Today we’ll cover how Aquinas refuted the heresies of Islam that Muhammad taught.
___________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES
Contra Gentiles – https://basilica.ca/documents/2016/10/St.%20Thomas%20Aquinas-The%20Summa%20Contra%20Gentiles.pdf
Sunnan Abi Dawud 2155 – https://sunnah.com/abudawud:2155
Sahih Muslim 1767a – https://sunnah.com/muslim:1767a
Infancy Gospel copied by Quran – https://youtu.be/BF1SP5iFTCs?si=O3f9w9-SWtE4Y1LB
_________________________________________
MY SOCIALS
Discord Server: https://discord.gg/library-of-rome-1088336020690436169
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@sanctus.dominus
___________________________________________________________________________
source
Glory to the Triune God
I thought this video was satirical 🤣. What a crock of bs from someone who knows nothing of true monotheism.
I don’t know why when i read Quran i become more close of Islam. And when you have any question related of this you can discuss with a Mufti. ❤
As soon as I heard “flying donkey”, I left the mosque immediately 😂
You worship a men.
What’s the background music?
2:14 is that not better than rejecting those Muslim women who escaped the danger of being tortured or killed by their pagan husbands?
I advise you to read verse 10 chapter 60 of the Holy Quran
It's interesting how the moment you mention Islam & Muhammed and all of a sudden the comments take a south direction instead of intellectual discussion.
Aquinas never refuted a thing about Islam or Muhammed… But agree to disagree!
I am just disappointed since most of the comments are military driven…
At any rate, the Middle Ages could be described – in very simplified terms – as the period of occidental thinking in which the three monotheistic religions tried, among other things, to think how the reception of Aristotle could be reconciled with the knowledge of the revelation of an otherworldly God. To recall Moses ben Maimon for Judaism, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad aṭ-Ṭūsiyy al-Ġazzālīy for Islam, and Thomas Aquinas for Christianity.
Having said that, Aquinas was HEAVILY influenced by Islamic thinkers.
Aquinas was well versed in the Islamic philosophy which was growing in West. But he didn’t have any particular opinion on it.
He, like everybody else, discussed their philosophy when he was writing on a particular matter.
Aquinas’s primary rivalry was with Averroes which was a growing threat to the Scholastics theologians.
Aquinas heavily disagreed on Averroes with the doctrine of single-intellect.
Aquinas also mentioned Avicenna but because Avicenna was not a radical Aristotelian (he was a Neoplatonist too), he does not take him that seriously.
I mean a thing which would bother him like Averroes.
Aquinas also knew of Al-Ghazali, denoting him as Algazel.
Aquinas refers to him when discussing the creation of the world, the eternity of the universe. But I doubt exactly what version of Al-Ghazali had Aquinas read. Because Ghazali was misinterpreted in the West. For instance, Frederick Copleston writes in his "A History of Philosophy (volume II) ”that William Auvergne wrote a treatise against Al-Ghazali mistakenly thinking that Al-Ghazali was an Aristotelian. But the actual case that Al-Ghazali was anti-Aristotelian. I doubt the same about Aquinas, exactly how much of Al-Ghazali he knew. Aquinas also doesn’t mention his source."
Moreover, I didn’t see anywhere Aquinas discussing anything of – the Sufi, the Asharites or similar sects. Of course, how would he know! He wasn’t interested in Islamic theology. But that was the good part of Islamic philosophy Aquinas had missed. Fakhral Din Al-Razi or Ibn Arabi, for example. The former, Al-Razi, for example was a prolific writer who tried to highlight both the Avicennean theology and Asharite theology.
Moreover, Aquinas did not hold any particular opinion on Islamic theology (not Islam). Nor did he have any interest in it. But he used Muslim philosopher’s opinion for his own theological discussion.
On the other hand, Aquinas contrasts the spread of Christianity with that of Islam, arguing that much of Christianity’s early success stemmed from widespread belief in the miracles of Jesus, whereas the spread of Islam was worked through the promise of sensual pleasures and the violence of the sword.
Mohammad, Aquinas wrote, “seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure.”
Such opinions (Aquinas' writings) appealed to a new generation, to a certain type of people limited in virtue and wisdom like the ones who commented on this video…
All you have to do is ask yourself, how did Aquinas learn about Islamic philosophy and Philosophy in general?
Aquinas lived in a time when Muslim documents were widely published in Latin translations across Europe most of the 11th and 14th centuries.
These documents not only addressed the works of Aristotle, but all Greek philosophy that was simply added to the great Muslim renaissance in modern thought and discovery.
Arabic, over this early period particularly, was the language of science; of philosophy and healing and was not just ahead of Europe but was the primary sources of the European Renaissance itself.
Europeans like to simplistically say that the Arabs simply copied Greek science and thought and then re-introduced it into Europe after the end of the Roman Empire, as if this is all they did.
This was not all at all. This is of course western thinking.
They COMBINED Greek inputs with inputs that were even more significant from both India and China as well, and recombined them into a purely Arabic format.
It was this format, and it included discussions of religion, theology and philosophy as well as of all branches of science, that were widely circulated in Europe through translations, and it would have been odd if Thomas Aquinas had not been well aware of these sources (and he quoted many Arab sources), as most leading Christians did, even though the Church went out of its way to reduce their influence.
A good reference to this the “The House of Wisdom” by Jonathan Lyons, Bloomsbury Press, 2009.
Thank you
@BloggingTawheed
The miracle of the sun at Fatima, Portugal is not just a proof that the God of Christians is the true god, but also a direct slap in the face to Islam because it happened at a place named after Muhammad's daughter.
The man even said he was ignorant of Islam 😂 how can you take him as a source. One God many prophets makes perfect sense compared to trinity.
While the first verse mentioned in this video, could use a better translation, it is cut off in the middle, I suppose to distort *its meaning on purpose for the sake of confusing and misinforming the ignorant. The verse, as *it appears sahih international translation, goes on to say:
"And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise."
Notice that marriage is referenced explicitly in brackets (interpolation). This is to remind the reader of the focus of the verse being marriage rather than just sex, as made clear two verses prior where the prohibitions start (the actual context, rather than a Muslim tradition):
And do not marry those [women] whom your fathers married, except what has already occurred. Indeed, it was an immorality and hateful [to Allah] and was evil as a way.
Here the word "nikah" (typically translated as "marriage") is used explicitly. It is worth mentioning of course that the classical understanding of "nikah" is that rather than being the formal marriage, it is the contract for conjugal relations. In the Quran, it requires no witnesses, but can only be annulled with witnesses as the goal of the contract is to protect paternity, honor, and ensure the care for the children it produces. It is true however that Islam is not against the enjoyment of sexual pleasure amongst consenting adults, as the only true requirement for nikah is consent, and we were created to enjoy our relations in peace. So often unfortunately, those proclaiming the religion had self advantage in mind over peace, though this is in no way the responsibility of God, and all cruelty, and abuse will be judged in the hereafter.
This was terrible, let's go through each of your points:
1) Concubinage – Any barbarity you perceive in the Quran is equally present in the Old Testament. If anything, the barbarity of the Old Testament is many times magnified. Anything you can accuse the Prophet Muhammad of doing you can also accuse Moses of doing. Moses and his followers had concubines, they engaged in polygamy, they used warfare to further the faith, they enforced capital punishment for apostasy etc. Unless you're prepared to denounce Moses (whose actions were allegedly sanctioned by God), you have no basis for criticising Muhammad.
2) Miracles – The splitting of the moon is just one of the reported miracles during the life of the Prophet. The hadiths record many other miraculous events. You might believe this evidence is historically weak, but it's no weaker than the scattered miracle reports you have for Jesus walking on water, or healing the sick, or the resurrection itself. Miracles are ultimately irrelevant though, since both Christianity and Islam emphasise that they're not necessary to recognise God exists. Nature itself is a testament to God's existence. The Bible even says "do not test your Lord" by asking for miracles.
3) Preservation – We've had the same Quran for the past 1400 years. This is beyond contention. The Bible on the other hand is plagued with corruptions and revisions, to the point that we can point out copyist errors. How can you even trust your holy book after such egregious corruption?
The Internet and its invention has created a hive mind system with the population. We shall all learn the truth and the facts together and choose together.
https://youtube.com/shorts/TYd7bIgx4A4?si=OncFR_yPcFF-plUH
JESUS I TRUST IN YOU
Islam treated female slaves more kindly in their enslavement than other cultures did. Their honour was not considered to be permissible to anyone by way of prostitution, which was the fate of female prisoners of war in most cases. Rather Islam made them the property of their masters alone, and forbade anyone else to touch them. Moreover, the concubines have rights and their children have shared inheritance. Practically, they enjoy everything that a wife enjoys. Even if this doesn't suffice, here's some more. In later verses (24:32-33), allah even opened the doors for these women, so they can work their way to getting married to somebody and earning their freedom.
God came unto humanity as Jesus, and died for our sins, but still 600 years later he decided his word wasn't complete and then sent an angel to talk with a decadent Arab in a shaddy isolated cave…. Yeah right… that reads a lot like a DEMON
SLAVERY? You wanna say that there was no slavery in the Old Testament that – based on the scripture – was accepted by Jehova? Every time you want to criticise for slavery then read Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Exodus, apparently you don't do it too much.
so read this: LEVITICUS 25: 44-45
"And as for your male and female slaves whom you may have—from the nations that are around you, from them you may buy male and female slaves. Moreover you may buy the children of the strangers who dwell among you, and their families who are with you, which they beget in your land; and they shall become your property"
POLYGAMY – compare Genesis 25:1,5-6 (Abraham & concubines), Judges 8:29-31 (Gideon), Genesis 29:15-31 (Jacob)… and I could give you more examples of polygamy among people of "righteousness".
Islam disallows intoxicants and non-marital intercourses so I wouldn't say that it promotes "carnal" pleasures in this life.
It's almost like christians of all people feel inclined to egg themselves in the very arguments that can be used against them, most notably slavery, although i believe that there's a huge contrast between slavery in both religions.
There's a reason why a muslim philospher's diligence cannot be compared to that of a christian's, islam's validity goes beyond showing that christianity is wrong, Aquinas' 'carnal men' argument is an insult to his own intellect, and his own bible.
Leviticus 25:44-46
Numbers 31:18
So many lies here in this video.
Appeal to carnal desires? It is forbidden to even look at women that are not your family or your wife. As for the slaves, it is only permitted not encouraged. In fact the greatest act of good a muslim could perform was freeing a slave which very rapidly lead to practical abolishment of slavery. If that is not satisfactory to you Christians, then did Abraham (peace be upon him) not have a son with Hagar? Are you calling Abraham (peace be upon him) a man that followed carnal desires?
And as for attracting people with carnal desires, if you read even the beginning of the history of the Muslims you'll know that they were a persecuted group that had followed every commandment that goes against the desires of men. People had to flee from torture and persecution in the early days of islam and yet people were choosing Islam.
Islam came to a people that drank Alcohol and smoked and islam made it forbidden and the people adhered to the commandment. It came in a time when women were sold and bought like commodities markets and made that fobidden. Islam goes against the natural desires of all men and it disciplines them.
The story of Jesus peace be upon him speaking as an infant and, making a bird and breathing life into it after false and non historic how? Because you decided so? You decide what is the truth and what is not based on what? You have no solid criteria, your entire Bible was compiled based on voting of church father 400 years after Jesus in the council of nicaea. Just men. Voting. Thats your "Holy" scripture?
The Quran is not "ripping off" this story from anywhere, its God telling us himself in his own words.
The matter of miracles.
Just shows your ignorance. Prophet Muhammad (may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) performed several miracles some of which are:
He healed a sick eye,
Water gushed forth from his fingers allowing a huge number people to drink from and perform ablution when they were in the battle field.
Curing people and relieving them of their pain.
As for proving? Can you prove Jesus raised the dead or cured lepers or gave sight to the blind or that Moses parted the sea?
There were no miliary expeditions to make people Muslim in the lifetime of prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wasallam), in fact you cannot force Islam on anybody. Islam command its followers to not interfere in other people's religious believes and life. See Surah kafirun.
In fact, when Muslim were in Madina, the jews of Madina were under the protection of the Muslims until they broke the treaty they had with the muslims and aided the attackers against the Muslims.
Even when the Muslims took Jerusalem, they re-established a jewish presence there after they had been massacred and kicked out of their by the Romans. The Jews and Muslims lived peacefully together and fought side by side against the Christian crusaders who flooded the city with the blood of innocent Muslims and Jews in the name of God (saying "Deus Vult" or "God has willed it").
The statement of expelling was made after the conclusion of a battle that had been instigated by one of the hostile Jewish tribes.
Ibn Umar reported: When the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was victorious at the battle of Khaybar, he intended to expel the Jews from there, but they asked him if they could remain on condition that they work the land and they would get half of its fruits. The Prophet said:
نُقِرُّكُمْ بِهَا عَلَى ذَلِكَ مَا شِئْنَا
"We will allow you to remain upon that as long as we wish."
Fighting is made obligatory for battles. It is made a duty upon the men to fight to protect their land and people. Whats wrong with that? Only traitors and cowards turn away and run away from their people when the necessity to defend arises.
It is the Christians that corrupt the teachings of the prophets. Which prophets ever worshipped or taught about a 3 in 1 god? Not even Jesus. It is straight up polytheism taken from the pagans.
And which prophets is spoken on in the old or new testament? None. Moses did not prophecy Solomon or David, nor Solomon prophecy about Ezekiel or Zachariah or John the Baptist. Do you then make that a criteria of not considering them prophets?
A ex Muslim once told me that Islam’s concern is below waist line, whereas Christian’s and Judaisms is above neck line , meaning wisdom.