Friday, October 2, 2015

The Arian Church, the Council of Nicea, and Muhammad

Note: The proprietor of this website is neither an expert in the history of dar Umma, or of the Arab nations and sects. The following articles are presented not as "the final word" on the subject, but to present clues as to how the Arab people and dar Umma may fit into a New Chronology. Being secular, this website makes no pretensions as to what spiritual doctrine is "spiritually correct", and the this webpage is not intended on harming the historical legacy of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

* "St. John of Damascus’s Critique of Islam" [] [begin excerpt]: The following passage is from Saint John’s monumental work, the Fount of Knowledge, part two entitled "Heresies in Epitome: How They Began and Whence They Drew Their Origin". It is usually just cited as "Heresies". The translator’s introduction points out that Fount of Knowledge is one of the most “important single works produced in the Greek patristic period,…offering as it does an extensive and lucid synthesis of the Greek theological science of the whole period. It is the first great Summa of theology to appear in either the East or the West.” Saint John (+ 749) is considered one of the great Fathers of the Church, and his writings hold a place of high honor in the Church. His critique of Islam, or “the heresy of the Ishmaelites,” is especially relevant for our times.
[begin passage from "Heresies" book] 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 reason they are called both Agarenes and Ishmaelites. They are also called Saracens, which is derived from Sarras kenoi, or destitute of Sara, because of what Agar said to the angel: ‘Sara hath sent me away destitute.’ These used to be idolaters and worshiped the morning star and Aphrodite, whom in their own language they called Khabár, which means great. And so down to the time of Heraclius they were very great idolaters. 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. Then, having insinuated himself into the good graces of the people by a show of seeming piety, he gave out that a certain book had been sent down to him from heaven. He had set down some ridiculous compositions in this book of his and he gave it to them as an object of veneration. [end excerpt]

THE GREAT HERESIES (by Hilaire Belloc) Chapter Four: The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed []

* "The Origins of Islam: A Christian Heresy Among the Arabs" [], a book review to complement this earlier book review [].

* "Origin of Islam from Arianism" []

Adapted from "Muhammad Was NOT The Founder Of Islam" by Theodore Shoebat, introduction [], main body (.pdf) []:
Muhammad was NOT the founder of Islam. Islam is simply an Arabian extension of a heresy called Arianism, or the denial of Christ’s divinity, which was founded by Arius in the 4th century. Muhammad simply continued the heresy by converting to Arianism, adding to it some other beliefs, and calling it Islam. I did a whole video on this:
That Muhammad was an Arian heretic is supported by several ancient Christian documents.  Constantine Porphyrogentinitus, the fourth emperor of the Byzantine Empire, wrote in the 10th century, in his Administrando Imperio, that "he [Muhammad] was believed because a certain Arain, who pretended to be a monk, testified falsely in his support for love of gain." (Constantine Porphyrogentinitus, De Administrando Imperio, 14, trans. R.J.H. Jenkins, brackets mine)
John the Deacon also recounts an Arian origin to Islam: "The Saracens [Muslims] are intent and zealous to deny the divinity of the Word of God. On all sides, they array themselves against him, eager to show that he is neither God nor the Son of God. Indeed, it was only because their false prophet [Muhammad] was the disciple of an Arian that he gave them this godless and impious teaching." (Refutations of the Saracens by Theodore Abu Qurrah, the Bishop of Haran, as Reported by John the Deacon, GK86-88, trans. John C. Lamoreaux)
Islam’s link with Arianism was affirmed by one of the oldest non-Muslims writers on Islam, St. John of Damascus, when he, in the 8th century, wrote: "This man [Muhammad], after having chanced upon the Old and New Testaments and likewise, it seems, having conversed with an Arian monk, devised his own heresy." (St. John of Damascus, On Heresies, 101, trans. Frederic H. Chase, Jr., brackets mine)
You do not begin the history of Islam with Muhammad, but with Arius.
Amongst the greatest examples as to why heresy is dangerous is that of Arius, the
most influential heretic on Muhammad's cult. (1) His heresy was the worst to have
emerged with the Roman Empire. (2) He was an Egyptian presbyter who was
enrolled in the church of Alexandria as an expositor of the Scriptures. (3) In order
for us to fully comprehend the tyranny of Islam and heresy, we must first expound
on the history of Arianism, and how, like Muhammad's cult, it implemented violence
on Christians in trying to force them to renounce the Trinity when it eventually took
substantial control over the government. (4)
Arius coveted the priestly position of the bishop Alexander, his jealousy taking such
a hold on him that he sought to destroy the Church by contriving his own heresy.
Since Alexander had strictly upheld and preached the Holy Trinity, Arius attempted
to refute this eternal truth by teaching that Christ was created and thus at one point
did not exist, and therefore could not have been equal with the Father. This belief,
because of its confusing of the person of Christ, appealed even to pagans. He
began to teach this to as many people as he could reach, making public
declarations of his blasphemy, and after many disputes and attempts at reasoning
with him, Alexander had no choice but to oust out Arius from the church. (5) Other
very learned men contended strongly with Arius and his followers, such as St.
Augustine, St. Jerome, St. Hillary of Poitiers, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. (6)
The Satanic nature of Arias and his ilk was exposed by Alexander in his letter to
another Alexander, the bishop of Constantinople, describing how the Arians
"trampled upon the religion of the church", being "instigated by Satanic agency"
and "skillful in deception," circulating "specious letters, calculated to delude the
simple and unwary." They lied to bishops about their hatred for the Trinity,
convincing them to accept their sect so that they could simply say that high
members of the church agreed with them. (7)
This is the type of operation which Glenn Beck is conducting, since he has been
getting top leaders of American Christianity to accept his false theology.
Not only were they of a demonic and deceptive nature, but a violent one as well.
Like Islam, they would come in the name of peace to deceive with the intent of
bloodshed, daily rallying for persecutions against Christians, and making false
accusations toward them before judges so as to get them punished. (7)
Such is no different than what the Muslims have been doing against Christians.
Islamic Sheiks today have, with their savage speeches, provoked mobs to execute
crimes toward churches and the saints. Islam was nothing knew, Arianism before it
influenced many, as is often the case, it soon overran the whole of Egypt, Libya,
and the further Thebaid, eventually extending to the other cities and provinces of
the empire, and completely dividing the saints. (8) When the emperor Constantine
had heard of this, he sent a letter to Arius and Alexander calling for mutual respect
between the two divisions; but this was done to no avail, and Arianism extended to
all of the eastern provinces of the empire. (9)
Constantine efficiently responded to this dilemma by gathering together over two
hundred bishops from all parts of the empire into an assembly: thus was the
Council of Nicea in 325. (10) During the assembly, a group of Arian bishops wrote
up their statement of faith and presented it to the rest of the attendants. Instead of
giving it recognition, the other bishops honorably teared it to pieces, and all but two
of them stood up and declared that Arias must be excommunicated. (11) The
Council concluded their statement of faith, or the Nicene Creed, in which it was
"I Believe in one God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things, whether visible
or invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the word of God, God of God, Light of
light, Life of life, the only begotten Son, the First-born of all creatures, begotten of
the Father before all ages; by whom all things were made: who for our salvation
took upon him our nature, and dwelt with men. He suffered and rose again the third
day, and ascended to the Father; and he will come again in glory to judge the living
and the dead." (12)
Constantine accepted the Creed, and was the first to testify that it was most
orthodox, imploring others to sign it in agreement, with the addition that the term
"consubstantial"--which meant that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one--be
used when describing the Holy Trinity. (13) The Council also affirmed that the "holy
catholic and apostolical church condemns all those who say that there was a
period in which the Son of God did not exist; that before he was begotten he had no
existence; that he was called out of nothing into being; that he is of a different
nature and of a different substance from the father; and that he is susceptible of
variation or change." (14) This went against all that Arius stood for, and in the
future, the Creed would also spearhead the doctrine of Muhammad.
In 335, Arius traveled to Constantinople where he would meet Constantine who,
upon his arrival, asked the heretic if he believed in the true doctrine of the Church.
Arius responded that he upheld orthodoxy, presenting to the emperor his statement
of faith, which omitted his belief against the Trinity. After declaring upon oath that
he did no subscribe to the heretical views which he in fact taught, Constantine gave
him leave with these words: "If your faith be orthodox, your oaths are honourable;
but if you do not really hold that belief which you have professed upon oath, God
will judge you from heaven." Afterwards, Arius' supporters desired to restore the
heretic to the Church, an idea unthinkable to Alexander, the bishop of
Constantinople. Mournful, Alexander retired into his church, and in lamentations
beseeched God to prevent Arius' restoration.
"If Arius," he said, "is to be joined to the Church tomorrow, dismiss me thy servant,
and do not destroy the pious with the impious. …Cut off Arius, lest if he enter into
communion with the Church, heresy enter also, and impiety be found conjoined
with piety." The next day had come, and Arius triumphantly and boldly began to
give a series of speeches; but as he spoke he was abruptly distracted by
something; he suddenly fell down, and death came upon him. (15) But his seeds of
evil continued to grow despite his decease. Eusebius, the bishop of Nicomedia,
being a fervent supporter of the Arians and their doctrine, gained the concern and
weary of the emperor. Constantine took measures against the spread of Arianism,
this being attested by these concluding words of his letter to the Nicomedians: "If
any one should make mention of those destroyers [the Arians], or presume to
speak in their praise, let him know that his audacity will be repressed by the
authority which has been committed to me as the servant of God. May God
preserve you, beloved brethren!" (16) Eusebius was then deposed and banished,
being replaced by one Amphio. (17)
The treachery of the Arians was later exemplified by their conspiring against
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in that they had accused him before Constantine
of trying to usurp the royal throne. Constantine, after hearing the bishop's defense,
acquitted Athanasius of the charge, and then sent a letter to Alexandria in which he
announced: "Believe me, my brethren, the wicked were unable to effect any thing
against your bishop." (18)
But the justice of Constantine, as well as his defense of the Faith against the deceit
of Arianism, would come to an end after his death. For, Constantine II, his son, was
soon beguiled, and accepted the Arian heresy. How this happened, can be briefly
explained: Constantine's sister, Constantia, had a deep friendship with a certain
Arian monk, though this fact was concealed from the emperor. Because of her
liking of this heretic, she bade her brother to bring him under his protection, a
request which he fulfilled. When Constantine was on his death bed, he was unable
to show his will to his sons on account of their absence, leaving him no choice but
to request the Arian monk, who was present, to give it to them. After the heretic
gave the will to Constantine II, a bond grew between the two, and the monk would
have an immense influence on the new emperor, instructing him in the apostasy of
Arius. Having now the zeal of a heretic, Constantine II went against everything his
father stood for, taking in a group of Arian bishops as his advisors, and afflicting all
kinds of cruelty on the saints. (19) Christians who had immense influence, freedom,
and state support under Constantine, in a breath, lost it all under his son. (20)
He banished Paul, the bishop of Constantinople, to Cappadocia where he would
shortly be murdered by Arians. In the words of Athanasius, "they had him [Paul]
strangled, by order of Philip the pro-consul, who was the protector of their heresy,
and the active agent of their most atrocious projects." (21) A council was held in
Sardica to dispute for the cause of Athanasius, a bishop was who banished by the
Arians. The assembly was attended by not only bishops, but victims, alongside
their families, of Arian tyranny. Arian bishops had attended the meeting, but once
they realized that the members of the synod upheld the Trinity, and that they were
with those who they had persecuted, they left in rage. (22) In the synodical letter
from the bishops assembled in Sardica, it was written that the Arians
"used chains, and the sword, as the engines of their cruelty. Several individual
were present whom they [the Arians] had exiled: others came forward as deputies
from those still kept in exile. The relations and friends of those whom they had put
to death also attended: and what was of most importance, bishops also appeared
against them; one of whom exhibited the irons and the chains with they had bound
him. There were also witnesses to testify that the death of many others had been
occasioned by their calumnies. Their infatuation led them to such excess that they
even attempted the life of a bishop; and he would have fallen a sacrifice to their
fury, had he not escaped from their hands. Theodulos, our fellow-minister, of
blessed memory, died while striving to make his escape from them; for, on account
of their calumnies, he had been condemned to death. Some showed the wounds
which with the swords of these persecutors had inflicted on them; others deposed
that they had been exposed to the torments of famine." (23)
All of these atrocities and oppressions were not done by mere individuals, but
entire Arian churches, the ministers of which used the Roman military to kill
Christians. The Arians would denude virgins, set churches on fire, and have
Christians imprisoned, all for the purpose of exalting Arianism, and punishing those
who refused to accept their heresy. In the synod, two men who had left Arianism for
the true faith, Macarius, bishop of Palestine, and Asterius, bishop of Arabia, spoke
of the violence they received by the heretics for their reconversion. They informed
the synod that they were many within the Arian movement who still held orthodox
beliefs, but were kept from joining the council by both threats and empty promises,
being even forced to remain in a single house, never being allowed, even for the
briefest moment, to be alone. (24)
The bishop Athanasius was justly permitted to return back to his church in
Alexandria by the emperor, but his Arian advisors, violently wanting to end their
great opponent, convinced him to put the saint to death. On one evening, as
Athanasius was with his congregation, and army of soldiers surrounded the church
demanding for his life. The bishop, though he had the chance to escape
immediately, waited for the congregants to exit the church for safety. "It is better," he
said, "for me to meet the danger alone, than that any of our people should
experience the least injury." When the greater number of the people left, and the
rest following after them, Athanasius was led by monks and some of the clergy out
of the church, and under the cover of darkness, he made his way to a life of exile.
With Athanasius gone, the Arians replaced him with a man of their own ilk, George.
He was a ministerial tyrant for his cult who hated Christians with such demoniacal
frenzy that he executed various sadistic cruelties inflicted on the congregation. To
do this, George hired a military chief by the name of Sebastian to see to it that the
doctrine of Arius was enforced. Women who took an oath of chastity were thrown
into prison, bishops bound and dragged, the homes of widows and orphans were
pillaged and attacked, and Christians were, under the den of night, arrested and
taken away from their houses. A week after Pentecost, the congregants gathered
together to pray that God deliver them from the despotic hand of George.
The sinister bishop ordered that these poor saints be punished for going against
him and his heresy. Sebastian charged them with his soldiers, and though by the
time they arrived most of them had left on account of the late hour, his sadistic
desires remained to be quenched. He ordered a huge fire to be made, brought next
to it two virgins, and as Muslim do to their victims, ordered them to denounce their
faith and accept Arianism. Their obstinate refusal was to his wrath, and Sebastian
told his men to beat the virgins until "they became scarcely recognizable."
Forty men were then seized, and ordered to be flogged with palm tree branches
covered in thorns. They were beaten so horrendously that some even died, while
others had thorns driven so deeply into their bodies that they could not remove
them without surgical operation. The survivors were banished to the Greater Oasis,
while the dead were refused burial. (26) How could one read such a story, and not
recognize the immense strength of spirit which these saints of old harbored within
their souls? The eyes of the wicked noticed the saints for the pureness of their
works, and as they bore their cross, they suffered under cruel men whose minds
were rooted in the earth, only to die the death of the flesh and have their souls
ascend to the eternal realm of Heaven. To those who endured this persecution and
were not allowed to bury their dead, Athanasius wrote:
"Let none of you be grieved on account of these impious heretics having prohibited
the honours of sepulture from being rendered to you. The impiety of the Arians has
reached such a height, that they block up the entrances, and sit like so many
demons around the places of sepulcher in order to prevent the dead from being
interred." (27)
Athanasius would remain in exile until being allowed to return to his church in
Alexandria by the emperor Julian in 361. (28)
One of the greatest examples of Christian fortitude is found in the actions of Pope
Felix II; for he had fearlessly declared that Constantine II was a heretic. Enraged,
the emperor ordered him to be arrested and beheaded, alongside other saints,
beside the adequate of Trajan. His body was soon recovered by Christians who
came to his place of execution at night, and he was buried on the Via Aurelia. (29)
Maximus, the bishop of Jerusalem, was a zealot of the Faith and an enemy of the
Arian cause. He persevered in his fight against the evil doctrine, and continued
even after the Arians cut off his eye and severed his right arm. (30)
What we also learn from the history of Arianism, is how heresy will always unite
itself with paganism and depravity. This is why Muslims today will unite with
Leftists, environmentalists and homosexuals. Because of the denial of the Trinity,
order was rejected, the disorder of idolatry and heathenism rushed in with open
arms, and the Arians accepted the pagans as allies against the Christians.
Thus why Christ said that "if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against
himself" (31). Lucian, the Arian bishop of Alexandria who replaced the exiled
Athanasius, used a heathen mob to decimate the saints. He accompanied himself
with one Magnus, a pagan who was known as a hater of liberty and piety: when the
idolater Julian was emperor, he burned a church down in Phoenicia; and in the
reign of the Christian Jovian he was forced to rebuild it at his own expense. But
under the succeeding Arian emperor Valens, the pagans were again empowered
and encouraged. Idolatrous rituals which were done in secret under Constantine,
were now done out in the open under the Arian power, and Valens, in his hatred for
the Cross, called the pagans to revive their reign of terror against the Church. (32)
The heathens in Alexandria, by the demand of Lucian, seized Christian virgins,
stripped them completely naked and clubbed them to death; and anyone who
protested was automatically assaulted by the savage crowed. In their ambush of
the city's church, one pagan sodomite, who renounced his male identity and
dressed as a woman, danced upon the altar mockingly calling for the Holy Ghost.
Another made himself entirely nude and seated himself on the episcopal chair. All
of the other scoundrels saluted him, and he then gave a speech declaring
homosexuality, licentiousness, theft and gluttony as superior to righteousness.
When Lucian entered the church, the vandals all saluted him, praised his Arianism
and proclaimed that he was under the favor of the Egyptian god Serapis.
"Welcome, O bishop," they said, "welcome to you, who deny the Son [Jesus Christ]!
Serapis, who loves you, has brought you here!" His accomplice Magnus seized
nineteen presbyters and deacons and compelled them to renounce the Trinity, his
words being:
"Assent, O wretched men, assent to the Arian doctrines. Even if your religion be
true, God will forgive you for having renounced it, for you are not now acting
voluntarily, but by compulsion. What is done from constraint is excusable;
voluntarily actions alone carry with them their own condemnation. Therefore, reflect
upon the reasons which I have brought before you, and sign, without delay, the
doctrine of Arius, which is now preached by Lucius. You may be certain that, if you
accede to this injunction, you will receive riches, gifts, and honours, from the
emperors. But if you will refuse obedience, you will be imprisoned, tortured, and
scourged; you will be deprived of all your wealth and possession, driven from your
country, and banished to a sterile and inhospitable region." (33)
They refused, and were eventually sentenced to be put in a ship and banished to
Phoenicia. As they were being conveyed into the ship, their fellow Christians
weeped for them. Their tears and lamentations were to the cruelty of the pagans;
Palladius, prefect of Alexandria, prohibited at that moment any citizen from
expressing grief for their ministers. Those who refused to take heed to this
tyrannical restraint endured the end of whips and blades and were then sent to the
mines as slaves. A deacon was then arrested for carrying a letter from Damasus,
bishop of Rome; his hands were bound behind his back, his head was beaten with
stones and masses of lead, and he was then thrown into the ship with his other
brethren. (34)
Later, this same Lucian was commissioned by the emperor to ordain a man named
Moses to be a bishop. But when Moses came to the church in Alexandria and saw
that it was Lucian, he confronted him with these words: "God forbid that I should
receive ordination at your hands; for the grace of the Spirit is not given in answer to
your prayers." When Lucian asked why he had such sentiments, Moses declared,
with righteous indignation:
"I say what I positively know, not what I conjecture. You oppose the apostolical
doctrines, and you speak against them; and the iniquity of your actions coincides
with the blasphemy of your words. Whom have you not employed to disturb the
assemblies of the church? Which of the eminent men have you not exiled? What
inhumanity can be compared, in point of cruelty, to that exhibited in your daily
actions?" (35)
In Antioch, a number of clergymen and monks were banished to Asia Minor for
protesting against Arianism, where they all perished upon arrival. *Theodoret. Hist.
Eccles. 4.23* The Arians in Constantinople forced numerous presbyters to get on a
ship and sail to sea as exiles. Subsequently, another ship manned by Arians
followed them, and when they had approached them, they set their ship to flames.
The Christians, unable to escape the burning ship, made their grave in the sea,
and their home in heaven. (36)
All of these commenced on the permission of the emperor Valens, who was so evil
that many of the saints came before him with fearless zealotry, chastising his
wickedness. When Vetranion, the bishop of Scythia, saw Valens he was moved by
that sublime zeal against tyranny which God gives us, and repeated with a loud
voice a Psalm of David: "I shall speak of thy testimonies before kings, and shall not
be ashamed". (37)
Pope John I, an indefatigable opponent to the Arian cause in the sixth century,
showed no fear when he reconverted Arian churches. These actions were noticed
by the emperor Theodoric, an ardent follower of Arianism, and he threatened to
destroy all of Italy if the pope did not cease. He killed many Christians and priests
by the sword, and had executed the two senators Boethius and Symachus. John
was soon thrown into prison, with other devout senators, and was forced into
confinement until death. (38)
Muhammad intermixed this heresy with his native paganism, making a religion
which did away with some of the most complex concepts in Christianity: the Trinity
and the Incarnation. (39) Therefore, the expansionist ambitions of Muhammad was
to not only to spread idolatry, but unitarianism all throughout the world by the
sword, just as the Arians enforced their heretical doctrine through violence. The
great Muslim leader Akbah expressed this violent unitarianism when he spoke of
his desire to go
"to the unknown kingdoms of the West, preaching the unity of thy [Allah's] holy
name, and putting to the sword the rebellious nations who worship any other gods
than thee." (40)
The "unity" here mentioned refers to the anti-Trinitarian nature of Allah, while the
"rebellious nations" and "gods" allude to the countries of Christendom and the
Godhead--that is, Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
 All of the atrocities committed by the Arians can be found being done in a similar
fashion in the earliest history of Muslims. There lies a story which sums up the war
between orthodoxy and apostasy. It begins in 743 AD with a tax official named
Peter of Maiouma, who being ill one day, was visited by some friendly Arabs. Peter
did not angle his position when speaking with them, nor did he hide his true
convictions in the fear of offending them or making these Muslims feel isolated.
"You should gain a reward from God for visiting me," he said to the Arabs, "even if
you friends are outside the faith. I want you to be my eyewitnesses that this is the
situation: everyone who does not believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,
in consubstantiality, and in the Trinity in Unity which rules life, has maimed his soul
and deserved eternal punishment. Even your false prophet Muhammad is such a
person, and a forerunner of the Antichrist. If you are convinced by my testimony
about the heaven and earth, abandon his mythology today, lest you be punished
with him: for I feel goodwill toward you." (41)
This saint did not proclaim such words to receive their favor or their acceptance, he
did it in the truest sense of Christian love. Modern Christians today repeatedly say
that "God is love", and therefore we should never expose or chide evil when we
see it. This is not love, but evil in its purest form; for who does not want us to fight
against the forces of darkness but the Devil himself? To love is to combat and
content, to strive and to struggle, without remorse, the entities in this world which
want us to come not to God, but to sinister creeds that leave man to nothing but
misery. What happened to our saint Peter of Maiouma? The Muslims left him alone,
and thought that his illness may have caused his bout of zeal.
They returned the next expecting a nicer, more tolerant and diplomatic Peter.
"Anathema to Muhammad," he cried, "to his false writings, and to everyone who
believes in him." His zealotry stirred the demoniacal spirits within the friendly
Arabs, and they, following the oppressive ways of the Arians before him, took their
swords and killed him. (42) Such a story captures the reality of this war between
good and evil, and in many battles for man's soul, the wicked usually prevail over
the saints. To many this may seem as a proof that saints are the losers, and their
doctrine is false; but as a few jewels in a desert of dust bring out their beauty more
pristinely, so does the truth show itself more unique and beautiful when its
followers are few. The fight between Islam and Christianity is a major part of this
war; so let us see its true history, and honor the martyrs who fought for the glory of
the Cross, and the downfall of that Antichrist religion of Muhammad.
From this history, we understand that Christian heresy is just as dangerous as any
other tyrannical system, such as communism. We cannot let its facade of holiness
deceive us; its sophistry charm us, nor its "good values" gain our acceptance. If we
don't then heresy will entirely override us, and by then will we be affirming that
theology does indeed matter.
(1) See De Croce, Refutation of the Koran, ch. i, p. 9
(2) Moczar, Seven Lies about Catholic History, ch. iv, p. 81
(3) Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 1.2; 2.29, trans. & ed. Samuel Bagster and Sons
(4) See Moczar, Seven Lies about Catholic History, ch. iv, p. 81
(5) Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 1.2; Moczar, Seven Lies about Catholic History, ch. iv,
p. 81
(6) De Croce, Refutation of the Koran, preface, p. 5
(7) Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 1.4
(8) Eusebius, Life of Constantine, 2.31
(9) Ibid, 2.34-35
(10) Eusebius, Life of Constantine, 2.8; Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 1.8. Eusebius says
the number was 250 bishops, while Theodoretus suggests that it was 270
(11) Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 1.7
(12) Ibid, 1.12
(13) Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 1.12; see also Moczar, Seven Lies about Catholic
History, ch. iv, p. 82
(14) Ibid, 1.12
(15) Ibid, 1.14, ellipses mine
(16) Ibid, 1.20, brackets mine
(17) Ibid, 1.20, brackets mine
(18) Ibid, 1.27
(19) Ibid, 2.3
(20) See Moczar, Seven Lies about Catholic History, ch. iv, p. 82
(21) Theodoret. Eccles. 2.5
(22) Ibid, 2.7-8
(23) Ibid, 2.8, brackets mine
(24) Ibid, 2.8
(25) Ibid, 2.14
(26) Ibid, 2.14
(27) Ibid, 2.14
(28) Ibid, 3.4
(29) The Book of the Popes, 38: Felix, trans. Louise Ropes Loomis
(30) Theodoret. Eccles. Hist. 2.26
(31) Matthew 12:25
(32) Ibid, 4.22, 27
(33) Ibid, 4.22
(34) Ibid, 4.22
(35) Ibid, 4.23
(36) Ibid, 4.24
(37) Ibid, 4.35
(38) Book of the Popes, 55: John I, trans. Louise Ropes Loomis
(39) Hilaire Belloc, The Crusades, ch. ii, p. 8
(40) In Gibbon, Decline and Fall, vol. v, ch. l, p. 953, brackets mine
(41) Chron. Theophan. Annus Mundi 6234
(42) Ibid 6234

* "Islam: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhammad up to 732 A.D. Was he a Caliph?" []

* "Ancient Birmingham Koran ‘could have belonged to world’s first ever Muslim’ " (2015-12-23, []

No comments:

Post a Comment