From [*Lumen Gentium*](https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html) chapter II, paragraph 16: > (126) But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, 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. I find this really confusing on two levels. Firstly, this seems to imply that Muslims worship the same God as the Christian God; secondly, perhaps a corollary of the first point, it suggests that Muslims are also given salvation. What does the Vatican actually mean by this?

All three believe Jesus is not God, there is no Trinity as understood by traditional Christians, yet at the same time Jesus is the Messiah, the word of God, born of the virgin Mary, and accept the Torah and gospel accounts. Jesus is the Messiah, and word of God (but Trinity is wrong): https://quran.com/4/171?translations=95,101,85,20,18,22,19,17 > O People of the Book! Do not go to extremes regarding your faith; say nothing about Allah except the truth.1 The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger of Allah and the fulfilment of His Word through Mary and a spirit ˹created by a command˺ from Him.2 So believe in Allah and His messengers and do not say, “Trinity.” Stop!—for your own good. Allah is only One God. Glory be to Him! He is far above having a son! To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And Allah is sufficient as a Trustee of Affairs. Jesus fulfills the Torah, and brings the gospel: https://quran.com/en/al-maidah/46 >Then in the footsteps of the prophets, We sent Jesus, son of Mary, confirming the Torah revealed before him. And We gave him the Gospel containing guidance and light and confirming what was revealed in the Torah—a guide and a lesson to the God-fearing. Virgin birth (and immaculate conception?): https://quran.com/en/at-tahrim/12 > ˹There is˺ also ˹the example of˺ Mary, the daughter of ’Imrân, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into her ˹womb˺ through Our angel ˹Gabriel˺.1 She testified to the words of her Lord and His Scriptures, and was one of the ˹sincerely˺ devout. In the case of Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, this is sufficient for them to be considered Christians, but in the case of Muslims, they are considered a foreign religion. What explains this difference in categorization? A corollary, is there a list of minimal beliefs that categorizes a group as Christian or non-Christian, which would categorize Jesus' disciples as Christian? In older times, according to John of Damascus , it seems Islam was considered a Christian heresy, not a separate religion. >From that time to the present a false prophet named Mohammed has appeared in their midst. This man, after having chanced upon the Old and New Testaments and likewise, it seems, having conversed with an Arian monk, devised his own heresy. Based on my limited knowledge of medieval theology, it does seem like Islam (along with Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses) would be considered a form of Arianism.

Did arabic Christians and Jews use the word Allah to refer to god before Islam came about? Are there any texts predating Islam that prove this

There are a number of Christians (groups that believe in Christ and name themselves "Christian") who don't believe in the Trinity. Many of these are broadly considered Christians. Muslims are non-Trinitarians, but they believe in Jesus and claim that they follow his teachings. Why won't Muslims be considered Muslims and Christians at the same time in the sight of God?

If a Christian "converts" to Judaism or Islam (or any of the Abrahamic religions), is he still considered saved as a Christian? What if he/she converted from Trinitarian to Unitarian? This is a general Christian question, so I am requesting an overview of Christian positions on such conversions.

What are some examples of Christian apologetics responses to the Islamic concept of God that God is all-powerful so that everything that happens to a human being is because of fate and thus that what happens to a human being is interpreted as being more deterministic in nature? Background to this question: what is the use of praying if fate is a ruling force against/for a person?

This is how it's mentioned in the Bible: > Then Ezra blessed the LORD the great God. And all the people answered, "Amen, Amen!" while lifting up their hands; then they bowed low and worshipped the LORD with their faces to the ground. > > Nehemiah 8:6 but only Muslims pray with their faces to the ground. I would like to know what Bible verses show the prescriptive way to pray?

What were the beliefs of the Syriac Christians in Arabia at the time of the Islamic prophet? I have heard that these [Nazarene Christians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect)) (Christians of the city of [Najran](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najran)) did not believe that Jesus was crucified similar to the Muslims. That claim was made by a Christian apologist, but I do not get the angle as the Qur'an clearly mentions that there are Christians who believe that Jesus was crucified as it says about the crucifixion: "it was made to appear to them"

This paper [*The Priority of Mandaean Tropes Generally Considered Derivative of Christian and Islamic Influences*](https://www.academia.edu/32005295/The_Priority_of_Mandaean_Tropes_Generally_Considered_Derivative_of_Christian_and_Islamic_Influences) seems to show that [Mandaenism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandaeism) influenced a lot of Christianity and Islam, as we see many parallels between the texts, instead of the reverse claim (which the paper calls "standard model") that Islam and Christianity influenced the *Ginza Rabba* text. **How would Christianity evaluate whether this claim is correct?**

https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/40402/does-quran-548-imply-that-allah-wants-jews-to-follow-the-torah-and-christians This post suggests that the given verses in the quran that seemingly show that the gospel is not corrupted actually point to the word given by Jesus and not the current new testament But quran 5:47 states this ""So let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed in it. And those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are ˹truly˺ the rebellious."" It says that at the time of the prophet , the people of the gospel are to judge by the gospel, but the gospel at the time of the prophet was the more or less the current 4 canonical gospels of the new testament . Is this a wrong reading of the Arabic of the text( as gospel in arabic might more directly related it to the words of Jesus) or does the op make a mistake? I ask this in this exchange because Christians would have a better and less biased understanding of what exactly the gospels indicate here( even tho it's from the islamic pov)

Can anyone confirm wether this hadith is sahih or not, if so wouldn't it be very similar to the 7 year covenant of the antichrist with the Jews that's mentioned in Daniel 9:27 "4.5 Al- Mahdi’s Treaty With Romans According to various Islamic theological sources, al-Mahdi is said to be one who will initiate Islam’s fourth and final treaty between the “Romans” and the Muslims. Al-Mahdi will make this treaty for a period of seven years! In a Hadith, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said: “There will be four peace agreements between you and the Romans. The fourth will be mediated through a person who will be from the progeny of Hazrat Aaron (the brother of Moses) and will be upheld for seven years. The people asked, “O Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who will be the Imam (leader) of the people at that time?” The Prophet said: “He will be from my progeny and will be exactly forty years of age. His face will shine like a star” (Tabarani, as related by Hadrat Abu Umamah, as quoted by Zubair Ali,2004, p. 43).It appears that the period of this seven year peace agreement will likewise be the period of the Mahdi’s reign."

People claim that the Islamic Mahdi will be the Christian Antichrist due to similarities such as ruling for 7 years and riding on a white horse.There are also similarities between the Islamic dajjal and Jesus (Isa) as dajjal will heal the sick and perform miracles and claim to be the Messiah to the Jews. Can anyone tell me if these claims are wrong?

As we know, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the main 3 monotheistic religions. Quran says: > Surely, those who believed in [God], and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabians, -whosoever believes in [God] and in the Last Day, and does good deeds - all such people will have their reward with their Lord, and there will be no reason for them to fear, nor shall they grieve. [*Surah Al-Baqarah* 62](https://quran.com/2/62?translations=18,84,85,21,22,95,101) By the way [Sabians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabians) are also a from a monotheistic religion, John the Baptist was a prophet of them. From Islam point of view, if you believe God is one and do good deeds then you shouldn’t worry about your salvation. Is it like this also in Christianity, or is salvation exclusively for Christians?

I would like to delve into the Christian perspective on whether God can be credited for the healing process of an individual who, initially not a Muslim, converts to Islam and undergoes genuine spiritual renewal, or at least claims to undergo such a renewal, based on their self-reported experience. One can find many such testimonies on the web ([example 1](https://youtu.be/4-l7cemjwyI?t=605) , [example 2](https://youtu.be/nwjJS6wfv-s?t=547) , [example 3](https://youtu.be/Ertxy9kMB7M) , [example 4](https://youtu.be/8jNuBgSqYks) , [example 5](https://www.youtube.com/@MuslimConvertStories)) . I want to understand the Christian viewpoint regarding divine involvement in the well-being and spiritual growth of individuals who undergo a religious transformation, particularly in the context of the conversion of a non-Muslim to the Islamic faith. Is it conceivable that God plays a role in the spiritual development of a Muslim convert? **Are there any Christian denominations that believe this is possible in principle?** Or are all Christians denominations necessarily committed by theological reasons to ascribe any improvement and healing experienced by a Muslim convert to psychology, sociology, the influence of deceptive spirits, or any combination of these factors? *Note*: While this question can be broadly applied to individuals reporting healing and spiritual growth in various religions, my primary focus is on Islam, given its close association as an Abrahamic faith, alongside Judaism, with Christianity.

Jews had prophets and received Scriptures from those prophets. Later, came Christians who had apostles and through them received Scriptures. Still later, Muslims come along and they have one prophet Muhammad and through him they received Quran. Muhammad claimed that he belongs to the prophetic line of the Judeo-Christian tradition. In the Quran, the book Muhammad gave as the Scriptures, he quotes many familiar names and stories from the Bible. Why don't Christians, mainly Protestant Christians, accept the Islamic prophet Muhammad as a true prophet of God? If they don't, why? An already discussed question in this forum has been offered as an answer to this question. Here it is: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/87277/50422 However, the above question and the responses it gathered do not answer my question as I explain below. My above questions in the OP do not seek general reasons to test all those who claim to be the prophets of God, rather they focus only on the Islamic prophet Muhammad and his claims. Furthermore, none of the answers given in the above link examine Muhammad's teachings in the light of the Biblical teachings.

Christians see Jesus as the only Son of God who incarnated as a human being to redeem mankind from sin in fulfilment of the prophesies made in the Old Testament. The Qur'an refers to Jesus as one of the greatest prophets and accepts his Virgin Birth and Second Coming. Jews on the other hand, question the divinity of Jesus and consider his as the 'prophet of disaster'. They do not accept that Jesus fulfilled numerous prophecies of the OT. Although Christianity from its side treats Judaism as its source (Jesus himself having been a Jew in human form), and reveres the forefathers such as Abraham and David, it is doubtful if the Jews reciprocate the respect and the regard Christianity pays to Judaism. Of course, the political alignment has its own course in so far as Christian, Jewish and Muslim believers are concerned. One is however inclined to believe that in so far as religious belief is concerned, followers of Islam have more affinity to Christianity than the Jews have. **My question therefore is**: Has any comparative study been made on the perception of Christianity held by Judaism *vis-a-vis* that held by Islam?

As far as I know [there are 4 Gospels](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/18703/what-is-a-gospel-and-how-many-gospels-are-there-in-the-catholic-bible) : Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. I am an ex-Christian (currently atheist) who had a debate with a Muslim about a few discrepancies between the Qur'an and the Bible. The Muslims believe that 1. Haman worked for Pharaoh and is building babel tower 2. Mary was a sibling of Aaron 3. Jesus is given "gospel". As a non-Muslim and atheist, I of course think that Muhammad simply made a mistake. Perhaps he didn't get the story right or wasn't consistent with his sources. But of course Muslim apologists will claim that it's a misunderstanding anyway: different Haman, different meaning of sibling, and different gospel. The 3rd point is more interesting though. My Muslim friend pointed out that gospels *already* EXISTED before the Bible was written: - [Mark 1:14](https://biblehub.com/mark/1-14.htm) - [Matthew 4:23](https://biblehub.com/matthew/4-23.htm) - [Luke 8:1](https://biblehub.com/luke/8-1.htm) So it's a bit tricky. In Indonesia the word for "gospel" is "injil". I wonder where that word came from. Muslims seem to think that Jesus got the "gospel" like Muhammad got the Qur'an. But I think that's just not the case. The Gospels we have now, I understand them to be Jesus' late biographies, a bit like Hadith in Islam. However, the fact that the word "gospel" DOES show up in the Gospels themselves is intriguing. **What "gospel" was Jesus preaching because the Gospels as books weren't even written when he was living?** It looks to me that he was a Rabbi who preached typical Judaism stuff that might or might not be reinterpreted by his followers to be something much more than that.

According to the Quran, God revealed the Gospels (which it calls Injeel) to Jesus, just like He revealed the Quran to Muhammad, and Torah to Moses, but the New Testament doesn't have any books that can be called God's revelation in the first person to humans. Gospels are biographies that are believed to be written by people inspired by God. My question is did early Christian authors point out this issue? Any references would be very helpful.

It's well-known that in the Bible God mentioned all about Israel and its people like Judaism. Judaism and Christianity believe in the same Bibles also. So Judaism is an ethnic religion according to their claim. If anyone wants to be Jewish, he can't be. One must be from that ethnicity to be Jewish. It's same for many African, Indian, Chinese and so many other ethnic religions. But in case of Islam we see that God never said "O people of Arab". Qur'an is all about people of the world. God always talked about all humankind. So in case of Christianity, it seems an ethnic religion like all other ethnic religions. But why Christians claim it to be universal religion? Did Jesus or God say that the Bible is for all humankind or Christianity is for all humankind? **What is the logic of Christianity being different from other ethnic religions?**

The main difference between Christianity and Islam is the acceptance of the Quran as an inspired revelation. Most or all Christian denominations/sects refuse the Quran believing that it be uninspired and fabricated. My question is not about all those denominations. Present Islam (both, Sunni and Shia) on their side accepts Jesus as a Messenger of God but usually doubts the reliability of Christian scriptures, and thus ignores many parts of the Message that has come to us through Jesus (p.b.u.h). This may be a reason for convinced Christians not to accept Islam as is. However, the Quran itself clearly accepts that Jesus is a Messenger of God, a Prophet, and the Messiah that will return (it is not clearer in the Quran than in the Bible whether he would come much before or almost with the Last Day). Hence, it may be a Christian position to refuse present Islam not because of a general refusal of the Quran but rather because present Islam does not consider the Word of God come through Jesus (p.b.u.h) and his importance in an appropriate way. My question: Is there any Christian denomination that considers the Quran as inspired but refuses Islam as it is?