The wisdom of John of Damascus exposes Islam as being a Mutilator of God

The great Church Fathers St. John of Damascus (8th c.) and St. Gregory Palamas (14th c.) clearly point out the inherent fallacies and inconsistencies of Islamic theology by articulating the dogma of the Holy Trinity as found in the scriptures, and comparing it to Quranic passages. St John Damascene is quite bold in his refutation:

“…We say to them: ‘As long as you say that Christ is the Word of God and Spirit [“The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was Allah’s word which he conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from him” (Sura 4:171)], why do you accuse us of being Hetaeriasts [“Associators” – i.e., those who associate another with God]? For the word, and the spirit, is inseparable from that in which it naturally has existence. Therefore, if the Word of God is in God, then it is obvious that He is God.

“‘If, however, He is outside of God, then, according to you, God is without word and without spirit. Consequently, by avoiding the introduction of an associate with God you have mutilated Him. It would be far better for you to say that He has an associate than to mutilate Him, as if you were dealing with a stone or a piece of wood or some other inanimate object. Thus, you speak untruly when you call us Hetaeriasts; we retort by calling you ‘Mutilators of God.’ (St John of Damascus, Critique of Islam, emphasis added.)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The wisdom of John of Damascus exposes Islam as being a Mutilator of God

  1. θ says:

    John of Damascus just happens to be half incorrect and half correct in his lengthy commentary of Islam. It is quite refreshing that as a Syrian Arab he agrees with Islam being the Abrahamic religion thru lineage of Ishmael, whom John and his family descended from.
    Now, about his basic errors:
    (i) Associators?
    Islam never categorises the Trinitarians as the pagans. As far as Jesus is concerned, he is just one associate of both the Father and Spirit, not Allah. That’s the mistake of basic theology: Is “God” according to the Trinitarians a what, or a who, or perhaps both?

    Nevertheless, certain defunct sect such as Marcionism did believe that Jesus is other God separated from Jehovah of the Hebrews.

    Even on ontological sense Moslems do not believe in a personage of the “Father” that clones himself, let alone to believe in a lesser personage of “Son” that was originated or generated from another person different than himself for his basic existentialism. Isn’t every person of mortals originated from God?

    (ii) Mutilator of God?
    God’s Messiah in Islam is separated from Him as much as the God’s laws (Torah) separated from Him in Christianity, so who mutilates whom exactly?
    Why beholdest John of Damascus a mote that is in his Arab brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in his own eye?

  2. Anonymous says:

    That perfectly makes sense with what Jesus says, that he receives “all things” from the Father who makes them thru him, including Jesus’ person – that he receives it generated from the Father – hence Jesus’ person is a thing (like the rest of the world) which the Father makes, generates, originates thru him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s