Din când în când, dăm peste câte un articold e excepție. Astăzi avem iar această ocazie. Ce poate fi mai bun pentru înțelegerea islamului decât mărturiile celor care l-au trăit în secolul VIII pe propria piele ?
Muhammad in hell for heresy. – William Blake’s Watercolor of Canto XXVIII (Lines 30 and 31 of Inferno, the First Part of Dante Alighieri’s Epic Poem the Divine Comedy). – University of Chicago
The Fount of Knowledge is divided into three categories:
- “Philosophical Chapters” (Kephalaia philosophika) – “With the exception of the fifteen chapters that deal exclusively with logic, it has mostly to do with the ontology of Aristotle. It is largely a summary of the Categories of Aristotle with Porphyry’s “Isagoge” (Eisagoge eis tas kategorias). It seems to have been John Damascene’s purpose to give his readers only such philosophical knowledge as was necessary for understanding the subsequent parts of the “Fountain of Wisdom”.
- “Concerning Heresy” (Peri aipeseon) – “Little more than a copy of a similar work by Epiphanius, brought up to date by John Damascene. The author indeed expressly disclaims originality except in the chapters devoted to Islamism, Iconoclasm, and Aposchitae. To the list of eighty heresies that constitute the “Panarion” of Epiphanius, he added twenty heresies that had sprung up since his time. In treating of Islamism he vigorously assails the immoral practices of Mohammed and the corrupt teachings inserted in the Koran to legalize the delinquencies of the prophet.”
- “An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith” (Ikdosis akribes tes orthodoxou pisteos) – “The third book of the “Fountain of Wisdom”, is the most important of John Damascene’s writings and one of the most notable works of Christian antiquity. Its authority has always been great among the theologians of the East and West. Here, again, the author modestly disavows any claim of originality — any purpose to essay a new exposition of doctrinal truth. He assigns himself the less pretentious task of collecting in a single work the opinions of the ancient writers scattered through many volumes, and of systematizing and connecting them in a logical whole.2
In his passage on Concerning Heresies, his section on the superstition of the Ishmaelites is considerably longer than most. One reason for this attention could be his prolonged battles against iconoclasm, in which the influence of Islam was a significant factor. The following are selected sections from his passage on Islam.
1. Muhammed devised his own heresy
“There is also the superstition of the Ishmaelites which to this day prevails and keeps people in error, being a forerunner of the Antichrist. They are descended from Ishmael, [who] was born to Abraham of Agar, and for this (More)
Categories: Teologice
Când a fost și cât a durat Crăciunul? 
Daniel Brânzei: „Șilo“, metafora care ne mântuie ! 
Barzilaiendan 
Dumnezeul Bibliei este diferit de Allah al Islamului. Allah e capricios, ingaduie minciuna si cere adeptilor sa omoare pentru el in timp ce Dumnezeul Bibliei isi tine promisiunile si ofera mantuirea prin Fiul Sau Isus Hristos care si-a dat viata pentru noi. Personal cred ca islamul e demonic si e periculos sa afirmam ca Allah e acelasi cu Dumnezeu , Tatal Domnului nostru Isus.
Cred si eu ca islamul a fost o erezie a crestinismului, de pe urma unei conferinte a unui britanic ce a adus argumente interesante. Exista insa o consecinta ciudata a acestei teorii. Inseamna ca crestinii si musulmanii se inchina aceluiasi Dumnezeu. Personal, resping aceasta din urma afirmatie in primul rind pt ca musulmanii n-o recunosc. Daca ei zic ca se-nchina unui alt dumnezeu (recte Allah e dumnezeul islamului- dupa ei) mi se par ridicoli crestinii care se straduiesc sa ne convinga de asta. Mi se pare insa logic ca-daca acceptam islamul ca pe o erezie a crestinismului- cele 2 religii sa aibe acelasi Dumnezeu, theoretic vorbind.