compassion on his brethren and to strengthen them? As for Christ’s words, “I prayed for you, that you not lose your faith; but you, have compassion on your brethren, at that time, and strengthen them,” [Luke 22:32-33] we do not think that he meant St. Peter himself [and the apostles themselves]. Rather, he meant nothing other than the holders of the seat of St. Peter, that is, Rome, [and the holders of the seats of the apostles]. (1)

Theodore goes on to write how when the heresy of Arianism (the denial of Christ’s divinity) arose, [size=13pt] the Church commenced the Council of Nicaea to combat it; when Nestorianism (the denial that God became flesh in Mary’s womb) arose, the Church of Rome commanded the Council of Ephesus. (2) Islam intrinsically coincides with both of these heresies, in that it rejects Christ’s divinity, and the Incarnation of God in Mary’s womb.
Since the Church of Rome was the one that first commenced the two councils that went against these two false doctrines and their followers, it is therefore impossible that the Catholic Church would then turn around and create a heresy that upholds them and desires to kill the very people (Catholics) who were adverse to these heresies [/size]

John the Deacon, an ancient Catholic theologian who had direct access to the material of Theodore Abu Qurrah, declares the primacy of St. Peter’s See, deems Muslims as enemies to the Church, and then describes how the bishop Theodore wrote against the heresies of Islam:
And because the Lord had promised Peter, the chief of the apostolic choir, that he would lay the church’s foundation on the unshaken rock of his confession, and because he had assured the church that she would overcome the gates of hell, so the opponents of God, up to the present, struggles against the church. …I am speaking of the most blessed and most philosophical bishop of Haran in Coele Syria, Theodore. In his writings, which were truly inspired by God, he worthily held up to public scorn the impiousreligion of the Agarenes [Muslims]and showed to all that it was worthy of complete derision. (3)

[size=13pt]
The Catholic Church preserved and protected the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and in so doing it condemned and fought against Islam more than any other institution in history (if you don’t believe me, read any detailed history book on the Crusades) [/size]

The first Church leader to lead and organize a crusade against Islam was St. Pope Leo IV who, in the year 849, led a battle against Muslims who were trying to sack the Vatican.

As soon as Arianism came about, the Church combated it; and when Islam arose, with its very Arian doctrine, the Church combated it. Catholicism’s war against Islam is a continuation of its war against Arianism. There is therefore no evidence or documentation to prove that the Catholic Church suddenly decided to invent an extension of the very doctrine it was bent on crushing and suppressing.


Islam has its roots in Arian doctrines, not Catholicism; and yet many today wish to turn it round, and reverse this very historical fact. Constantine Porphyrogentinitus, the fourth emperor of the Byzantine Empire, wrote in the 10th century, in hisAdministrando Imperio, that
he [Muhammad] was believed because a certain Arain, who pretended to be a monk, testified falsely in his support for love of gain. (4)
John the Deacon also recounts an Arian origin to Islam:
The Saracens [Muslims] are intent and zealous to deny the divinity of the Word of God. On all sides, they array themselves against him, eager to show that he is neither God nor the Son of God. Indeed, it was only because their false prophet [Muhammad] was the disciple of an Arian that he gave them this godless and impious teaching. (5)
For the Catholic Church inventing Islam, we have no evidence. What we do have, however, are an abundance of ancient records of Catholics fighting Muslims, and Muslims striving to destroy Christendom and the Catholic Church, a goal which, to this day, they have not given up.
[size=13pt]
They contine to slaughter Christians every day, which is why you should donate to our rescue team to save Christian lives. [/size]

To learn more about the great war between Christians and Muslims, get my new DVD series on Christian militancy.
FOLLOW ME ON FACEBOOK
(1) Theodore Abu Qurrah, Discerning the True Church, B164, trans. John C. Lamoreaux*
(2) *Ibid, B165-B166*
(3) *Refutations of the Saracens by Theodore Abu Qurrah, the Bishop of Haran, as Reported by John the Deacon, GK86-88, trans. John C. Lamoreaux*
(4) *Constantine Porphyrogentinitus, De Administrando Imperio, 14, trans. R.J.H. Jenkins, brackets mine*
(5) *Refutations of the Saracens by Theodore Abu Qurrah, the Bishop of Haran, as Reported by John the Deacon, GKh118, trans. John C. Lamoreaux*


Link : http://shoebat.com/2014/02/04/catholic-church-invent-islam-2/

Cc OLAADEGBU

Theodore affirmed the primacy of the Roman Church, and viewed Islam as an enemy toward the Church. On the primacy of the Church of Rome, Theodore writes:
Do you not see that St. Peter is the foundation of the church, selected to shepherd it, that those who believe in his faith will never lose their faith, and that he was ordered to have compassion on his brethren and to strengthen them? As for Christ’s words, “I prayed for you, that you not lose your faith; but you, have compassion on your brethren, at that time, and strengthen them,” [Luke 22:32-33] we do not think that he meant St. Peter himself [and the apostles themselves]. Rather, he meant nothing other than the holders of the seat of St. Peter, that is, Rome, [and the holders of the seats of the apostles]. (1)

This quote alone proves that Theodore is a Roman Catholic and I am not surprised that he will go on to defend the Vatican. It's such a pity.

maverickboy:


I still haven't got why these people always involve Islam in their sectarian differences. what to say, I don't know!
BTW, so Shoebats didn't even convert to Christianity, but Catholicism... learned new thing

His mother is a Roman Catholic which obliges him to defend the institution.

OLAADEGBU:




This quote alone proves that Theodore is a Roman Catholic and I am not surprised that he will go on to defend the Vatican. It's such a pity.

Everyone has an opinion including theodore. But he did make very very important points. Why would a church invent a religion to compete with it. Especially at a time it was combating heresy left right and center..

The narrative claiming the catholics invented islam doesnt add up especially when u look at hadiths that show mohammed was bent on beheading catholics monks, clerics etc..and that the first person to make the claim of catholics inventing islam was actually a fraud.

i cc'ed u because u posted a claim with no facts only conjecture. . There are many things i dont understand about the catholic church but it is important that we dont bear false witness. . I criticize islam but i would never say what i cant prove with records. .

parisbookaddict:

when your father and leader (the pope) is at peace with the muslims and youre here attacking the muslim then its an issue of concern.

ProphetUdeme:
when your father and leader (the pope) is at peace with the muslims and youre here attacking the muslim then its an issue of concern.

Actually, the catholic church classifies mohammed as a heretic and false prophet. Did u know that? But like much of Europe political correctness is rife in the church,

For instance they have invited a muslim imam and a jewish rabbi to pray at the vatican once.. the muslim fellow prayed that allah makes them victorious over the infidels. It was hilarious. .

Thats by the way, nonetheless u dont expect the pope to make careless statements abput muslims. It will only cause conflicts.. Peace is better... a man of his position criticizing a religion with crazy fanatics will cause problems, dont u agree?

parisbookaddict:


Actually, the catholic church classifies mohammed as a heretic and false prophet. Did u know that? But like much of Europe political correctness is rife in the church,

For instance they have invited a muslim imam and a jewish rabbi to pray at the vatican once.. the muslim fellow prayed that allah makes them victorious over the infidels. It was hilarious. .

Thats by the way, nonetheless u dont expect the pope to make careless statements abput muslims. It will only cause conflicts.. Peace is better... a man of his position criticizing a religion with crazy fanatics will cause problems, dont u agree?

i do agree but i think he generally propagates peace with the islam out of fear and not just for peace. This pope francis looks like a timid fellow.

OLAADEGBU:


His mother is a Roman Catholic which obliges him to defend the institution.

Whatever!

ProphetUdeme:
i do agree but i think he generally propagates peace with the islam out of fear and not just for peace. This pope francis looks like a timid fellow.

U have soo much hate for the catholic church. This is what clouds ur views.

Out of fear of muslims?? Lol. Are they invading the very secure vatican. I guess u will be satisfied if he says something that agitates 1.5 billion muslims and cause diplomatic problems between catholic dominated countries and islamic ones..

By the He is not timid. Infact he is quite brave in my opinon. Dont forget he was the one that facilitated the renewal of cuba -US diplomatic relations after 50 years. This will bring investments to cuba and bring millions out of poverty in that country.

No world leader nor protestant pastor was able to achieve this for 50years.

Lets not forget he has condemned abortions, capitalism, stem cell research and homosexuality. . Somethimg most protestant pastors in the west shy away from.

He has spoken out the ill treatment of gays. Your brave Nigerian leaders in all there timid wisdom thinks jailing them for 14years will cure them.

There are a number of things i disagree with about catholic traditions but one thing i love about the catholic church is its emphasis on peace and the consistence of its positions on hot-button moral issues like the aforementioned. .

OLAADEGBU:




This quote alone proves that Theodore is a Roman Catholic and I am not surprised that he will go on to defend the Vatican. It's such a pity.

bishop theodore of syria lived around the 8th century. At that time there were no protestants. So ofcourse almost all christians were catholics, only the heretics like d arians who had been excommunicated were non-catholics.

So he is as good a source as any when it comes to islam

parisbookaddict:


Everyone has an opinion including theodore. But he did make very very important points. Why would a church invent a religion to compete with it. Especially at a time it was combating heresy left right and center..

The fact that Ted's mother is Roman Catholic will certainly slant his opinion towards defending the institution at all costs. The Vatican had many reasons for inventing Islam. I hope you realise that the US used the same tactics in attacking it's enemy (USSR) when it used Bin Laden as a proxy only for BL to turn against the US when they felt hard done by. The RCC saw true Christians and the Jews as an affront to their domination. The Christians did neither bowed to them then and nor now, the Jews did not allow them to take over Jerusalem and the Vatican needed that to solidify their grip on religion.

parisbookaddict:


The narrative claiming the catholics invented islam doesnt add up especially when u look at hadiths that show mohammed was bent on beheading catholics monks, clerics etc..and that the first person to make the claim of catholics inventing islam was actually a fraud.

I opened a thread that debunked the lie saying Alberto was a fraud. If you sincerely read that rebuttal you will not join forces with the Vatican and it's friends by calling him a fraud unless you have vested interest just as Ted in the RCC.

parisbookaddict:


i cc'ed u because u posted a claim with no facts only conjecture. . There are many things i dont understand about the catholic church but it is important that we dont bear false witness. . I criticize islam but i would never say what i cant prove with records. .

Alberto Rivera was an eyewitness when he received a briefing as a Jesuit priest and the fact that Lebanon and Turkey are Roman Catholic and Islamic countries respectively is a strong evidence that his testimony is true. Read up on the thread I posted: "Testimony of a former Jesuit priest".

https://www.nairaland.com/2342759/testimony-former-jesuit-priest

Ubenedictus:


bishop theodore of syria lived around the 8th century. At that time there were no protestants. So ofcourse almost all christians were catholics, only the heretics like d arians who had been excommunicated were non-catholics.

So he is as good a source as any when it comes to islam

When I mentioned Theodore I meant Ted the son of Walid Shoebat. It is obvious that he was named after bishop Theodore of Syria that you mentioned. God has always left Himself a witness in every era. Christians were scattered all over the then known world especially Africa before the RCC through the "Muhammadians" forced them with either the Qur'an or the sword just as the Muslims are doing today.

OLAADEGBU:


When I mentioned Theodore I meant Ted the son of Walid Shoebat. It is obvious that he was named after bishop Theodore of Syria that you mentioned. God has always left Himself a witness in every era. Christians were scattered all over the then known world especially Africa before the RCC through the "Muhammadians" forced them with either the Qur'an or the sword just as the Muslims are doing today.

the part you bolded is a quote from bishop theodore. The time bishop Theodore was writting the 'muhammedans' hadn't started fight. Nobody had been "driven" out of anywhere. That was during d time wen islam was in it infancy and theodore was busy combating d arianism dat islam taught.
The catholic church didn't make friends or support islam and its doctrine just as d testimony of theodore shows.

OLAADEGBU:


The fact that Ted's mother is Roman Catholic will certainly slant his opinion towards defending the institution at all costs. The Vatican had many reasons for inventing Islam. I hope you realise that the US used the same tactics in attacking it's enemy (USSR) when it used Bin Laden as a proxy only for BL to turn against the US when they felt hard done by. The RCC saw true Christians and the Jews as an affront to their domination. The Christians did neither bowed to them then and nor now, the Jews did not allow them to take over Jerusalem and the Vatican needed that to solidify their grip on religion.



I opened a thread that debunked the lie saying Alberto was a fraud. If you sincerely read that rebuttal you will not join forces with the Vatican and it's friends by calling him a fraud unless you have vested interest just as Ted in the RCC.



Alberto Rivera was an eyewitness when he received a briefing as a Jesuit priest and the fact that Lebanon and Turkey are Roman Catholic and Islamic countries respectively is a strong evidence that his testimony is true. Read up on the thread I posted: "Testimony of a former Jesuit priest".

https://www.nairaland.com/2342759/testimony-former-jesuit-priest

u really need to slow down on how u consume conspiracy theories..and false claims..

both of us agree that mohammed was a fraud. how did u come to that conclusion.
1. he contradicts himself many times
2. his story doesnt add up
3. several claims dont make sense etc.

now apply this to the claims of alberto..

point to note is that the fellow u trust so much was born in 1935 and died in 1997.

mohammed was born circa 600ad..

how did this secret say hidden for 1400 years.

now here are some other claims by alberto

Allegations against CatholicismAccording to Rivera, Jesuits are responsible for the creation ofcommunism,Islam, andNazism, and causing theWorld Wars,recession, theJonestown Massacre, and theassassinationsofAbraham LincolnandJohn F. Kennedy(a Catholic); he further claims that the Catholic Church wants to spreadhomosexualityandabortion, that theCharismatic Movementis a front for the Catholic Church, thatthePopesareantichrists, and that the Catholic Church is theWhore of Babylon.[4]He has also claimed that the Jesuits were the masterminds behind theMedieval Inquisitionin the 13th century.[5]The Jesuits were in fact founded in 1534.[6]

here is the link for more https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Rivera?_e_pi_=7%2CPAGE_ID10%2C2962683173

do u actually believe those nonsense allegations.

here is some information about him

According to theCornerstoneexposé:[1]Rivera had a 'history of legalentanglements' includingfraud, credit card theft, and writingbad checks. Warrants had been issued for his arrest inNew JerseyandFlorida, and he was wanted by the Spanish police for 'swindles and cheats'; while in the U.S. in 1967, he claimed to be collecting money fora Spanish college, which never received this money. The details of his claims changed: In 1964 he said he had left the Catholic Church in July1952, but he later put the date at March 20, 1967; despite this, he was still promoting Catholicism in a newspaper interview of August that same year. Although supposedly placed in the sanatorium in 1965 andheld there for three months, he gave the date of his release as September 1967, leaving a period of over a year unaccounted.The document exhibited by Rivera to prove his status as a Catholic priest was fraudulently obtained and the Catholic Church denies his claims of having been a Jesuit priest or a bishop. He had only one sister in London; she was not called Maria (her name was María Teresa), was not a nun, and did not live in a convent. In an employmentform dated 1963 he claimed marriage to Carmen Lydia Torres, and thecouple had two children in the U.S. when his own account had him a celibate priest in Spain.Cornerstonealso questioned Rivera's claim to various degrees, including three doctorates (Th.D.,D.D., andPh.D.), reporting that his known chronology did not allow enough time for him to have completed these degrees and that he had admitted to receiving them from a Coloradodiploma mill.

of course these could be lies so if u have better information about him do share. .

Ubenedictus:

the part you bolded is a quote from bishop theodore. The time bishop Theodore was writting the 'muhammedans' hadn't started fight. Nobody had been "driven" out of anywhere. That was during d time wen islam was in it infancy and theodore was busy combating d arianism dat islam taught.
The catholic church didn't make friends or support islam and its doctrine just as d testimony of theodore shows.

OLAADEGBU is too blinded by conspiracies about the catholic church to answer you objectively.

nobody should be above criticism, but at least criticize with facts and not hearsay or unfounded rumours. OLAADEGBU does Not understand that in this regard.

parisbookaddict:


OLAADEGBU is too blinded by conspiracies about the catholic church to answer you objectively.

nobody should be above criticism, but at least criticize with facts and not hearsay or unfounded rumours. OLAADEGBU does Not understand that in this regard.

ola is a classic case of distructive indoctrination, he has some sites he visits and anything he hears there become law. He will never doubt it or bother to use his brain to critique it.

The guy he is reading from is a conspiracy theorist who once said that d vatican has a very big computer that contains all the information of every protestant in world and that in some time in d future d vatican wil try to kill all protestants.
Even after reading such nonesense ola wil not use his brain.

Ubenedictus:

ola is a classic case of distructive indoctrination, he has some sites he visits and anything he hears there become law. He will never doubt it or bother to use his brain to critique it.

The guy he is reading from is a conspiracy theorist who once said that d vatican has a very big computer that contains all the information of every protestant in world and that in some time in d future d vatican wil try to kill all protestants.
Even after reading such nonesense ola wil not use his brain.

I agree. Some protestants actually think the pope is an anti Christ. I find this laughable. Any Christian who reads the bible will see that everything About the anTi Christ is associated with Islam.

Yet OLA claims the pope is the anti Christ. An anti Christ that is against wars, greedy capitAlism, abortions, homosexuality, eugenics, euthanasia, cApital punishment etC. While a lot of mega church pastors, accept homosexuality, planned parenthood(abortion mills), adultery, primitive greedy collection of their flocks tithes, seeds, first fruits etc buying mansions and jets and some even call Mormons Christians (Joel osteen did this on CNN) and yet it is the old theologian conservative pope that is an Anti Christ to him.

I am convinced he is one of those that believe anything printed on the internet without applying critical reasoning.