Do Catholics and Muslims Worship the Same God?

It certainly seems as if we worship the same God. After all, we call God by the same name. Arabic-speaking Christians, including Eastern Catholics such as Maronites and Melkites, use the word “Allah” for the God of the Bible.

But are they the same God?

The question is not answered by simple linguistic identity, as evidenced by St. Paul’s complaint to the Corinthians: “For if some one comes and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough” (2 Corinthians 11:4). The “other Jesus” that was being preached among the Corinthians was not a different person of the same name, but a view of Jesus of Nazareth that was so radically different from Paul’s that he termed it “another Jesus” altogether.

In the same way, it is possible that the Qur’an and Islamic tradition present a picture of God so radically different from that of the Bible and Catholic tradition that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the proposition that they are the same Being in both traditions, apart from some minor creedal differences.

But wait a minute. Don’t Catholics have to believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, because the Second Vatican Council says so? The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church tells us that the “plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.” (Lumen Gentium 16)

It is almost more important to clarify what this text does not say than what it does. The first statement, that “the plan of salvation also includes” Muslims, has led some – mostly critics of the Church – to assert that the Council Fathers are saying that Muslims are saved, and thus need not be preached the Gospel, as they’ve already got just as much of a claim on Heaven as do Christians.

This is obviously false. This statement on Muslims comes as part of a larger passage that begins by speaking of “those who have not yet received the Gospel” and concludes by reaffirming “the command of the Lord, ‘Preach the Gospel to every creature.’” It speaks of the possibility of salvation for those who “through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.”

Clearly, then, Muslims figure in the “plan of salvation” not in the sense that they are saved as Muslims, that is, by means of Islamic observance, but insofar as they strive to be attentive to and to obey the authentic voice of the Creator whom they acknowledge and who speaks to them through the dictates of their conscience.

This suggests that a Muslim who refrains from suicide bombing because he understands that it is cold-blooded murder has a better chance to be saved, and is more clearly attuned to the promptings of the Creator within whose plan of salvation he finds himself, than does a Muslim who blows himself up in a crowd of infidels because the Qur’an promises a place in Paradise to those who “kill and are killed” for Allah (9:111).

The Conciliar statement also wisely adds the caveat, all too often ignored by the Church’s critics, that “Mohammedans” (Musulmanos) are “professing” to hold the faith of Abraham. Whether or not they actually hold it is arguable, but the Vatican Council is only noting that they claim for their faith that it is that of Abraham, without discussing whether or not Islam actually is an authentically Abrahamic faith.

Likewise widely misinterpreted, or at least given a weight that it was clearly never meant to bear, is the subsequent affirmation that Muslims “along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.” Many see in this also an assertion that the Gospel need not be preached to Muslims, or that they are already saved, for they adore the one and merciful God. Many Catholics, including writers of some prominence, have asserted that Vatican II, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church that quotes it, teach that Catholics and Muslims worship the same God, and then proceed as if this establishes more than it actually does, or as if it were obvious that the Council was thus forbidding a critical stance toward Islam or concern about Islamic supremacist advances in Europe and the U.S.

In this vein the great Catholic writer and apologist Peter Kreeft writes disapprovingly that “many Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, do not believe what the Church says about Islam (for example, in Vatican II and the new Catechism): that Allah is not another God, that we worship the same God.” He leaves unexplained, however, what he thinks that means exactly, or what responsibilities or courses of action it sets out for Catholics.

The Council document is actually saying perhaps less than Kreeft and others of like mind would wish it to be saying. In the first place it is clearly affirming that Muslims, like Christians, are monotheists, which is a rather commonplace observation that has been noted numerous times over the fourteen centuries of Islam’s existence. As far back as 1076, Pope St. Gregory VII wrote to Anzir, the king of Mauritania, that “we believe and confess one God, although in different ways.”

What it is asserting beyond that bare fact, if anything, can best be ascertained by considering the passage in light of those “different ways” to which Pope Gregory alluded. It is noteworthy that Pope Gregory doesn’t say that the one God that he and King Anzir both worship is the same God. All he says is that both he and Anzir worship one God; in other words, they’re both monotheists. And the Second Vatican Council is not actually making a definitive statement on that issue. It is saying that both Catholics and Muslims adore the one and merciful God, and while that clearly does indicate a certain commonality, there can be no doubt about one thing it certainly doesn’t mean: that Muslims and Catholics adore the same God in every particular, for Catholics do not believe that Muhammad was a prophet or the Qur’an is God’s Word, and Muslims do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God or the Savior of the world, or that God is Triune.

The same may be said of Jews, of course: they, along with Muslims, reject the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the divinity of Christ, and yet clearly Catholics and Jews worship the same God. This, however, is because Christianity began as a form of Judaism and is in a certain sense an extension of it, affirming faith in the same Old Testament Scriptures, the same prophets, and many points of belief.

These things cannot be said about Islam, which considers itself to be less an extension of Christianity than a rejection and correction of it, such that Muslims even reject the Old and New Testament Scriptures as corruptions.

In declaring that both Muslims and Catholics adore the one and merciful God, the Council obviously did not mean that Muslims and Catholics regard that God in exactly the same way, or that the differences were insignificant. The Council is silent on the question of whether or not the Muslims’ adoration is blind or informed. So what, then, is the Council actually saying?

Vatican II was a large-scale attempt to restore relationships that had been broken for centuries and build new bridges of trust where groups had been divided from the Church by centuries of mistrust, suspicion and outright conflict. Consequently it emphasized common ground rather than differences, unlike every ecumenical council that preceded it. No case, however, can be made that its statement about the shared adoration of the one and merciful God in any way mitigated the Church’s truth claim or sense of its own responsibility to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, any more than shared monotheism removes that responsibility in regard to Protestants or anyone else, for that responsibility is reiterated in the same passage.

It is not even certain that the Council is saying that Muslims and Catholics adore the same “one and merciful God.” Muslims certainly believe that their one and merciful God is the same One whom Christians (and Jews) worship, for the Qur’an tells them so (29:46). And whether they know it or not, the only God actually available to receive their adoration and hear their prayers is the Christian one. However, the differences in how Muslims and Catholics conceive of the one and merciful God lead to the possibility that while Muslims believe that they are worshiping the same God that Catholic worship, the teachings of Islam itself, despite the Qur’an’s insistence that Muslims worship the same God as do Christians and Jews, actually paints a picture of a God who is substantially different from the God of the Bible and the Catholic Faith.

It is noteworthy in this connection that the Council speaks of “Muslims” (Musulmanos), not “Islam,” adoring with Catholics the one and merciful God. It is a manifest fact that Muslim people believe that their God and the Christians’ God is the same. It is by no means as clear that the teachings of Islam itself about God offer a picture of the same Being who is delineated in orthodox Catholic theology. Although Arabic-speaking Christians generally use the word “Allah” for the God of the Bible – the same Arabic word used for the God of the Qur’an – this identity of name does not require that the two Beings referred to in each book are one and the same. It may be so, but it is not established on the basis of the Qur’an’s declaration, or of the identity in nomenclature.

In any case, this short passage from Lumen Gentium is burdened down by a weight of assumptions. When Kreeft says that “many Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, do not believe what the Church says about Islam (for example, in Vatican II and the new Catechism): that Allah is not another God, that we worship the same God,” he apparently assumes that to affirm that Muslims and Christians worship the same God establishes an important kinship between the two groups, and may even indicate that Islam in itself is a fundamentally good thing, such that Catholics should encourage Islamic faith and Muslim piety. Kreeft, in fact, espoused such a view in a debate with me.

These assumptions, however, do not proceed as a matter of necessity or inevitability from the Conciliar text. It would do no outrage to that text if the differences between the Islamic and Catholic views of the one and merciful God, and between Islam and Catholicism in general, were such that Catholics would not wish to encourage Muslim faith or fervor. One may therefore take a jaundiced view of the prospects for Catholic/Muslim cooperation and dialogue without dissenting from the Council’s teaching.

At the same time, even if the Council Fathers did mean to affirm that Catholics and Muslims worship the same God, this would have little significance for the contemporary ecclesiastical or political situation, in which Muslims are oppressing and killing Christian believers in several countries without regard for the Qur’an’s insistence that “our Allah and your Allah is one.” And as for the assumption that the Council meant to speak of a special kinship between Catholics and Muslims, Catholics have a moral obligation to be charitable to all people, regardless of whether or not they believe in the same God we do. Genuine charity includes a concern for justice.

The second Vatican II reference to Islam comes in the Declaration on Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate:

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.

Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.

While this is a bit more descriptive about Muslim belief than was Lumen Gentium, as it includes the Islamic classification of Jesus as a non-divine prophet and Islam’s respect for the Virgin Mary, it adds nothing in terms of substance to the Dogmatic Constitution’s statements about Muslims. Here again we see that the Muslim linkage of Islam to Abraham is presented not as fact, but as something Muslims affirm, or “take pleasure” in affirming. Here again we see that they adore the one, merciful God; in other words, that they’re monotheists.

That is all that Vatican II is really saying about Muslims: they’re monotheists, they say they belong to the religion of Abraham, and they revere Jesus, but not as the Son of God, and His Blessed Mother.

The tone is very different, but not much in terms of substance is added in earlier Church statements on Muslims and Islam. And as Pope Benedict XVI has reminded us, Vatican II is not a super-council that supersedes all previous Church teaching; rather, its teachings must be understood in light of tradition. When it comes to Islam, the consistent focus in earlier statements about Islam is generally not on what Muslims believe, but on Islam as a heresy, and on the hostility of Muslims to Christians and Christianity. In that vein, Pope Benedict XIV in 1754 reaffirmed an earlier prohibition on Albanian Catholics giving their children “Turkish or Mohammedan names” in baptism by pointing out that not even Protestants or Orthodox were stooping so low: “none of the schismatics and heretics has been rash enough to take a Mohammedan name, and unless your justice abounds more than theirs, you shall not enter the kingdom of God.”

Pope Callixtus III, in a somewhat similar spirit, in 1455 vowed to “exalt the true Faith, and to extirpate the diabolical sect of the reprobate and faithless Mahomet in the East.” Neither this statement nor that of Lumen Gentium rise to the level of a dogmatic definition, but is it possible for Islam to be a “diabolical sect” that at the same time adores the “one and merciful God”? Certainly, for it is always possible that their adoration of the one and merciful God may be wrongly directed, marred by wrong emphases and outright falsehoods.

Nonetheless, many Catholics would argue that the statements of Benedict XIV and Callixtus III (and others like them from other popes) reflect a very different age from our own, and that Vatican II’s statements reflect a more mature spirit, as well as the charity toward others that Christians should properly exhibit. And that may well be so, although it must be noted that even though they are only fifty years old, the statements of Vatican II on Islam reflect the outlook of a vanished age no less than do those of the earlier popes. For in the 1960s, secularism and Westernization were very much the order of the day in many areas of the Islamic world. It was, for example, unusual in Cairo in the 1960s to see a woman wearing a hijab, an Islamic headscarf mandated by Muhammad’s command that a woman when appearing in public should cover everything except her face and hands. Now, on the other hand, one may walk down the streets of the same city and be surprised to see a woman who is not so attired.

This change has not been solely external. The hijabs in Cairo are but one visible sign of a revolution that has swept the Islamic world, or more properly, a revival. Islamic values have been revived, including not only rigor in dress codes but also a hostility toward Western ideas and principles. The “Arab Spring” uprisings have led to a reassertion of the political aspects of Islam, as opposed to Western political models, all across the Middle East. Western ideas of democracy and pluralism that were fashionable in elite circles all over the Islamic world in the first half of the twentieth century have fallen into disrepute.

One consequence of all this is that the Islamic world that the Fathers of Vatican II had in mind is rapidly disappearing. The words of Vatican II on Muslims must be accorded the respect that all Church teaching merits, and obeyed to the degree that obedience is owed to all magisterial statements. These statements must be evaluated, however, within the context of their times. The documents of Vatican II are no less a product of their age than the statements of Benedict XIV and Callixtus III are a product of theirs. Just as the age of crusading knights has vanished, so also the age of a dominant secular West striding confidently into what it terms the “modern” age is rapidly vanishing. This is not to devalue or denigrate the Council in any way, but simply to see it as what it is, no more, no less: an enunciation of certain eternal truths, to be sure, but within the context of a number of unexamined and yet decisively influential core beliefs and assumptions about the nature of the world and of mankind.

Ultimately, while it may always be the Christian’s responsibility to reach out with respect and esteem to Muslims, the hostility that the Islamic world had always displayed toward Christendom was never less in evidence than it was in the 1960s, and so a statement of friendship was never more appropriate, either before or since. That situation does not prevail today, a fact that has a great many implications for the prospects for dialogue as well: Western-minded Muslims who have a favorable attitude toward the Catholic Church no longer have nearly the influence among their coreligionists that they once had, at least in the Islamic world.

That is not to say, however, that we have returned to the world of Benedict XIV and Callixtus III, when Catholics understood that Mohammedanism, as it was then popularly styled (to the indignation of Muslims themselves) was a heresy, steeped in falsehood and perhaps even diabolical, and dedicated to the destruction of the Church and the conversion or subjugation of Christians. We are centuries away, and separated by chasms of cultural assumptions, from the world in which it was even possible to think of one’s faith as having enemies and needing to be defended. Catholics of the modern age have long assumed that that world was gone forever, and there is some reason to believe that it is indeed.

But with Muslim persecution of Christians escalating worldwide, there is also considerable evidence that that rough old world is returning, and may never have been as far away as it seemed to be.


Robert Spencer is the author of several critically acclaimed books about Islam, including the New York Times bestsellers The Truth about Muhammad and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). He is a columnist for FrontPage Magazine and the director of Jihad Watch.

  • StellaMaris

    I think it is undeniably true that we become like the God we worship, that the more devoutly a person worships ‘God’ the more that person is conformed to God or ‘the god’ that he is worshipping.  What if people thought they were worshipping God, but in fact, they were worshipping the devil?  What would the devil’s religion look like?

    First, it would have to have as its enemy the Jews.  It would have to be implacably committed to the idea that the chosen people of God’s first covenants should be hated or destroyed.It would have to develop after the time of Christ, because it would be attempting to ‘undo’ the salvation of man.It would also have to appear after the time of Christ because the devil cannot create, only pervert: he’d have to have the ‘raw material’ of the highest possible moral laws or the summit of all religions to work with, so he could pervert it.  He’d need to be perverting God’s revelation, not man’s invention, so the new religion would have the appearance of revelation.
    It would be inimical to Christianity, wishing to ‘undo’ and eradicate Christ’s means of salvation, the Church.  As the enemy of Christianity, we should expect the devil to be quiescent when he is weak, and bold when he is strong.  Just as the devil has an easier time attacking an individual soul when the soul is far from the sacraments or when the conscience has become dull to the reality of sin, so we could expect the devil’s ‘anti-Christian’ religion to attack Christianity at a time when belief in the Blessed Sacrament was weak and when Christians had a duller sense of sin (when Catholics stop making use of confession; when Christians in general posit a ‘loving, understanding’ God who ‘wouldn’t send someone to hell’ for a serious sin; when Christians believe pretty much everyone will go to heaven no matter what, etc.). At the same time, if we saw a resurgence in belief in the Real Presence; if the people of God were rousing themselves and becoming more devout – if more people were committing to Christ – then the devil would be aroused, and we might see ‘his church’ persecuting more Christians.  The devil often becomes more active when his back is to the wall.  In sum, the threat of the devil’s religion is likely to be present – and more or less active – until the devil himself is finally defeated. So we should expect a church that over centuries has remained persistently ‘unconvertible,’ whose members traditionally do not leave and embrace Christianity.The devil’s religion would have to have some basic principles that are true or objectively good enough to attract people: the devil would know that the worship of pure evil would not attract well-meaning people who want to build a culture or find God.  And the devil would want to seduce righteous souls, not those who are already in his pocket.It would have to be self-sustaining: once people are in, it would have to be hard for them to get out.It would have to have principles that bind people to a culture, in case people lost belief in the religious tenets.  Also, the ‘culture’ would have to be strong because it’s easier to close churches and imprison clergy – to eradicate all public worship – than it is to stop people from speaking their native language, wearing their traditional dress, eating, drinking, and celebrating in time-honored ways.  If the religion itself became weak, the culture would still tie people to the faith, and the faith could always be revived in more auspicious times.  So the culture and the faith would have to be inextricably intertwined: to convert to the faith, you must convert to the culture.It would have to have strong codes of behavior and dress to make the members cohere as a culture, even if they didn’t cohere as a religion.  In this way, it might mimic Judaism, which is not only a set of beliefs, but has to do with family ties and a rich cultural inheritance. But it could not mimic Christianity in being able to accommodate anyone: people would have to convert to the culture, not just the beliefs. It would be a perversion of the old covenant of God’s chosen people, not an image of the new covenant embracing all mankind.  There would have to be certain people who are definitely ‘out’ – not only God’s chosen Jews, but others.  It could not be a ‘live and let live’ religion.The devil’s religion would have to have principles that allow for strong families, because the family is the building block of culture.  But the family unit would have to be ‘too’ strong, a stranglehold or a prison for some members – a perversion, not a mirror of the Trinity of love. So families would be held together by fear or force or subjection or family or community pressure; and romantic love or free, personal choice of spouse would be frowned upon or inimical to the devil’s religion. Since salvation came through woman (Mary), the devil’s religion would be anti-woman, in the sense that women would be seen as inferior to men spiritually – unable to achieve a high level of spirituality or contribute spiritual gifts to the faith.  It would have to see women as a means to an end, the most tried-and-true method being reducing women to sexual objects for men or a means for men to have children.  Women would have to be, in some sense, disposable.  So there would have to be polygamy or serial monogamy and divorce, and women would have no choice of husband, few or no civil rights in the culture, and would be at the disposal of men (fathers, husbands, brothers) rather than being sovereign in themselves.It would have to allow for the disposal of children in one way or another, while appearing pro-life; for example, by parents having the power of life and death over their children.  It would have to be able to build and sustain a culture, so there would have to be future generations, but at some level the children would be seen as objects: to be married off for the profit of the family; to be killed for disgracing the family; or to be sacrificed to the god of the religion as ‘martyrs’ to the religion in deliberate acts of suicide.It would advocate killing: a culture of life for itself and death for those who do not bend to its claims.It would not respect free will or freedom of conscience, but demand absolute obedience in all matters.  It would not appreciate the world, either by being too ascetic or by rejecting or suppressing enjoyment of the physical world: ‘incarnationalism’ and all that goes with it (such as concern for the environment and gentle care of animals) would be inimical to the devil’s religion.It would fail to image God by failing to be creative: the practitioners would rarely be inventors, plastic or visual artists, dramatists or actors.  It would not have a reputation for great imagination in literary works; it would not contribute great art or institutions (like hospitals or the university) to the world, but only borrow from the creativity of others.  The devil cannot create, so he would not be able to come up with a religion that encouraged creativity (though he would not be able to change man’s nature, so there would inevitably be some people – perhaps rich or powerful ones or the ones of weaker belief – who could indulge in creativity, invention, art or intellectual speculation).  Because the devil cannot create, his religion – and its culture – would have to depend upon the cultures around it for new technologies.  However, since this religion would naturally be set against all outside it, adherents of the devil’s religion would use the technology of others against them.  When weak, the religion would be ‘peaceful,’ biding its time until it could use the education, technology, tactics and values of the surrounding culture against that culture.  Having built up its power by gleaning strength it does not have on its own, and taking over technologies it cannot invent, the devil’s religion would be ready to go on the offensive. This is entirely in keeping with how the devil himself is constrained in his works: weak in himself, but using and perverting the good creation of God against the devil’s enemies – mankind, particularly people of God’s covenants.The devil cannot make anything living or organic, so doctrine would be fixed, and unable to develop as the world changed; the essential dogmas would not expand to encompass new moral problems and new social situations as man’s horizons and possibilities expand, so man would have to remain in some sense ‘backward’ – socially, culturally, technologically – in order to practice this religion in the highest degree without transgressing the tenets.  In other words, look for culture that has trouble adapting to new forms of government or new ways of living.  The only ‘use’ the devil’s religion would have for the advancements of godly cultures and faiths would be to use those advancements against the godly.The devil’s religion would be inimical to reason.  It would logically contradict itself.  The devil lives in logical contradiction by being a creature who rejects his creaturely status; similarly his religion would be by its nature logically contradictory and people steeped in it would be unprepared or unwilling or forbidden by the tenets of the religion to examine logical contradictions inherent in the faith.  Since human beings are by nature rational, when members of the devil’s religion confronted logical contradictions in the faith, they would experience unbearable cognitive dissonance – unable both to endure living in the falsehood, or to acknowledge that they are living by a falsehood.  Thus we could expect a tendency to blind, unexamined faith and charismatic leaders who could command or inspire some kind of action that would confirm the faith and release the tension of the cognitive dissonance.  Simply, look for a tendency toward violent reactions to any real or perceived threat to the religion. The devils’ religion would be defeated by the woman who is clothed with the sun and crushing a serpent under her heel.  This is why  it would fear and repress women.  I can’t go along with the idea that Muslims worship the same God we do. I’m convinced that unbeknownst to themselves, they worship a demon.  But the people themselves are not at fault for being brought up in a faith that their ancestors may have been forcibly converted to on pain of death.  God wants their conversion.  He has it all mapped out.  And I think He’s given us a clue in Fatima.  He’s giving us a clue as big as the sky in Mary herself, such a big clue we tend to overlook it: it is through her that salvation came into the world, and it will be through her – in some way we can’t possibly imagine – that salvation (Christ) will come to Islam.

    • Donnabethell

      StellaMaris, you shine!

    • Brad

      StellaMaris, brava, bravissima! You have done your Patroness great credit. 

      I would only add that we must recall two things: that the Church (CCC 841) very carefully navigates the Muslims’ claim that they stem from Abraham: “they profess” may not, after all, mean that they do, in fact, hold the faith of Abraham (is Allah indeed the God of Abraham?) nor does their claim on his patrimony guarantees his patrimony.  But this is all but taken for granted now, by the world.  Secondly, we must recall that Mohamed tamed his people with a new religion that looks positively pollyanna next to the desert shamanism and animism that it replaced in their hearts: a djinn in every stone and no monotheism in sight.  In your excellent comment, we see how, without Christ or the Holy Spirit (or, even, for the old Jews, the Father Himself), man is left to his own devices and is easily fooled by the demon: the rank paganism of the desert is replaced by the monotheism of Mohamed, but the latter in itself could be a trick.  Thus the question: what is worse: man groping his way alone or man accepting food that could be poisoned?

    • Slobo

      May Our Lord And Savior Jesus Christ Bless You Faithful Servant! AMEN!

    • Interested3436

      Good job, StellaMaris!

    • Mrs. Rene O’Riordan

       StellaMaris – what you have written is so brilliant – can I quote you? There are passages there in your piece that so resonate with my experience in dealing with muslims, especially their tendency to turn on me and to start insulting me. It’s good to keep an eye on where that is all coming from and to realize we are battling “not with flesh and blood..” and also the dependency on Our Lady being in this battle with us. Oh also Robert thanks for clearing all that up about the Church’s teaching on islam – I had begun to think I was going to have to explain to B16 what was going on with our muslim friends, but of course he is on the ball, but I do think Catholics need to be made more aware. – Rene

      • StellaMaris

        Dear Mrs. O’Riordan, 
        You may quote, of course: I suppose anything on the Internet automatically has no copyright.  I wrote that several years ago, and only showed it to a few friends because often when I’m rather convinced of a thing, I have many doubts about it.  I have no personal experience with Muslims, only what I have read.  It is interesting to read that what I have concluded resonates with your personal experience.

    • Cmatt

      unbeknownst to themselves, they worship a demon

      That’s a bit strong in an otherwise great piece.  I would rather put it as unbeknownst to them, they worship a god created by a demon.  They still think they worship God; the problem is that this god is so distorted as to be unrecongizable as God.

    • voxcantor

      Stella Maris, would you write me at; I would like permission to publish this on my blog.

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour

    If one believes that God is the Creator – the uncaused first cause and prime mover – then, it follows logically that His being is identical with His essence, which is simply pure and endless being.

    There can no more be two logically coherent but inconsistent concepts of the Creator, than there can be two inconsistent concepts of a circle.

    It follows that Jews, Christians and Muslims believe in the same God

    • Donnabethell

      It is true that there cannot be two Supreme Creators of all things, two First Causes. But that does not mean that the instigator of Islam is the Supreme Creator. Of course he said he was, but by his fruits you will know him. He is the Great Deceiver, the Father of All Lies. Once past bare monotheism, the Islamic and Judeo-Christian understandings of God are completely divergent. And because theology determines anthropology, the respective views of man, especially in the crucial male-female relationship, are very different.

      And is it logical that the God of Jesus Christ would establish a new religion that denies the divinity of Jesus and fights implacably for the abasement or destruction of Christians and Jews? StellaMaris gets it right.

    • Mcpruden

      The Allah that muslims believe in is so powerful, he even has the power to contradict himself. 

    • “There can no more be two logically coherent but inconsistent concepts of
      the Creator, than there can be two inconsistent concepts of a circle.”

      This is a laughable statement, and the obvious response is that most clear-thinking Christians don’t consider Islam to have a logically coherent or a consistent concept of
      the Creator. Allah can create a square circle, God cannot. Western religion accepts a law of non-contradiction, an Eastern religion like Islam does not.

      • Donnabethell

        The statement as it stands is correct. The problem is what you point out: the Islamic concept of God is not logically coherent, especially as held by the dominant Sunni sect. That is why Pope Benedict XVI in his Regensburg address argued that true religion must proceed from Logos–rationality. This precludes using force and violence to advance religion. Some Muslims objected to being called violent and burned down some churches and killed a nun to make their point.

    • RufusChoate

      Circular logic doesn’t work even for you.   Less verbose more logic.  You might want to investigate the Nicene Creed for Clarity. Muslim are Monotheists and deny the Trinity which I understand to be the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit.

      • Michael Paterson-Seymour

        But that would imply that Jews and Christians worship different gods, which no one has ever claimed

        • RufusChoate

          Yikes, you display your unhealthy ignorance with every post. Christians believe in this novel concept of revelation where God revealed himself over the last 6000 years first to Israel then to the world.

          Islam is post Revelation i.e. After Christ. It is an invented creed cobbled together from Christianity and Judaism by a violent Sociopath to advance his lust for power and little else.

          • Michael Paterson-Seymour

            As Blessed John Henry Newman says, “.  And since this everlasting and unchangeable quiescence is the simplest and truest notion we can obtain of the Deity, it seems to follow, that strictly speaking, all those so-called Economies or dispensations, which display His character in action, are but condescensions to the infirmity and peculiarity of our minds, shadowy representations of realities which are incomprehensible to creatures such as ourselves, who estimate everything by the rule of association and
            arrangement, by the notion of a purpose and plan, object and means, parts and whole.  What, for instance, is the
            revelation of general moral laws, their infringement, their tedious victory, the endurance of the wicked, and the “winking at the times of ignorance,” but an “Economia” of greater truths untold, the best practical communication of them which our minds in their present state will admit?”

            So Revelation supplements, but does not supersede natural reason

            • RufusChoate

              Interesting digression but it is unclear what this has to do with your contention that Islam worships the same God as  Christianity and Judaism. Is the Islamic Revelation through Muhammad that denies the Divinity of Christ valid? 

              Natural reason and historical examination indicate that Islam is a violent expansionistic criminal conspiracy masquerading as a Religion which from its creation it was only about blood, vengeance and looting its prosperous neighbors.

              • strangeboy

                yes and what about your peaceful religion that all bloody world wars are started by your christians or catholics ?? ? if you are so called followers of your jessus than why you dont learn to forgive ? why you are keep killing peoples in Afghanistan, iraq and Pakistan ? ? why you drink wine or eat pork if it clearly state in your bible not to do so ? ? you guys are mentally retired but you know the problem is that you idiots can say whatever you want to islam and quran but we cant say anything to bible and jessus cause we respect him …… you really need a mental treatment before writing a statement please check out the world facts

                • m parker

                  Muslims are taught that they are to “respect” Jesus, but this is only the Islamic Jesus, who bears no resemblance to the Bible Jesus. In any case, Jesus is not the Muslim role model, so any “respect” afforded is meaningless.
                  btw if you want to respect the Jesus of the Bible, the true Jesus that is, it is highly recommended for you to read more about Him. Try the New Testament, if nothing else it will help you to calm down your temper.

        • avalpert

          As a Jew I certainly will claim that the god Christians worship in Jesus is not the God who we worship – for a Jew, worshiping the Christian god is certainly idolatry, for a gentile it is debatable.

          • msmischief

             I assure you that Jesus is not, in fact, a graven image.

            And it can not possibly be idolatry for one and not for the other.

            • avalpert

              There is more to idolatry than graven images. And I assure you , worshiping a man as a god qualifies.

              And yes, it can be idolatry for one and not the other since halacha only applies to Jews, the laws applicable to gentiles (based on the noachide laws) are different. That said, there is disagreement in the responsa (essentially Jewish legal briefs) as to whether it is idolatry for gentiles. Not to go to far down the weeds but it turns on whether one sees it as shituf or pure poltehism.

              Bottom line, from a Jewish perspective – definitely different gods.

              • msmischief

                 That I am not bound to eat kosher does not make my meals kosher.

                As for worshipping false gods, which is what you are abusing idolatry to mean, how on earth can a god become true because of the nature of the worshipper?  At most you can say that if Jesus really wasn’t God, Gentiles are nevertheless excused because they were mistaken.  But that permission can’t possibly be absolute because there is the possibilty that a Gentile could know better and do it anyway.  And even if he didn’t know better, he would still, in fact, be worshipping a false god.

                • avalpert

                  See you just don’t get it. Your meals are in fact kosher for you – or more accurately not Treif unless you are eating flesh taken from a living animal which is prohibited to gentiles by the seven laws of noah. It is not forbidden to you, it is to Jews. 

                  The prohibitions that derive from ‘lo yeyeh lecha elohim acherim’ (you shall not have other gods before me – the first commandment) do not apply to gentiles. Those prohibitions are avodah zarah – properly translated as idolatry or strange worship – not worshiping false gods as you say. The prohibitions of idolatry for gentiles are derived from the seven laws of noah – and that is where shituf comes in. Shituf is a category of worship that isn’t  considered monotheism by Jews (and prohibited to them) but not considered polytheism either and thus not a violation of idolatry under the seven laws of noah. Whether Christianity is shituf or not is a debate with Jewish legal writing. This isn’t excusing you because you are mistaken, it is because the nature of the worship itself isn’t idolatry under the limited restriction places on gentiles.

          • chi

             And this is where Judaism breaks down because it has refused to make a critical analysis of the Old Testament before them before coming to settle for a decision on the Nature of Jesus Christ regarding His Deity.

            • avalpert

              And this is where Christianity breaks down because it jumped straight into idolatry deifying a human being – no better than the golden calf. Then they confuse pagan mythology which they turn into their theology for ‘critical analysis’ of the Bible (Tanach) when in fact Judaism has been doing true critical analysis of the bible for its entire history and used as a real framework for God’s law.

        • m parker

          I am one of the growing numbers that do claim the Islamic god is not the Bible God, because the Quran and Sunnah both prove them not to be.

    •  Your argument is completely unsound on both theological and philosophical grounds.  Please take a few philosophy courses.

    • m parker

      “It follows that Jews, Christians and Muslims believe in the same God”
      No,they don’t. It is made to appear they do, but in reality they do not.
      The origins of the Islamic god are pagan,Mohammed just used what was familiar to him and incorporated it all into his new invention. Mohammed was a pagan Arabian, who worshipped at the Kaaba with the rest of his tribe, he just demoted his tribal god,Hubal,and elevated the already known “creator god”Allah,i.e.Al Ilah (the god).

  • sgfan

    Allah is a figment of a very deranged man. He is  NOT God who created the heavens and the earth.  Killing in the name of Allah is NOT what a loving God would do. God loves mankind and is not out to kill those who refuse his lordship. Jesus, God’s son, came to give us life abundantly but He will NOT force himself on anyone. He wants devotion to him out of willful submission to His will.

  • poetcomic1

       Kill non believers on earth to spend eternity in a great Whorehouse in the Sky.  This is not MY religion and it is not my God.  This is a true Satanic inversion. 

  • Pargontwin

    “…may even be diabolical…”  I have been saying something to that effect for years.  According to a veteran (I forget his name) of the war in Afghanistan, one who specialized in the customs and culture of that region, the strictest interpretation of sharia law allows a man to marry a girl when she is still an infant, and to consummate the marriage when she is as young as nine years.  Then add to that what we know about the devil:  that he bears a special hatred of women in general, and of purity and innocence in particular, because of the Virgin Mary.  The way that the radically traditionalist version of Islam treats its women has caused me to sum it up as, “The word ‘Allah’ may mean ‘God,’ but given their beliefs, I sometimes wonder just *who* is being addressed.

    • Nationalbest

      Let’s stop mincing words. Islam is the spawn of the Devil. They are anti-Christ.

    • Flan

      You’re talking about customs in a very primitive part of the world, customs that have been followed in the West as well.  Read St. Augustine’s life story sometime.  Engagements of infants still occur, even among Christians, where arranged marriage is common practice.  Of course, Western canon law eventually moved the age of marriage up to 14 for girls, but there was a time when menstruation marked the age at which a girl became eligible to consummate marriage, which meant a nine year old might meet the standard.

      • m parker

        It is agreed that Western society has left behind some customs that are damaging to society, because we in the West have the freedom of conscience to do so.Our culture is built on values that allow for reasoned argument, leading to the betterment of society through progress, and academic achievement.Conversely, in Islamic society no such freedom exists, as Muslims are forever tied within a 7th century Arabian culture, unable to question their faith, as it is said to be the literal, eternal unreformable words from Allah,for the benefit of mankind.

        Our questioning culture then, has lead to making laws which make for a better society, case in point, raising the age of consent, which allows girls to be married when more mature in mind and body. This is not so within Islam, the role model of which was betrothed to a child of six, and married her at age nine. This “set in stone” for all Muslim men, a pattern of conduct, still practiced throughout the Middle East,which cannot be argued against, under pain of death.,(you are criticising the actions of Mohammed, taken as blasphemous) Herein lies yet another chasm of a difference, between Western/ Christian societies, and the Islamic one, proving once again that the God of the Christian, is not the god of the Muslim.

  • fuelrod

    The invasion and occupation of Iraq and later Afghanistan–by “Christian” USA has accounted for what–200,000? 300,000? civilian deaths, almost exclusively Muslims.  Who is truly the persecutor here and who is the persecuted?  

    Don’t forget, the Christian diaspora from Iraq since 2003 has been a *direct* result of the American occupation.  Prior to the Bush/Cheney invasion, Christians fared considerably better in Iraq than they have since. 

    • RufusChoate

      The truth will be difficult for you but the Sunni minority rule of Saddam Hussein required the cultivation of minorities like Christians and Kurds as power sharers in his regime to offset the Shiite majority. 

      What you see in addition to Iraq, Lebanon , Libya, Sudan and Egypt all of who suffered no American invasion is Islam in all its glorious oppression. 

      You’re monomaniacal focus on American responsibility for the evil acts of others strikes me as the standard Leftist’s paternalistic condescension that the little brown folk of the Middle East are children without moral responsibility and the big mean European creates their evil deeds.


    • Donnabethell

      Please don’t blame the Iraq War on Christians. Many of us opposed it and Pope John Paul II begged President Bush not to do it.

    • The Leftish website documents as much as possible all the civilian deaths in the Iraq war.  That website was certainly against the Iraq war.  Which makes it all the more impressive that their own documentation, when you look at the details, shows that literally over 99% of civilian casualties were due to Shia and Sunni indiscriminately massacring each other, “insurgents” and jihadists blowing themselves up in crowds, firing indiscriminately on crowds, and an almost absolute disregard for civilian life on the part of the Iraqi jihadist insurgency.

  •  Spencer is right on, as always, and very much in line with church teaching.

  • Jccaacon

    What this article supports is the Society of St Pius long time conviction that some of the council documents can be vague and can be interpreted in ways that lead to error.

    • Fred

      You are exactly right.   If anyone reads V II documents and compares their wishy-washy language with the crisp, clear language of the Church in the first third of the 20th century, they will be astonished.

      The older documents leave no doubt where the Church stood.  V II documents are a masterpiece of liberal double-speak

      SSPX is right to hang tough.   A thorough ‘clarification’ of V II is in order.

      • susan

        “The older documents leave no doubt where the Church stood.  V II documents are a masterpiece of liberal double-speak”

        EXACTLY RIGHT…kinda like the USCCB’s ‘Faithful Citizenship Voter’s Guide’, eh?

      • Jay E.

         Yeah great, never mind the fact that this is the Magisterium teaching… WE don’t like what V II says, so WE’RE not going to believe it. I sometimes wonder who’s the real liberal here.

    • Howard Richards

      I suppose you would make the same comments about the Bible — that it is vague and can be interpreted in ways that lead to error.  After all, look at how many Protestant denominations have been constructed from just such interpretations, to say nothing of para-Christian groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

      Maybe SSPX should hold off on endorsing the Bible, too.

  • Jack Isaacks

    Do Christians and Mahometans (and Jews, for that matter) all worship the same deity?

    Read this article and then decide for yourselves.


    What you say about Islam can also be said about Christianity.  Even people within the Church of Christ (that is, the Church of all of the Baptized in Christ) do not all agree on how God is to be defined and what is required for Salvation.  Some Christians do not even understand or believe the ramifications of the recalcitrant state of mortal sin nor in the authority of the Pope and the Magisterium.  They think they are saved as long as they say they believe in Jesus Christ – meaning no works are required of them.  Some don’t believe in the Sacraments.   Look for yourself.  You condemn Islam as following a “no-god” yet you don’t see our own, internal state? 

    There must be an authentic, authoritative element within Islam which is similar to the Catholic Church within Christianity – that element which is on target with us in general.  We should see them, in some respects, like we see our separated bretheren, as capable of worshipping the same God, but perhaps off target.

    Please have faith in the Holy Spirit who guides the Magisterium.  Please stop trying to create your own version of reality (which is probably unreality since you do not speak or write with the authority of the Holy Spirit.) 

    • m parker

      “There must be an authentic, authoritative element within Islam which is similar to the Catholic Church within Christianity”
      There is, it comes in the form of its role model, who was a false prophet.

      Muslims are our brothers/sisters in humanity only, not in faith, as they do not worship the same god, the origns of which lie in paganism.

  • pamelanak

    At the risk of causing a Lenten firestorm, I venture to note that modern Judaism has very little in common with traditional Chrisitanity either although we (meaning Chrisitians) confess to worshipping the same God. Many orthodox jews wouldnt agree  and seem to  very much despise Christianity and Christians in general.  This is usually  the point that all the nasty names, snarks and assumptions of superiority and pure hatred  bubble to the surface and on to the screen, precluding rational discussion. One hopes this might be different.
    A people’s notions of God can be wildly divergent, disagreeable  and abhorrent to other believers and yet still hold a common thread. I think of the “Feet Washing Prods” vrs “Snake Handling Prods” vrs  “Dunkers” vrs “Sprinklers” vrs “John Hagge-ites” vrs “Mormans”  and on and on. I think the same could be said of Christianity, Judaism and Islam although I listen to my betters on points of theology. But what my betters tell me , in this instance , has been a muddle since Vat II. For instance we were always encouraged to pray for all nonbelievers, including the Jewish people until that prayer was removed –due to  jewish protest!  Doesnt make any sense to me, nor does the Pope appearing to pray with pagans in a public fashion or pausing for Muslim prayers during his Mass in the Holy Land. Nothing simple anymore.

  • This is a great piece of writing, and really helps to resolve some of the more troubling questions I’ve struggled with in understanding what the Church really meant about Islam during Vatican II.

  • Fastiggi Robert

    This is an interesting article by Robert Spencer. I especially appreciate his points about the different cultural setting of the 1960s with respect to Islam. I would like to offer a few comments. First, it is Catholic dogma that the “one and true God, our Creator and Lord (Deum unum et verum, creatorem et Dominum nostrum)” can be known with certainty through the natural light of human reason (Vatican I, Dei Filius, Denz.-H, 3026). So, to say that the Catholics and Muslim both believe in the “one and true God” is not to claim that the Qur’an is divinely revealed. It is, though, an acknowledgement that both Catholics and Muslims believe that there is one, almighty Creator.  Second, to believe in the  same God does not mean an equally correct comprehension of Him. It is possible to believe in the same God while coming to very different conclusions about what accords with His will. For example, when the high priest accuses Jesus of blasphemyand worthy of death (Mk 14: 64-65), he manifests an incorrect understanding of the one God who is present before him in the Person of the Incarnate Word. Yet such an error on the part of the high priest would not lead us to conclude that he does not worship the same God. Instead, it shows that he has an inadequate understanding of the  one, true God.  So, it seems possible to claim that, on one level, Catholics and Muslims worship the same God while admitting that, in many other respects, the way Catholics and Muslims conceive of God is not the same.

    Finally, it should be noted that after Vatican II, Blessed John Paul II explicitly stated that Catholics and Muslims worship the same God. On August 19, 1985, speaking to Muslim youth in Casablanca, Morocco, he said:

    “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. (In the French original: Nous croyons au même Dieu, le Dieu unique, le Dieu vivant, le Dieu qui crée les mondes et porte ses créatures à leur perfection).”

    This statement, of course, is not a dogmatic pronouncement, and it must be understood within its proper context. It does show, however, that those who say that (at least on one level) Catholics and Muslims worship the same God have the words of a recent Pontiff to provide them some support.


    Robert Fastiggi, Ph.D. Professor of Systematic Theology, Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit, Michigan

    • Naresh Krishnamoorti

      The act of worship and the act of belief are two separate acts, one natural the other supernatural.  These distinctions need to be understood.

      • Fastiggi Robert

        Thank you for your comment. Both belief and worship can have natural and/or supernatural elements depending on the context. See the CDF’s declaration, Dominus Iesus of the year 2000 (no.21), which notes that “some prayers and rituals of other religions” may serve as a “preparation for the Gospel.”

        • Naresh Krishnamoorti

          My reference was to St. Thomas (II-IIae, Q. 81, a. 5), wherein he explains that anyone can worship the true God who attributes to Him qualities that are the conclusions of rightly-ordered natural reason alone.  This is because the act of worship is part of the natural virtue of justice.  On the other hand, in order to believe in the true God, we need to know Him as He has revealed Himself to us, through supernatural faith. While Moslems and Catholics can worship the same God, they don’t believe in the same God.

          • Fastiggi Robert

            Thank you for this response. I think St. Thomas in this passage is understanding belief as equivalent to supernatural faith. “Belief,” though, can be understood in a more general way, i.e. as a response of the will to what one knows about God. So, when Bl. John Paul II said to Muslim youth in 1985, “We believe in the same God,” I don’t think he was contradicting St. Thomas. Moreover, according to St. Thomas himself (ST II-II Q. 10, a. 12) the teaching of the Church has precedence over the teaching of any individual doctor of the Church. So, we should judge St. Thomas by the teaching of the Church  not vice versa.

    • Michael Paterson-Seymour

      I agree completely

    • m parker

      I am afraid this is not the case. Catholics and Muslims do not worship the same God.
      First, the Islamic Allah finds its origins in pre Islamic pagan Arabia.
      Second Mohammed was a false prophet.
      Third, the Quran and Sunnah both prove that Islam is nothing more than a plaguerisation of the Bible, and other religions known about in Mohammed’s time.
      Islam is based on deceit and lies, its about time the Catholic Church recognised this fact, and stood true to its own teachings,by telling the truth.

  • mollysdad

    Muslims affirm of the God they worship that He is self-existent, and so they are not on that account to be found guilty of idolatry.

    Sunni Muslims, however, affirm of the Qur’an that it is uncreated, and are on that point guilty of blasphemy and idolatry.

  • Naresh Krishnamoorti

    St. Thomas Aquinas says, or implies, that Moslems and Catholics worship the same God (II-IIae, Q. 81, a. 5). 

    Why?  Because the act of worship is part of the natural virtue of justice, which does not require supernatural grace.  To worship God, it is necessary only to know WHAT God is, not WHO He is.  If a person knows WHAT God is by attributing to Him qualities that are the conclusions of natural reason alone, that is, that He is One, all-holy, all-powerful, all-knowing, etc, then that person can worship God, because he knows WHAT God is.

    From this, it should be apparent that the Moslems and the Catholics worship the same God.  Of course, it’s easier to understand this fact through the eyes of Avicenna and Al-Farabi, than through the eyes of a suicide bomber.

    St. Thomas goes on to say that in order to BELIEVE in God, we need to know WHO God is, not merely WHAT he is; that is, we need supernatural faith, from which arises knowledge of the Trinity, and so forth.

    From this it is clear that the Moslems and the Catholics DO NOT BELIEVE in the same God; but this is not to say that they do not worship and adore the same God.

    • Howard Richards

       He certainly does not say that Catholics and Muslims worship the same God; he does not mention any other religion.  The closest he comes to addressing the issue in that article is in the statement, “And it is possible to have too much in matters pertaining to the Divine worship, not as regards the circumstance of quantity, but as regards other circumstances, as when Divine worship is paid to whom it is not due, or when it is not due, or unduly in respect of some other circumstance.”

      The whole question here is whether Islam is “worship paid to whom it is not due”.  Since such is possible, the mere fact that they are monotheists gives them no better claim than Akhenaten, the pagan solar monotheists of the late Roman Empire, or certain Hindus.

      • Naresh Krishnamoorti

        Anyone who ascribes to God those transcendental qualities that can be ascribed to Him from natural reason alone (His Unity, Immutability, Omnipotence, Omniscience, etc.) can worship the True God.  This is because “worship” is a natural act, not a supernatural act. 

    • m parker

      “To worship God, it is necessary only to know WHAT God is, not WHO He is”.
      Once you know the origins of the Islamic god, you know for sure it is not the God of the Bible.
      The Islamic god finds its origins in Pagan Arabia.
      Islam is based on lies and deceit. It is only relatively recent, mainly because of the actions of Muslims,that this fact has at last been exposed. We Christians need to be very aware to distinguish facts from fiction, being touted in the name of this bogus belief system.
      More research will uncover the much needed facts.

  • Jay E.

    Lumen Gentium, as you say, claims this: “In the first place amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who,
    professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and
    merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.” So, in the years since Vatican II have the Muslims stopped worshiping the same God? Are they all now a totally different sort of Muslim? Is there a new Islam that replaced the old Islam the Council Fathers were speaking of? I hardly think so. So I stand with what the Council says: we adore the one and merciful God. So I think Peter Kreeft is entirely right. 

    • Jay,
      Mr. Spencer covered this point in the article.  Lumen Gentium says that Muhammedean are “PROFESSING to hold the faith of Abraham”.  It doesn’t say that they are ACTUALLY holding the faith of Abraham.  

      I can profess to be the quarterback of the NY Giants, but don’t go looking for me on TV on Sunday.

      • F M

        But your response doesn’t address the second part of his point: “along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.”

        Is there another God who will judge mankind on the last day other than the One, True God?

  • Steve from Long Island

    Here is what St. John says about this.  He is more of an authority than anyone since he knew Jesus.  From his First Letter, chapter 2: [21] I have not written to you as to them that know not the truth, but as to them that know it: and that no lie is of the truth. [22] Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son. [23] Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also. [24] As for you, let that which you have heard from the beginning, abide in you. If that abide in you, which you have heard from the beginning, you also shall abide in the Son, and in the Father. [25] And this is the promise which he hath promised us, life everlasting.

    And Jesus tells us that false prophets will come and we are to judge them by their fruits.  The fruits of Mohammedans have been on display for 1500 years.  And this is still a debate?  I know which god they worship.  But I also think that individual mohommedans don’t know any better and may genuinely believe that they worship God the Father. 

  • Howard Kainz

    It seems to me the Vatican II in its laudable efforts at ecumenism, went too far.  The important thing for Christian unity is to reconcile with Protestants and Orthodox.  After that is done, mental gymnastics for uniting with a religion that is bent on destroying or subjugating Christians and Jews and all “non-believers” may be less tortuous.  If the devil wanted to create a religion, what would it be like?  For one thing, it would be bent on the destruction or subjugation of Christians and Jews who do not convert. And it would have no problem with attaining its ends through violence and lying, and creating an impersonal God who hates unbelievers and is merciful and forgiving to believers.

  • If there is one Creator, as most of us believe, than it is obvious that Muslims worship the same God as Christians.  That does not mean they properly understand the Creator so it is their understanding/view that is in error.  We, as Christians have to remember that we too have our individual understanding/view and that our view can be in error.

    Jesus warned us of this and gave us a guide when he said in John 14:6
    “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

    John 14:7-14 provides more detail and a specific promise.

    • m parker

      The “creator god” of the Muslim, is the one that was recognised by the originator of Islam,i.e.Mohammed,who was a false prophet.
      The only gods Mohammed knew anything about was the pagan moon god Hubal,and the “greatest (“creator”) god” of the Kaaba called Allah,worshipped by Mohammed and his tribe, along with his fellow pagans

  • pamelanak

    The above post refers to the one by Jack Issacs which was posted as a reply to him and ended up where it currently is. The link is :

  • pamelanak

    Thank you for posting this as it makes more sense of the subject than most anything I’ve seen in quite a while…and in simple language too. I cant see how it differs from what the RC Church has always taught about all non christian religions….uh until VatII came along  and muddied the topical waters .

  • Elcid

    islam claims Christ is a prophet and not the son of God, so that would make him a false prophet since he claimed to be the son of God, so islam refutes itself by claiming a false prophet, also why would the same God send his archangel once to a virgin to announce that she would give birth to the son of God but six hundred years later send the same archangel to muhammad and tell him to proclaim a new religion and denied the divinity of Christ.

  • msmischief

    An interesting analysis of whether Muslims pray to God:

  • tz1

    Every heretic, Pelagius, Arius, etc. also worshiped the same God,but had things critically wrong with doctrine.  Muslims are more like heretics – they revere Mary and Jesus, but don’t hold the correct beliefs.  Today, Mormons (e.g. Romney) and Jehovah’s Witnesses would be in the same category.

    One big difference -4% of catholics follow the church teaching on contraception.  50% are divorced – a murder-suicide, a dishonor killing.  only 25% attend weekly mass.  How many Muslims attend Mosque weekly and do pray 5 times a day and have large families and don’t dress for show?  I do notthink we will have temporal or eternal victories from the moral low-ground.

  • Daniel

    An important aspect is that the council uses the phrase “unum deum”, ie Christians and Muslims believe “in one God”, rather than “in the one God”. There is no definite article in the Latin, official version. The English translation unfortunately colours our understanding of the text to mean more than the latin text does.

  • Pingback: Do Catholics and Muslims worship the same God? - Christian Forums()

  • Robert Spencer wrote:
    “…[Kreeft] apparently assumes that to affirm that Muslims and Christians worship the same God establishes an important kinship between the two groups, and may even indicate that Islam in itself is a fundamentally good thing, such that Catholics should encourage Islamic faith and Muslim piety. Kreeft, in fact, espoused such a view in a debate with me.”

    Though Kreeft espoused such a view toward the beginning and during the course of the debate (which I’ve watched and which is probably still accessible on youtube), I think Kreeft might have changed his perspective by the end of the debate, when he seemed to yield to Spencer the whole argument of the debate.   


    God is Infinite, yet here we are trying to define Him in human terms.  We know OF God through the Scriptures.  But how can we say we KNOW God directly?  How can Christian, Jew or Muslim claim to KNOW all of God as He totally IS and clearly if we are finite and He is Infinite?  We each know God based upon our own Scriptures and Tradition; but I am confident that Christian Scripture and Tradition is authoritative.

    Perhaps we err when trying to contain God within His own Creation.  God contains Himself and gives Himself to us in ways we can understand (but still find to be completely mysterious).

    Perhaps we will all spend eternity getting to know God better if we are His friends.

  • Core Islamic texts disagree with the Bible:  human beings are not made in the image of God.

    For example, in Qur’an Chapter 42, Verse 11:

    “The Creator of the heavens and the earth. He hath made for you pairs of yourselves, and of the cattle also pairs, whereby He multiplieth you. Naught is as His likeness; and He is the Hearer, the Seer.”

    In the Judeo-Christian conception, human beings, made in God’s likeness, are children of God the Father.  In the Qur’an, Allah never calls himself “Father,” and in several places denies He has any sons or daughters. (See, e.g., Qur’an 112:3)  Rather, human beings are only Allah’s servants or slaves. “I have only created jinns and men that they may serve me.”  (Qur’an 51:56)  

    Even if both theologies were pure fantasy, the Islamic one leads to authoritarian social outcomes, whereas the Judeo-Christian one tends, over the long run, toward freedom.


      But the Magisterium of the Catholic Church would interpret the Koran differently than you just did.  Did not Jesus say that He did not come to be served but to serve?  And are we not to follow His example and also serve?  Did not Jesus teach us how to be?  When you love someone, do you demand that they serve you or do you desire to do everything for them? What were Martha and Mary doing to/for Jesus?   What is really mean’t by “slave” in the Koran?  I would not trust an anti-Muslim-biased man to interpret “slave.”  Also, the “imago Dei” which we have is not seen – it is in our souls – the Will and the Intellect.  We do not see that; we see our human form and our human form is not that which is the “imago Dei.”  So, theoretically speaking, Christian and Islamic scripture are not too divergent.  Finally, in the human sense, we are not sons/daughters of God the Father – not genetically.  We are spiritually his children.  Perhpas the Koran intends the human, genetic child.  We are not genetically the children of God because then that would mean that we are all Divine (we would have to have genetic code which is uncreated). 

      We need to work together to help each other know God better – Christians, Jews and Muslims.

    • Flan

      “Even if both theologies were pure fantasy, the Islamic one leads to authoritarian social outcomes, whereas the Judeo-Christian one tends, over the long run, toward freedom.”

      That’s definitely the looooong run!  To Jews, Muslims, heretics (and a few other peoples thrown in for good measure), I’d venture Christianity seemed fairly authoritarian for quite a few centuries!

  • Gentrypowell

    “God is a spirit; and they that adore Him, MUST (oportet / δει) adore Him in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).”  Since Muslims cannot adore God in truth (nor in Spirit for that matter), they cannot truly adore Him.  Their “god” is nothing more than yet another false god put up by devils to deceive men and drag them to Hell.  Luckily, VII was only a “pastoral” council and is not infallible. 


      Thank you for qualifying your remark with your last statement.


    I am amazed at the Christian hate speech in this comment thread.   Are not those who would be children of God the peace makers?  Think of St. Francis of Assisi – was he not a peacemaker?

  • TheodoreSeeber

    The main difference between the Koran and the Catholic view of the Bible is *rationality*.  We believe in a God that is reasonable and bound to truth by the strength of reason.  The Allah of the Koran is not reasonable- he’s chaotic, saying one thing to one man and another different thing to a different man.

  • Vishal Mehra

     That Islam replaced paganism of the desert is Mohammedan story but should we accept it uncritically?

    Islam is NOT an Eastern religion. As recognized clearly by GK Chesterton, it is an arrow of the West planted in to middle of Asia.

    What about the medieval legend of Mohamed being a disgruntled bishop? Is there no truth in that?  

  • Bender

    The Magisterium is 100 percent authoritative and infallible on matters of the Catholic Faith.

    But what is its degree of authority on Islamic doctrine?  Is it the place of the Church to say what is and what is not Islamic dogma? 
    Are we to tell Muslims what it is that they believe? Or is it for Muslims themselves to determine what it is that they believe?

    Would we countenance some Muslim leader decreeing that because both Muslims and Catholics worship one God, that Catholics worship a God that is NOT a Trinity, and in fact expressly denounced the idea of the Trinity has blasphemy?

    It would appear clear that we cannot unilaterally and arbitrarily tell Muslims that they and we worship the same God.  Rather, only if they agree can we say that.  And I don’t see any Muslims agreeing.

  • betsybug354

    Another excellent article by Robert Spencer. Let me introduce myself by stating that I am a Christian, raised in the Methodist Church and having been tossed around over the years by changing doctrines and a trend of increasing liberalism in the church. I’m presently a Lutheran, but spent a few years in the Presbyterian church looking for the truth. I am increasingly drawn to the Catholic Church and its solid, unbroken tradition of faith beginning with Saint Peter and continuing to the present day. In fact, the more I explore Catholicism the more fully I expect I will eventually convert to the faith.  I have been married to a Muslim man for 25 years. All anyone really has to do to know the answer to the question, “Do we worship the same god?” is to ask me.

    The answer, of course, is absolutely not. We do not worship the same god.  I think the strongest argument for this claim is that Islam felt it necessary to deny Christ’s crucifixion on the cross for the sins of mankind.  I believe Islam is a spirit that seeks to deny the godhood of Christ so as to rob mankind of its possibility of salvation.

    I am faced with the influence of the god of Islam every day in my home and in my marriage and family.  It is a god with no gifts of the Holy Spirit.  No joy, no peace. My husband, while he tries to be a “good” person, lacks the transforming influence that the blood of Christ provides.  He doesn’t know who God is, just that “God is God.”

  • Mary2333

    It is believed that the true Third Secret of Fatima was a warning regarding the errors of Vatican II, as Our Lady wished it to be revealed in 1960 (when Vatican II preparations were being made) as it would be more clear then.  The error of Vatican II was in the watering down of the Catholic faith to better appeal to the Protestant churches and in rebellion against the authority of the Pope, the Bishops wanting to have equal power with the Pope.  The first Council, recorded in the Bible, showed discussion amongst the Apostles about requirements for gentile converts, with Peter (the first Pope) making the final decision. Vatican II made ambiguous statements that were left up to the individual Bishops to decide on the particulars, in essence giving them little kingdoms within Christianity.  That is why there is so much disunity within the Catholic Church today.  As there are thousands of Protestant denominations today, so there are slightly variant Catholic diocese.  The change was a very human attempt to bring “peace” to mankind via an ecumenical utopia.

    The effect of Vatican II is being seen as confusion and compromise within the Catholic church, with grappling for control by hierarchy and for liberal latitude by laity.  Caring for those within the Protestant faith should not destroy the only Christian church actually founded by Jesus himself.  The Catholic faith preserved the Bible (monks copying it for centuries), and have the full Bible (Martin Luther threw out seven books because he did not like the dogmas they supported – like purgatory).  The Catholic faith also has the traditional teaching of the Apostles (called Apostolic Tradition), mainly the seven sacraments (baptism, the Eucharist, confession, confirmation, marriage, holy orders for priests, sacrament of the sick), and what they taught about Mary and the scriptures.  The Bible says Jesus taught his Apostles in private, and the Archbishops and the Pope are their successors today and follow the Apostolic Tradition. 

    Vatican II did not change the basic dogmas of the Catholic faith or the Apostolic Tradition, nor did it elevate Islam.  Islam came six hundred years after Jesus, and Mohammad sought to legitimize and make superior Abraham’s first son, Ishmael, as the heir to the covenant, and establish Mohammad as the main prophet of the covenant with Ishmael’s line.  Mohammad denied that God chose the Jews to preserve the true faith and the true covenant with God.  Mohammad denied that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, the Paschal lamb and the New Covenant promised in the Old Testament.  Instead, Mohammad rewrote the Bible, including what he knew of the Gnostic Gospels (basically novels that the Council of Trent declared were not part of the Bible in order to dispel any confusion), in order to make himself (Mohammad) the main character.  Islam is blatantly anti-Christ, as the golden dome on the Temple Mount inscription (“God has no son”) declares.  The Catholic church, including Vatican II, never formally recognized Islam as anything but diabolical heresy, but only reminded Catholics to love Muslims anyway and to remember that they might be in good faith even in their error.

  • seems most comments here speak past the article. islam rejects jesus as god and the trinity. agreed. the question is is the allah of islam one in the same as our god the father and judaism’s yahweh? mohammed claimed an abrahamic root. this author attempts to pry the god of abraham from islam. this is the same problem with hebrews. one tribe is decended from abraham by way of isaac. the rest from ishmael. (or esau). it is impossible for these people to separate affairs of the world from affairs of the soul. christainity has been working on this for 2000 yrs. i view islam as founded in jelousy. the arabs (of the desert) would not accept christ or judaism so mohammed gave them a faith of their own. and an envious, restless spirit

  • Superstealth7

    As a committed Catholic i hold that everybody should be Catholic, including Muslims obviously. However, it seems to me that Mr. Spencer thinks that if i say “Muslims worship the same God as Catholics [but don’t know him as he has been definitely revealed.]” i am somehow implying that Muslims worship righly. The latter does not necessarily flow from the former. If an adherent of Islam or any faith or no faith genuinely desires to worship “the one true God,” he or she is doing that, de facto, in prayer. To borrow a line from Mr. Spencer, “insofar as they strive to be attentive to and to obey the authentic voice of the Creator whom they acknowledge and who speaks to them through the dictates of their conscience,” individual Muslims are worshipping (imperfectly) the same God as you or me, objectively speaking… its about intention. If a Muslim cries out to Allah, would we be surprised to see Jesus came to his assistance? 

  • 38degreesn

    Well, the LAH, a meteroite, was put in the kabba, and worshiped as AL-Lah (the black stone). for many centuries, along with 365 other pagan rocks, idols, and what ever. That an arab with a strong tribe took over mecca, and destroyed all the other “gods”, thus proclaiming that there was only one god, al-lah, is history. The heresy arose when that arab twisted the judeo/christian faith. Facts like “the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, is God”, the Trinity, etc are denied. The “miriam” of that book is supposedly the mother of Jesus, and she is the sister of Aaron, so about 2400 yrs old. Thus, not knowing God, they place Jesus as a slave of a rock. Then follows all the resultant failures in their texts, which can only be upheld by killing the people who know it as false. Any child can see they are not the same God.

  • Elihayu Stearn

    What has gotten into Robert Spencer that he’s decided to twist himself himself into knots trying to convince Catholics that muslims probably don’t worship the very same God as Catholics? 

    Apparently Spencer doesn’t think that Catholics should rely on the clear guidance on that topic provided to us, in among other places,  
     – Pope Paul VI’s Nostra Aetate in 1965,
     – Pope John Paul II’s Moroccan presentation in 1985 ,or in
     – section 841 of the current Catechism of the Catholic Church.
     I doubt Pope Benedict would argue that it’s not a well-settled theological proposition that Catholics, Jews, and the majority of muslims (including the devout and humble ones that mostly struggle to take care of their families and to become better members of their communities and haven’t yet had the leadership of their mosques hijacked by thuggish wahhabis or jihadists) all worship “the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day”.
     Actually, I doubt that, if pressed, Spencer would dare to clearly and explicitly make such a weak  argument either.
     But for some reason, he’s instead produced an article that does his very best to imply otherwise.

    • sanfordandsons

      The only creed we have is that God is God, the Muslim Allah and the Christian God. Beyond that we have nearly no affirmation of what comes next. Islam teaches hate and Christianity teaches love, the exact opposites. If you can remove the teaching of Mohammed on hate then the two religions are the same. But anyone who is a true Christian can never act against his brother in hatred because he/she will be eternally damned. On the other hand, Muslims who kill for Allah are given a place in paradise. There is a incongruous applicability to that philosophy.

    • m parker

      Robert Spencer is one of the most qualified to speak about this bogus belief system, because he knows the truth about it, by academic study.
      Study of this faith is freely available to all, through various means, who have the appetite for knowledge, which by reading your comments you are in desperate need.
      btw. Islam has not been hijacked, as there is only one Islam. The more a Muslim knows about his faith, the more active he becomes in following it as his role model did.

  • Elihayu Stearn

    A few months ago Rev. Robert Jeffress and some Southern Baptist leaders supporting Rick Perry wrote a Robert Spencer style article (i.e., comprised of insinuation and selective truths) that targeted another major religion popular among the peoples in the developing world…except,in their version of a Spencer-type theological hit job, they provided voluminous proofs that the Catholic Church is not at all a Christian religion and is fatally riddled with practices derived from Babylonian cults.

    It’s not at all pretty when the somewhat-educated (at least Jeffress has a D.Min., not just a quickie M.A. like Spencer’s) foist a simplistic, but twisted, version of reality on the credulously devout.  

    But, as both Jeffress and Spencer have demonstrated, that questionable approach to spreading something that superficially looks a whole lot like God’s word sure can make for a robust economic model, notwithstanding whatever collateral spiritual damage may be inflicted on innocent third parties in the process.

  • Flan

    <<As far back as 1076, Pope St. Gregory VII wrote to Anzir, the king of Mauritania, that “we believe and confess one God, although in different ways.”
    What it is asserting beyond that bare fact, if anything, can best be ascertained by considering the passage in light of those “different ways” to which Pope Gregory alluded. It is noteworthy that Pope Gregory doesn’t say that the one God that he and King Anzir both worship is the same God. <<

    How disengenuous.  Come on.  We believe and confess one God, even as we say different things about him, because…we're of two different faiths!    Protestants have different things to say about Him too, as do Jews.  Yet we all worship the one and only God.   The One with the same history.  To admit we're all worshipping the same God isn't to say we all have perfectly formed ideas about Him, just that, however blurry the picture, that's Him!

  • Flan

    “What would the devil’s religion look like?First, it would have to have as its enemy the Jews. It would have to be implacably committed to the idea that the chosen people of God’s first covenants should be hated or destroyed…”

    I hope you realize you’re describing our own faith for a lenghthy period of its  history.

    • StellaMaris

      Find me a time when THE CATHOLIC CHURCH – not individual Catholics  – was, doctrinally and officially, committed to ‘the idea that the chosen people of God’s first covenants should be hated or destroyed.’ 

      This is a difference between the Catholic Church and Islam.  In Catholicism, we can always point to what was dogmatically defined as binding on all believers, and nowhere do you find the Catholic Church teaching as binding that every Catholic must be ‘implacably committed to he idea that the Chosen People of God’s first covenants should be hated or destroyed.’ 

      Islam is a diferent kettle of fish.  It is so slippery – so clearly NOT guided by the Holy Spirit – that anyone who is a ‘leader’ can interpret the Koran and teach what Islam is about.  That’s the defense position of Islamic apologists now, whenever any Muslim commits an atrocity in the name of Allah: “That’s not really what the Koran teaches,’ they will say, and point out some alternative Muslim ‘pope’ (for lack of a better word) who supposedly teaches authoritatively the ‘correct’ interpretation of the Koran, which is, of course, all about peace and love. But wait a minute!  What about the suicide bomber who was taught authoritatively by a different absolute authority that if he killed all those infidels (meaning Jews and Christians), he would go to the great whorehouse in the sky?  Who is the real spokesman for Islam?  I said it in my first post: the Father of Lies.

       Catholicism has had some Judas popes just as Jesus chose a Judas apostle.  But never has the Holy Spirit allowed any pope, no matter how personally wicked or anti-Semitic, to teach that all Catholics must be ‘implacably commited to the idea that the Chosen People of God’s first covenants should be hated or destroyed.’  No Catholic is threatened with ex-communication (still less, execution) for wishing the health and prosperity of Jews or supporting a Jewish homeland in the Middle East, etc.

      Look at the history of the Jews in Europe – just to take an example – and you will see times when there were pogroms and expulsions of Jews, and when Jews were required (or in some cases preferred) to live apart from Christians.  But first, they had to be allowed to settle in Christian lands at all, and to find a place there and have legal protection for themselves and their houses of worship.  They chose to settle in Europe (the Jews taking refuge in Poland is a shining example, and if your knowledge of the history of the Jews in Europe only extends back as far as World War II or some sketchy notions of ‘the Inquisition’ read some books before you try to argue with me on this.)  There is a reason why the Jews not only chose to settle in European countries, but flourished in European countries.  And yes, they did flourish.  Oh, my, did they flourish!  To say that the Jews did not flourish in Europe is to deny a history full of brilliant people in many fields, people who have made great contributions to the world in so many ways – and did it in Europe.  One example that just comes to mind, is that the center – the heart – of the arts (music, drama, comedy) in lands affected by the Holocaust was virtually destroyed by the destruction of the Jews.  The slaughter of the Jews in the Holocaust was an incalculable loss to Europe and the world, because despite not being ‘at home,’ in Christian countries, despite limitations that were real and laws made by secular authorities (after all, the Church only governed the Papal States, the Jews were able to flourish remarkably in Europe. 

      Let’s not look only at the breakdown of relationships between Christians and Jews in Europe – a breakdown for which the Church has voiced regret and formally apologised – but let’s look at the fact that Christian kingdoms and nations welcomed the Jews into Christian societies and co-existed with the Jews more or less peacefully for long periods, with benefits to both parties.  There is, indeed, a hole in the heart of Europe where once our Jewish brethren lived.  Can any Muslim nation express the same sentiment?  Can you point to a single Muslim-controlled area where the loss of Jews would be met with anything but triumphant rejoicing?  The Christian west mourns – rightfully – the Holocaust, even as it examines its own guilt and complicity.  Can you think of any Muslim act of mourning or regret or apology for harm done by Muslims to Jews?  Where are the Holocaust musems and memorials – just to take one example – in Muslim lands?

      Look at what happened to European Christians AND Jews when Muslims invaded their lands.  If you’ve read history, you cannot help but draw the conclusion that given a choice of where to go in the diaspora, Jews were better off (perhaps only marginally so, in some or even many cases) settling in Christian lands than settling among Muslims.

      If you are an American, and you are not Jewish, ask any Jews you know this question: Imagine you had family in another part of the world, and they had to leave their country and move to another country as refugees.  They could not go to Israel.  Where would you rather have them settle: a Muslim-controlled country or a country that was Christian or largely Christian?  Where would you think they would be more safe, given the history of relations between Christians and Jews and Muslims and Jews?

      I don’t know the answer to that question and I can’t ask it – I am an American but don’t live in the US anymore.  But I think I know the answer.

  • Flan

    I’m not sure what happened to that first message I attempted to send.  It looks like you need a key to unlock the meaning.  But no, here it is:  Pope Gregory VII saying we believe and confess one God in separate ways was not a trick message.  Catholics and Muslims have different things to say about the One and Only God (as do Protestants and Jews) because we didn’t all get sent the same, clear picture.  Yet no matter how blurry one may be, it’s Him!

  • chi

    The whole events in this story seem to have gone full circle; and a matter like that should merit a critical appraisal otherwise we, in the Christian World, would still be going round a revolving door! I want to raise certain issues in this discourse for us to chew and digest, as it were:
    1. How was Islam founded? Who was ‘Angel Gabriel (Jibril)’ the Muslims claimed as the instrument through which Mohammed received the messages of the Koran?
    2. Do you think that after the unspeakable sufferings of Jesus Christ and the ignominous death on the Cross to save humankind, that the Almighty God would send again His angel to minister to Mohammed? In terms of mere empirical reasoning, do you think this would have made any sense?
    3. Are Christians now suggesting that God the Father that presented Jesus Christ at the latter’s baptism in the River Jordan as ‘My Beloved Son in Whom I am well pleased..listen to Him’, was just merely playing around when He, God The Father, made that statement?
    4. Have Catholics forgotten the charge of Jesus Christ on St. Peter? In the charge Jesus Christ  had said that He would build His Church on Peter…and the gates of Hell shall never prevail against it?
    5. If anybody has any scintilla of agreement that the Muslims and Catholics follow ways that would lead each of them to Heaven, then one would ask: how many Heaven are there? Is there Heaven for the Muslim and Heaven for the Catholic? I ask this question because Jesus Christ, The King of Heaven, has said that whoever fails to acknowledge Him before men would face the same non-acknowledgment before His Father. So, since a Muslim does not acknowledge Jesus as The Way, The Truth and The Life, it follows that Jesus Christ would not acknowledge such a person before His Father! However, if there is another Heaven where Jesus does not hold sway, then the Muslim might have been referring to that.
    6. They say: ‘a fructibus eorum cognoscetis eos’ – by their fruit you shall know them. What fruit has Islam borne all through the ages till now? Does such a fruit strike one as the product of God you and I know about? This, again, brings me to refer to my question 1 above: who was that ‘Angel Gabriel’ that was sent to Mohammed. By logical reasoning and employing simple algorithm one can easily answer this question.
    7. You, see, Brothers and Sisters, there is no need for Christians to always want to play the so-called ‘political correctness’ and as such sidestep issues that are very clear so that somebody is not offended. It is always better to tell the truth. And in the present  circumstance, we should tell the truth about the wide gulf between Christianity and Islam, otherwise we shall be insulting Jesus Christ Who had come to found a way to Heaven for us! If we continue to hide the truth we shall be crucifying Jesus Christ time and time again!

    8. Islam and Christianity (Catholicism) are NOT the same; the two religions DO NOT  worship the same God because the two religions sprung up from two different sources. While Christianity (Catholicism) was founded by Jesus Christ Himself, The Son of God, Islam DID NOT emanate from God. The so-called Angel Gabriel or Jibril claimed by Islam did not come from God.
    9. It is becoming something worrisome that Christians are beginning to deny their religion in order to show the so-called political correctness before people of other faiths. For example read this piece for a start:
    We should remember that he who denies Christ before men would be denied by Christ before His Father in Heaven

    • Dan

      Your comment is very good.

  • Cathalloftus

    The word “Allah” is used by all comers in the Middle East, but its use should not be interpreted as anything other than, what the anthropologist Malinowski, termed “Phatic Communion”. “How are you?” is almost always responded to with “Thanks be to Allah!” – which apparently suggests that all is well, and that one is grateful to (the) God (of Islam) for that happy state. Not a bit of it! A man could be in a bad way, and an atheist too; but he mouths the normal response to the question that is really a greeting    In the West, people say “Thank God” meaning “I’m glad of that” even though they may not actually have any belief in God. I found that Muslims and Christians in the Middle East use the word “Rub” to refer to, or address, (the Christian) God.

  • Robert A Rowland

    Thank you for trying so hard to deny what VCII said  about Islam.  Thank God it was a pastoral council. If there is only one God as the God of Abraham proclaims, there can be only one faith.  Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and there can be no variations.  Islam is antithetical to Christianity because they deny that Jesus is God.   You would think that was  pretty clear.  As a convert  in 1949 that was thoroughly instructed in every aspect of de fide doctrine, dogma, and the infallibility of the Magisterium, I have a serious problem understanding why Pope John XXIII called the council.  What happened to the renewal he called for?  It did not take Pope Paul VI very long to realize that Satan had indeed been allowed in the sanctuary. I have trouble finding anything good that we can credit to VCII.  Consider current estimated belief in the Real Presence – that is enough for me to consider the Novus Ordo a travesty.  Sacred vessels and the Eucharist should never have been corrupted by unconsecrated hands. The doctrinal council ,Vatican Council I, was virtually overruled concerning  new doctrine.  Thank God Pope Paul VI released Humanae Vitae to  protect marriage and family from dissident corrosion.  Infallibility has never been under more serious threat or assault in the history of Christianity.

  • Judy Capistrant

    How this got around to the SSPX, I do not know, but they are not right to ‘hang on”.  It is sad that every little thing has to be “verifiied”, as if we are little children, and we take statements our ot context and run with them.  An example would be if we tell a child, who is standing on a chair, do not stand on the chair, and then later they stand on ANOTHER chair, and say, ” you did not tell me to not stand on THIS chair.”  With music, they may say the organ is “preferred”, and then they add trombones, electric guitars, drums of all kinds, xylophones, etc, stating it does not say they are not allowed… childish, to get what THEY want.

    They may be worshiping the same God, but they are not listening to what HE he has said, but what their founder interpreted what He is saying… they will get a great shock to not find seven virgins waiting for them, when they hit judgement. Thier is no way they can follow God, as they think Jesus was just a prophet, BUT Bishop Sheen says Mary, who they think very highly of, will lead the Muslim nation to Christ.  Would certainly not put it past her : )

  • That Hat Lady

    The faith of the Jews bears no resemblance to the faith of Moses’ time. After the fall of the temple, they refuted the original old testament and follow Talmudism and Kabbalah, which is closer to paganism and is the opposite of what Moses believed.

  • Mincherjosh

    The real theological problem seems to be that Mohammed explicitly intended to supercede Christ. It is not as though Islam attempts to remain, as the Jews, awaiting the Messiah, with Abraham’s faith intact. Abraham’s faith was Messianic, ordered towards the Messiah of Israel, his descendent, descended from Isaac, but the Saviour of all men.How is theirs the faith of Abraham if it is not a faith in the Messiah. They do not even await him, as do the Jews. They supercede him with a mere man; Mohammed. What is that which rejects the Messiah and attempts to supercede him with another man?

    • F M

      That’s not true. Muslims recognize Jesus as the Messiah, but as is typical, they don’t understand that term in quite the same way what that Christians do (God/man etc.) You can find reference to this right in the Q’ran:

      From two surahs in the chapter entitled “Mary”:

      “(Remember) when the angels said, “O Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him (God), whose name is the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary”


      “They said, “We killed the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of God.” They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but the likeness of him was put on another man..”

      Like so much of Islamic theology as it pertains to Christian things, it has its own, particular, heretical flavor. Yet, there is also truth in it.

      I only had time to do a quick search on the second coming issue (they believe that Jesus will return to defeat antichrist, rule the earth and judge all men), so pardon the citation of Wikipedia here, but it’s not bad:

  • JMJ

    Between  Robert rather long article and StellaMaris’s long comments, my eyes are getting blurred. I could only skim through them, but, I didn’t see one very important fact and if I missed it, I apologize: the fact is that the Muslims DO NOT CONSIDER GOD AS A FATHER OR EVEN BEING MERCIFUL, which creates a serious block between us Catholics and them.  If you say anything about Jesus being the Son of God, you are taking your lives in your hands. The story of why our Lady appeared at Fatima is quite amazing as it has been said that Fatima converted to the Catholic Church before she died and of course, the Muslims have a great place in their hearts for our Blessed Mother and treat Nuns, that wear their wedding dresses (habits) with great respect.  +JMJ+

  • azhermit

    There is only one God… a Triune God…  and there is no salvation outside of the Holy Catholic Church… and few will be saved… the few who were Chosen before time began.   Let the grinding and gnashing of teeth begin… again.  

  • Rwaligora

    mabey i’ll become a crazy muslim and get 4 wives….cut off the heads of christians…and enjoy the virgins awaiting me at death….truly a religion inspired by hell

  • C

    StellaMaris, I love your statement, or expos’e.  You nailed it.  I especially love that you pointed out how Our Ever Vigin Holy Mother Mary is destined to crush the head of the serpent – the same serpent that used Eve to initiate the fall of mankind.  The same serpent, who disguised himself as the Angel Gabriel while he dangled the Prophet Mohmmad over the lake of sulfur untill Mohammed confessed the entire Qur’an outloud.  Maybe Mary and Eve will tagteam up on the Serpent and take him down!  Eve deserves the chance to redeem herself and thereby, all of mankind.

  • C

    And Robert Spencer, the author, amen to your article! 

  • Peter

    “This suggests that a Muslim who refrains from suicide bombing because he understands that it is cold-blooded murder has a better chance to be saved, and is more clearly attuned to the promptings of the Creator within whose plan of salvation he finds himself, than does a Muslim who blows himself up in a crowd of infidels because the Qur’an promises a place in Paradise to those who “kill and are killed” for Allah (9:111).”

    Do you really mean to suggest that Muslims just “refrain” from suicide bombing?  That’s somewhat like referring to Catholics “refraining” from burning heretics at the stake.  This is just another formulation of the presumption of guilt behind the age old question “When did you stop beating your wife?”

    Or how about speaking of U.S.  soldiers who “refrain” from mass murder of Afghan civilians.  I recognize that, based on news reports, the soldier who committed those acts had suffered a brain injury and had already served three tours in Iraq.  He should never have been deployed to Afghanistan in the first place.  But, likewise, based on evaluations of unsuccessful suicide bombers and other studies, they are typically depressed, isolated individuals who are recruited for that task precisely because of their vulnerability to the type of brainwashing necessary to make them strap a bomb onto their chest and set it off in a crowded location.  It is a horrific act of nihilism not all that different from the type of lone gunman rampages and murder suicides that seem to be depressingly common in the U.S., usually committed by men who are, ostensibly, “Christian.”

    Most of the “infidels” killed by suicide bombers are other Muslims, often, but not always, those of a different sect.  Again, I refer you to the bloody history between Catholics and Protestants.  But more to the point, religion is often just the pretense.  Was the conflict in Northern Ireland really about theological differences?

    Any religious or secular philosophical belief system can be twisted and turned towards violent, political ends, and one of the crucial steps in that process is the dehumanization of “the other”.  So please “refrain” from referring to Muslims as if they were all potential suicide bombers.  You could start by not proof texting passages from the Quran.  It serves no more purpose than proof texting from the Bible, a practice which the Catholic Church discourages, by the way.

  • Damien Charles

    just glossing over Spencers typical context-abortion, he has followed the same style. He has argued somehow that because of the behaviour of Muslims today that the judgement of being the same God has now changed. That is a failure in logic because we are not talking about the behaviour of Muslims but the concrete defintion of God to Muslims. Spencer simply attempts to squirm around it and uses the typical emotive attempts of avoiding the subject itself but talking about modern day Egypt, hijabs as if that is relevant.

  • Mab411969

    that was a very long explanation….all you should have said was the church made a mistake by saying Catholics and Muslims worship the same God.

  • shorebattery

    There is NO amount of sweet talks, embellishment, and an attempt to be politically correct that can  change what is not to become what is, or what is to become what is not. Allah that the Muslims call is NOT the Almighty God, we Christians refer to; the Almighty God that we have read about from Genesis to Revelation in the Holy Bible. The Islam’s Allah commands the Muslims to kill ‘unbelievers’ or ‘infidels’ without batting the eyelid. And that is why we see the level of violence amongst the Muslims all over the world. What a religion! I do hope the Muslims would one day realize that Islam is not a religion from God; no never a religion from God.

    • EKMcM

      Islam, are we not talking of the religion of peace? So easy to believe, just kill off all those who do not believe your beliefs – then you have peace.

  • daniel

    your not even remotely catholic. the catholic faith holds that noone can be saved, even if they shed blood in the name of christ, unless they are catholic – eugene IV ex cathedra

  • Pingback: Do Catholics and Muslims Worship the Same God? | Crisis Magazine « Servus Fidelis: the faithful servant()

  • Dave514

    I came across this that I thought might be both enlightening and helpful.

    To Muslims, God is a God of justice…NOT repeat NOT LOVE!!!

    It sure explains why the Muslims think and act as they do. It all
    explains why most of us especially ALL the politicians have no idea
    about the Islamic societies.

    The implications for us and the rest of the world are vast deep and
    ultimately include WWIII


    ” 1) Does Islam worship the same God as Christians?

    Martin and Gracia Burnham were Bible believing Evangelical Christian
    missionaries (not Catholic) who were captured by Islam terrorists in
    Indonesia and held for over a year. This husband and wife team spent
    over a year living with Islam extremists. The wife, Gracia Burnham was
    rescued by Indonesian police after a year. She sustained a gunshot wound
    and the husband was shot to death in the crossfire of the battle. The
    following is an excerpt that helps get inside the Muslim mind.

    Martin and Gracia Burnham

    Interviewer: Did you learn anything about ministering to Muslims that
    might be helpful to others?

    Answer by Gracia Burnham GB: My only expertise is from living with these
    guys for a year and observing them. The first question Martin and I had
    when we first were taken was “were we worshiping the same God these guys
    were worshiping?” And we started making notes of the characteristics of

    He’s the one who made everything;

    He’s all-knowing,

    He’s sovereign over everything.

    Because he made it, he’s the ruler over it all and he has the authority
    to say things will be this way or that way.

    He’s the righteous judge;

    He’s going to be the judge in the end.

    He’s the one who makes the rules,

    And they (Muslims) went on and on and we came to believe that we were
    talking about the same God we Christians worship, Jehovah. Then one day
    they were talking about the names of God that show his different
    characteristics. He’s merciful, and all these different things. I asked
    if one of the names for their God was love. Does Allah love you? And you
    could see him thinking and he said, “No, Allah doesn’t love us and we’re
    not asked to love Allah. We just worship him because he’s the true
    creator.” So I told Martin, with a god who doesn’t love you, this is
    where that religion leads, to something like this. If I started teaching
    Muslims, I would teach the characteristics of God, the ones they already
    know and then say, “Here’s one you haven’t been taught: God is love.”
    And give them the Old Testament Scriptures that talk of His love.
    They’re very agreeable to talk about the Old Testament Scriptures. They
    know all about Noah and David and Adam and they call them the prophets.
    So they’ll listen to you talk about the Old Testament and there are
    plenty of verses that talk about God loving us. I think they’ve just
    been deceived in their concepts of God. That’s what New Tribes Mission
    always taught us: when you go into an area, try to use their name for
    God unless he’s just totally different.

    Interviewer: It’s interesting that they would know John 3:16 without the
    concept of love coming into it.

    GB: It blew me away. One of them, Solaiman, would say to me, Islam is a
    religion of justice and we’re going to get justice for everything bad
    that has happened to Muslims and he would go back to the Crusades and on
    up. And we told him that Christianity is a religion of mercy. We know
    that we’ve sinned. And that’s another thing about Muslims. Their concept
    of sin is like ours. God won’t tolerate it. They know that everyone has
    sinned. I remember saying to him one day, “We need somebody to show us
    mercy because we’ve sinned. Somebody’s got to pay for our sin or we’re
    going to have to. And that’s what Jesus did. Jesus paid for our sins so
    they’re removed and we don’t have to bear that debt anymore and we’re
    not going to be judged by our sinfulness.” Solaiman got this sneer on
    his face and said, “Where’s the justice in that? I’m going to pay for my
    own sins.” And we were so sad when we went to bed that night and Martin
    said, “That’s exactly what’s going to happen. Solaiman’s going to pay
    for his own sins and it won’t be a pretty sight.”

  • Pingback: The New Antisemitism |

  • Pingback: Old Testament Week 9 « majorchange academy()

  • Pingback: Wideness of God’s Mercy: Pluralism #4 « Veracity()

  • Angela Sullivan

    I think the ambiguity of the Teachings of Vatican II have left many Catholics confused to say the Least Lets call a spade a spade. Mohammed was a FALSE Prophet so no good Fruits come from his Religion. He took just plagiarized The Catholic Religion and was a Charlatan, Not to leave out Polygamy, Incest His strange Marriage to a 6 year old I think he was 53 yrs This is not GOOD!!! Mohammed Fell so Far short of Morality that one can hardly conceive accepting anything he said. The Mormons seem to be a another bad imitation of MUSLIMS so the Hocus Pocus gets worse. The followers of Muhammad and Joseph Smith both killed innocent “infidel” on the same date of 9/11. On September 11, 1857, Mormon militia massacred about 140 men, women and children under the authority of Brigham Young. However 17 very young children were spared and adopted into Mormon families. They were in fact sold to the highest Mormon family bidder and resold and traded many times afterwords. This event is called “The Mountain Meadows” massacre. Mormon leaders engaged in a deliberate rewriting of history to deny they were behind the murders. On September 11, 2001 Muhammad’s followers, using the Koran as a guide, sent two airplanes into the World Trade Center killing 3000 innocent men, women and children. Muslims today have a PhD in rewriting history and preach in the mosques that Jews were actually driving the planes, not Muslim terrorists.Both were visited by an angel. Joseph Smith was visited by the angel “Moroni” and Muhammad by Gabriel.

    Galatians 1:6-9 says, “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before,
    so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.”

  • Angela Sullivan

    My Father use to say When One Tolerates Evil they are Overwhelmed By it.
    The whole Kissing up to these False Religions has not Done any Good and Americas False Religion Of Democracy is probably the Biggest Charlatan Religion.That ever existed.
    Pope Benedict XVI quoted Manuel II Palaiologos as saying: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only bad and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

  • noah_wayman


    After all these years, from when we worked together at Aquinas until now, you are still a charlatan and a pedant. You bounced from one extremism to another back then, and it’s clear you are still doing that now.

  • Mr. Brian Batty, O.P.

    Hidden theme of article: How many times can Vatican II be referenced?

  • Flankus

    In one sense, the Jews worship a different God than the Christians in that they reject the Trinitarian Godhead, and reject the divinity of Jesus Christ. Granted, in one sense, they worship the same God, and in another sense, they do not.

  • Sienna

    This past Sunday’s gospel reading, Genesis 18, was quite interesting in light of this discussion. Abraham (who is the father of both the Jews and the Muslims) is talking to the Lord. He then bows down to the ground to three men and says “my Lord”. Would he normally bow down to the ground to anyone? And would he refer to three men as “my Lord”? Does this not seem to indicate that this is the Trinitarian God, whether the Jews or Muslims understand it or not?

  • F M

    While Spencer makes some good points, he’s still off on a key issue (and Peter Kreeft, who Spencer criticizes, is actually right). The Church has clearly taught that we worship the very same God that Muslims worship in a Dogmatic Constitution (Lumen Gentium) and also in Nostra Aetate. In both LG and NA, the Church states that we adore the same God and also explains Who that God is by providing recognizable attributes that apply only to Him and no one else. In one place, Spencer seems unsure whether the council taught this and in another he reduced the council’s teaching to a mere affirmation that Muslims are “monotheists”. The Church taught more than merely this.

    Lumen Gentium 16: “the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst 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.”

    Nostra Aetate 3: “The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. **They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men;** they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God.”

    Here, the Church explicitly taught that Muslims are worshiping the same God we Catholics worship. If the God Muslims worship is not objectively Yahweh/I Am, then Lumen Gentium implicitly brands Catholics with idolatry. The Church also provided explicit, objective markers/identifiers of this God in LG and NA. These are:

    1) He is God alone, there is no other; 2) He is Creator of heaven and earth; 3) He is merciful and all-powerful; 4) He has spoken to men; 5) He will be mankind’s judge on the last day.

    Is there another God other than Yahweh/I Am, other than the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who fits these markers? Of course not.

    As such, the Church twice stated that Muslims know enough about God that they are indeed adoring the One, True God “together with us” (LG) – even if they are doing so imperfectly.

    Spencer is right about the fact that this does not mean Islam is an independent path to salvation aside from Christ (they still need Christ and the Church just like everyone else and should be presented with the Gospel). He is right that this does not mean that Muslims understand or worship God entirely correctly. He’s right that the council did not teach that Muslims actually hold the faith of Abraham (the council only stated that they **profess** to hold it). He’s right that this teaching does not necessarily mean much in terms of the political “kinship” on the ground (Muslims killing Christians, etc. – I think Pope Benedict XVI’s Regensburg address raised valid and important questions about our ability to truly dialogue with followers of Islam).

    But Spencer also writes, “That is all that Vatican II is really saying about Muslims: they’re monotheists, they say they belong to the religion of Abraham, and they revere Jesus, but not as the Son of God, and His Blessed Mother.”

    This is not “all” that Vatican II is “really saying” (merely that Muslims are “monotheists”). A monotheist could be objectively worshiping a false God or nothing at all. In LG and NA, the Church taught that the actual object of Muslim adoration is not a demon (1 Cor 10:20-22; Deut. 32:17; 2 Chron 11:15; Ps 95:5; Ps 106:37), not another creature (Rom. 1:25) and not nothing at all (Deut 32:21). They’re adoring the One, True God – the very same God that we Catholics adore. The council fathers found this important enough to repeat twice (LG and NA). This teaching wasn’t pastoral, it was inherently doctrinal. So Kreeft, if I understand him correctly, is right on this point. Spencer still seems to resist the clear teaching of the council that the God of the Muslims and Christians is, objectively, one and the same God. The council didn’t make such a judgment about Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, Wiccans, Satanists, et al, by the way.

    I think this piece by Jimmy Akin is helpful in creating the proper distinctions:

    This piece by Catholics United for the Faith is also helpful:

    But again, I think Spencer made some important points – but seems to be resisting the full teaching – which is perhaps not entirely surprising considering that he’s the director of “Jihad Watch”!

  • Lydia

    You may find Al Kresta’s “Dangers
    to the Faith: Recognizing Catholicism’s 21st-Century Opponents” to be interesting reading. He has a whole section on Islam that I found informative.

  • m parker

    Do Catholics and Muslims worship the same God?

    No they don’t

    Because Mohammed was a false prophet, he just used what was familiar to him to invent a new belief system he called Islam, meaning submission. Muslims submit to the
    will of Allah through Sharia Law, Catholics9Christians) submit to the will of
    God through the law of love. Sharia Law diametrically opposes the will of the
    God of the Bible, it promotes hatred,division,dicrimination,and intolerance. It
    even commands its followers to kill in the name of its god,Allah,as the supreme
    achievement, see Quran 9.111.

    The Quran totally and utterly mis understands, and therefore rejects the Trinity, Jesus’s
    divinity, His death by crucifixion, and His resurrection. This and much more,
    illustrates , the God of the Bible is NOT the god of the Quran.

    The word Allah is a contraction of the words Al Ilah,meaning “the
    god”. All pagans including 7th century Arabian pagans, worship idols,
    be they stones, rocks, trees, and in particular heavenly bodies. It has to be
    remembered at this point, Abraham came from a family of pagans before he was
    given the knowledge of the one true God of the Bible.

    The pagan Arabs worshipped a pantheon of gods at the Kaaba 360 in total, with
    one main creator god named Allah.This Allah, already known to them as the
    creator god, was the highest in this pantheon of gods,and without an
    image. Allah, had corresponding goddesses, “three
    daughters”, in reality heavenly bodies,i.e. stars and planets,named Al
    lat,Al Uzza and Al Manet,all had particular significance to the Arabs, as gods
    to pray to for help and reassurance in fertility, times of war and seeing
    into the future.

    See links:

    tribal god was Hubal,the chief moon god of the Kaaba, personified as a
    desert warrior.Islamic sources tell us that Mohammed destroyed all the
    idols in the Kaaba and declared there to be one god, Allah.

    Christians in particular, have ever since assumed, and therefore been deceived into
    believing that Allah is one and the same creator God of the Bible, and use this name
    throughout literature, especially in the Middle East. Even today in Malaysia,
    the name Allah is being challenged by Muslims, who are insisting
    Christians refrain from using Allah as the name for their God.

    All Christians should be using this time then to take the initiative, and start using
    the name the Bible gives God, which they should have been doing for
    centuries, and stop insulting and defaming the name of the One True God of
    the Bible, whose name is above all names, YAHWEH, i.e YESHUA.

  • Nel-nel

    I’m trying to be civil here, but I must say that I’m appalled that some are going so far as to call Islam “devil worship!” Some of my best friends are Muslim and they are the most God-fearing, devout, and wonderful human beings I know. Seriously, I feel like God is pointing at them and telling me, “You could learn a thing or two from them.” I am so blessed to have those friends in my life because they teach me how to be a better Christian every single day.

    Some Muslims may condone lots of practices that are cruel, such as child marriage and whatnot, but the Catholic Church doesn’t have much of a clean record either, does it? The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, plenary indulgences, silence over the recent and ongoing sexual abuse/pedophilia scandals, etc. Every human institution is flawed. Islam as a religion is flawed. Even Catholicism is flawed. But, God is not. Everyone worships and believes in the same God. Unfortunately, we all misinterpret his message because we’re human and put our own twist on it to make it more convenient for us and/or distinguish ourselves from the “out-crowd” aka people who don’t think exactly like us and oftentimes, don’t look exactly like us. Religion is very culturally- and racially-based.

    There is no right and wrong God. God is just God. Whether someone worships him in the form of the Trinity, a cow, a tree, whatever. God does not choose sides or teams. He’s cheering for everyone. All he wants is love and respect. He doesn’t care if we do that in a church or a mosque or dancing naked in the moonlight. Kind David got drunk and danced in the streets. Even Jesus partayyyed at the wedding in Canaa. Haha! As long as our hearts are in the right place, we love God, ourselves, and our neighbors, it’s all good.

    Seriously, religion divides. But, faith should unite. We shouldn’t be arguing about which religion is more right or wrong. Religion is very much based on culture, which was historically determined by geography. Faith is on a whole different level that transcends human attachments like culture and traditions and rituals. You can’t argue about faith. You either believe or you don’t. And if you do, you believe in the same God. You just conduct different rituals to show him homage. God could care less how you worship him and via what channel aka religion. All he/she/it cares about is that you do.

    I like to think I’m a pretty devout Catholic Christian. I’m certainly not perfect. I’m only human. I hope nothing I’ve stated here offends anyone. That is not my intention. I would just like to close with one final question and one comment. #1 – What if you had been born a Muslim? #2 – Heaven is for the righteous. Righteous is not a synonym for Catholic or Christian.

    • m parker

      Some Muslims may condone lots of practices that are cruel, such as child marriage and whatnot,”

      Exactly, and they do so with impunity because their teachings condone them.

      Christianity however does not advocate and condone these many” cruel practices”, the Christians throughout history that have, did not have authority from their scriptures. There lies the chasm of a difference.

      ” There is no right and wrong God. God is just God. Whether someone worships him in the form of the Trinity, a cow, a tree, whatever. God does not choose sides or teams”
      What is the “point” of Jesus then, and why are you a Christian, and not a follower of a different faith?
      Maybe you should be evaluating your faith, to consider the importance of it in your life, that is, it if does have any at all.

  • JuanOskar JayMaynes

    There are many nice Muslim people but the theology of Islam is counterfeit. Let’s just pray for their conversion and stop trying to get into Mohammed’s mind.

  • SusanGraham

    I am so impressed with the inteligent thoughts and ideas that everyone has posted.Stella, I would have to say I agree with your very enlightened view!!

  • Pingback: The Pope Declares Man Can Save Himself Read more at

  • Pingback: Hypothetical question: What would you do? - Page 20 - Christian Forums()

  • Pingback: Do you believe... - Page 5 - Christian Forums()

  • NDaniels

    No, Catholics and Muslims do not worship the same God; Catholics worship The Communion of Perfect Love that Is The Blessed Trinity.

  • jacobhalo

    Jews, Muslims may think that they worship the same God as Christians, but, according to Jesus, the only way to the father is through HIM. So the Jews, Muslims are not getting through to the Father.

  • Pingback: Christian broadcaster: Vatican should not have allowed Muslim prayer - Page 20 - Christian Forums()

  • By their fruit will you know them…. No, the muslim god is an imposter.



  • Whitney