Answering Christianity Research Center

Source: www.islamforchristians.com

Quotations are commonplace in the sacred scriptures in all heavenly messages, especially Judaism, Christianity and Islam. When the true word of God involves a quotation, it should be completely identical with its original source. Otherwise, unidenticalness, partial identicalness and even approximate identicalness may serve as evidence of the distortion or even the alteration of the word of God. A quotation is nothing but the literal citation of the words of others, letter by letter, and word by word, verbatim, without increase or decrease in meanings or different orders of words.

As for Islam, Muslims do not claim that the Qur’an’s quotations from the previous scriptures, especially the Torah, the Injeel, and the Zabur, are necessarily included in the Bible simply because they do not believe that the Bible necessarily includes the original Torah, Injeel and Zabur. They rather believe that the Bible is a mixture between the remaining word of God and the word of man. Therefore, we may/may not find the Qur’an’s quotations from the previous scriptures in the Bible.

Unlike the Bible, the Qur’an has no inter-part or inter-chapter quotations for it is such a single unit which was revealed within the same span of time. Therefore, we do not find any chapter of the Qur’an quoting verses from another chapter. In general, there are a few quotations in the Qur’an for we notice that God directly talks to us without an agent.

As for the prophetic Sunnah (Tradition), including the prophetic statements, in addition to the statements of Prophet Muhammad’s Companions, as well as their successors and the successors of their successors, including the righteous predecessors and the grand scholars, they stick to the literalism of quotation from the Qur’an. That is to say Prophet Muhammad in his Sunnah, his Companions in their tradition as well as the Successors, the Successors of the Successors, the righteous predecessors and the grand scholars in their statements used to quote literal verses or parts of verses from the Qur’an letter by letter, word by word verbatim without increase or decrease in meanings, different orders of words, or adapted narrations.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

For example, Abu Sa`id bin Al-Mu`alla reported: “While I was praying in the Mosque, the Messenger of God called me but I did not respond to him. Later I said, ‘O Messenger of God! I was praying.’ He said, ‘Didn’t Allah say: ‘استجيبوا لله وللرسول إذا دعاكم لما يحييكم’ ‘Respond to God and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life.’ (Al-Anfal 8:24) He then said to me, ‘I will teach you a Sura (chapter) which is the greatest Sura in the Qur’an, before you leave the Mosque.’ Then he got hold of my hand, and when he intended to leave (the Mosque), I said to him, ‘Didn’t you say to me, ‘I will teach you a Sura which is the greatest Sura in the Qur’an?’ He said, ‘الحمد لله رب العالمين’ ‘Praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds’ (Al-Fatihah 1:2) which is Al-Sab’a Al-Mathani (i.e. the seven repeatedly recited verses) and the Grand Qur’an which has been given to me.’” (Al-Bukhari)

In the above hadith (prophetic statement), there are two quotations from two different Qur’anic chapters. The first quotation is taken from the chapter of Al-Anfal. It is completely identical to the source verse in the chapter of Al-Anfal as follows:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ يَحُولُ بَيْنَ الْمَرْءِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَأَنَّهُ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُونَ الأنفال 24:8

O you who have believed, respond to God and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life. And know that God intervenes between a man and his heart and that to Him you will be gathered. (Al-Anfal 8:24)

The second quotation is also completely identical to the source verse in the chapter of Al-Fatihah as follows:

الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ الفاتحة 2:1

Praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds (Al-Fatihah 1:2)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of God said, “When the Imam says: ‘غير المغضوب عليهم ولا الضالين’ ‘not the path of those who earn Your Anger, nor the path of those who went astray (Al-Fatihah 1:7)’, then you must say, ‘Ameen’, for if one’s utterance of ‘Ameen’ coincides with that of the angels, then his past sins will be forgiven.” (Al-Bukhari)

In the above hadith, there is one quotation from the chapter of Al-Fatihah. It is completely identical to the source verse as follows:

صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ الفاتحة 7:1

Not the path of those who earn Your Anger, nor the path of those who went astray (Al-Fatihah 1:7)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Abu Huraira reported that Prophet Muhammad said, “It was said to the children of Israel, ‘ادخلوا الباب سجدا وقولوا حطة’ ‘Enter the gate bowing humbly and say, ‘Relieve us of our burdens’, but they changed the word and entered the town crawling on their buttocks and saying: ‘A wheat grain in the hair.’” (Al-Bukhari)

In the above hadith, there is one quotation from the chapter of Al-Baqarah. It is completely identical to the source verse as follows:

وَإِذْ قُلْنَا ادْخُلُوا هَذِهِ الْقَرْيَةَ فَكُلُوا مِنْهَا حَيْثُ شِئْتُمْ رَغَدًا وَادْخُلُوا الْبَابَ سُجَّدًا وَقُولُوا حِطَّةٌ نَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ خَطَايَاكُمْ وَسَنَزِيدُ الْمُحْسِنِينَ البقرة 58:2

And [recall] when We said, “Enter this city and eat from it wherever you will in [ease and] abundance, and enter the gate bowing humbly and say, ‘Relieve us of our burdens.’ We will [then] forgive your sins for you, and We will increase the doers of good [in goodness and reward].” (Al-Baqarah 2:58)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

`Umar ibn Al Khattab reported: “My Lord agreed with me in three things: 1. I said, ‘O Messenger of God, I wish we took the station of Abraham as our praying place (for some of our prayers).’ So came the Divine Inspiration: ‘And take you (people) the station of Abraham as a place of prayer (for some of your prayers e.g. two Rak`at of Tawaf of Ka`ba)’. 2. And as regards the (verse of) the veiling of women, I said, ‘O Messenger of God! I wish you ordered your wives to cover themselves from men because good and bad ones talk to them.’ So the verse of the veiling of women was revealed. 3. Once the wives of the Prophet made a united front against him and I said to them, ‘عسى ربه إن طلقكن أن يبدله أزواجا خيرا منكن مسلمات’ ‘It may be, if he divorced you (all), that his Lord will give him in exchange consorts better than you.’ So this verse (the same as I had said) was revealed.’” (Al-Bukhari)

In the above hadith, there is one quotation from the chapter of At-Tahrim. It is completely identical to the source verse as follows:

عَسَى رَبُّهُ إِنْ طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَنْ يُبْدِلَهُ أَزْوَاجًا خَيْرًا مِنْكُنَّ مُسْلِمَاتٍ مُؤْمِنَاتٍ قَانِتَاتٍ تَائِبَاتٍ عَابِدَاتٍ سَائِحَاتٍ ثَيِّبَاتٍ وَأَبْكَارًا التحريم 5:66

It may be, if he divorced you (all), that his Lord will give him in exchange consorts better than you,- who submit (their wills), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast,- previously married or virgins. (At-Tahrim 66:5)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Abu Huraira reported: “The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. The Messenger of God said (to Muslims). ‘Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘قولوا آمنا بالله وما أنزل إلينا’ ‘We believed in God and what has been revealed to us.’” (Al-Bukhari)

In the above hadith, there is one quotation from the chapter of Al-Baqarah. It is completely identical to the source verse as follows:

قُولُوا آَمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالْأَسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَمَا أُوتِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ البقرة 136:2

Say, [O believers], “We believed in God and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him.” (Al-Baqarah 2:136)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri reported: The Messenger of God said, “Noah will be called on the Day of Resurrection and he will say, ‘Labbaik and Sa`daik, O my Lord!’ God will say, ‘Did you convey the Message?’ Noah will say, ‘Yes.’ His nation will then be asked, ‘Did he convey the Message to you?’ They will say, ‘No Warner came to us.’ Then God will say (to Noah), ‘Who will bear witness in your favor?’ He will say, ‘Muhammad and his followers.’ So they (i.e. Muslims) will testify that he conveyed the Message. And the Messenger (Muhammad) will be a witness over yourselves, and that is what is meant by the Statement of God ‘وكذلك جعلناكم أمة وسطا لتكونوا شهداء على الناس ويكون الرسول عليكم شهيدا’ ‘And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you.’ (Al-Baqarah 2:143)” (Al-Bukhari)

In the above hadith, there is one quotation from the chapter of Al-Baqarah. It is completely identical to the source verse as follows:

وَكَذَلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الْقِبْلَةَ الَّتِي كُنْتَ عَلَيْهَا إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَنْ يَتَّبِعُ الرَّسُولَ مِمَّنْ يَنْقَلِبُ عَلَى عَقِبَيْهِ وَإِنْ كَانَتْ لَكَبِيرَةً إِلَّا عَلَى الَّذِينَ هَدَى اللَّهُ وَمَا كَانَ اللَّهُ لِيُضِيعَ إِيمَانَكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِالنَّاسِ لَرَءُوفٌ رَحِيمٌ  البقرة 134:2

And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did not make the qiblah which you used to face except that We might make evident who would follow the Messenger from who would turn back on his heels. And indeed, it is difficult except for those whom Allah has guided. And never would Allah have caused you to lose your faith. Indeed Allah is, to the people, Kind and Merciful. (Al-Baqarah 2:143)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

As for the Bible, we do not find between the Old Testament and the New Testament such complete identicalness which is between the Sunnah and the Qur’an. What is more, we, sometimes, do not find the New Testament quotations attributed to the Old Testament (Matthew 2:23), (John 1:45-46).

We, sometimes, do not find such quotations in some manuscripts of the New Testament itself (1 Corinthians 2:16). The New Testament, sometimes, attribute to the Old Testament such quotations which are rather taken from somewhere or someone else, like Epimenides (Titus 1:12) or the non-canonical Book of Enoch (Jude 1:14-15). The New Testament, sometimes, gives short successive quotations as one quotation from the Old Testament, though they are multiple scattered quotations from the Old Testament without any indications in the Greek manuscripts that they are separate quotations (Mark 1:2-3), (Romans 3:10-18).

The New Testament, sometimes, gives such quotations which are only partially identical to the Old Testament. That is to say, some of the quotation words and/or meanings are found in the Old Testament, while other words and/or meanings are not found (Matthew 4:10), (Matthew 5:31), (Luke 10:25-27).

Sometimes, there is identicalness between the quotation given in the New Testament and its source in the Old Testament but with slight differences in words and/or meanings (Matthew 2:18), (Matthew 4:6). However, we still do not deny that the New Testament quotations are sometimes completely identical to their sources in the Old Testament.

Now, we may ask: if the Bible is the pure word of God, can its New Testament quotations not be completely identical to their sources in the Old Testament or be only partially or almost identical, though a quotation is nothing but the literal citation of the words of others, letter by letter, and word by word, verbatim.

The New Testament quotations’ unidenticalness or partial or approximate identicalness may serve as evidence of the distortion or even the alteration of the word of God supposed to be contained in the Bible. As the Bible we have nowadays involves such inconsistencies between its two testaments after the exclusion of the non-canonical books, what if the non-canonical books have not been excluded?

But, why is unidenticalness there? Did the New Testament authors not have copies of the Old Testament?

Either they had copies of the Old Testament, but they ignored them and added, omitted, or brought forward or back according to their own fancy, or they did not have copies of the Old Testament for there was no old testament in the form taken in the wake of the Council of Nicaea and even later on, and so they had to depend on their fallible memory and adapted narrations.

Anyway, the result is the same, that is, the Bible scribes did not stick to literal transcription when writing down the Bible contents. They would add, omit, and bring forward and back as they liked, without adherence to literal transcription, either deliberately, indeliberately, or for bad memory and the lack of complete, reliable compilations of the Bible books at the dawn of Christianity.

Finally, the collection and classification of the Bible books in the form we have today is something which retarded for centuries after Jesus’ Ascension which gave way to the distortion and corruption of the word of God supposed to be contained in the Bible.

Source: www.islamforchristians.com

Source: www.islamforchristians.com


The followers of the divine messages believe that God sent messengers to people and that some of those prophets left behind Holy Scriptures God had revealed to guide people.

However, controversy rages among the followers of the divine messages over those scriptures in terms of, most importantly, whether or not they are free from the worldly blemishes and the human intervention, and less importantly, the correct names to be given to the contemporary versions of those scriptures many centuries after their revelation.

Muslims believe in all Holy Scriptures, mainly Torah, Injeel, and Zabur, beside Qur’an. But, they do not believe that those scriptures are included in Bible

For example, many people believe that, beside the Qur’an, the most important scriptures sent down to prophets are the Torah, the Injeel and the Zabur. In particular, the Torah was revealed to Prophet Moses, the Injeel was revealed to Prophet Jesus, and the Zabur was revealed to Prophet David.

However, do the Torah revealed to Prophet Moses, the Injeel revealed to Jesus or the Zabur revealed to David continue to exist up to date? Are the Torah, the Injeel and the Zabur really imbedded in the so-called present-day “Holy Bible”? Did the content of this Bible survive the human intervention, either addition or deletion? Can we give the Bible’s contents any of the following names: the Torah, the Injeel or the Zabur?

It is bitter, old albeit renewed, controversy among the followers of the various divine messages, including Judaism, Christianity and Islam, which will never come to an end until the Judgment Day.

As Muslims, we may express our stance on the stated scriptures, how our faith in their divinity should look like and what names should be given to the current versions of those scriptures. We will handle those scriptures according to the historical importance of each of them:

The Torah
Muslims believe that God sent down to Prophet Moses a holy scripture as a criterion dividing between right and wrong. In the Qur’an, God says:

And [recall] when We gave Moses the Scripture and criterion that perhaps you would be guided. (Al-Baqarah 2:53)

In the Qur’an, several references are made to the holy scripture sent down to Prophet Moses. It is sometimes referred to as “Suhuf” (sheets). In the Qur’an, we read:

Nay, is he not acquainted with what is in the sheets of Moses (An-Najm 53:36)

We also read:

Indeed, this is in the former sheets, the sheets of Abraham and Moses. (Al-A`la 87:18-19)

Moreover, in the Qur’an, Moses’ scripture is also referred to as “Alwah” (tablets). God says:

He said: O Moses! I have preferred thee above mankind by My messages and by My speaking (unto thee). So hold that which I have given thee, and be among the thankful. And We wrote for him, upon the tablets, the lesson to be drawn from all things and the explanation of all things, then (bade him): Hold it fast; and command thy people (saying): Take the better (course made clear) therein. I shall show thee the abode of evil livers. (Al-A`raf 7:144-145)

No matter what the exact name of the scripture revealed to Moses was, Muslims believe in it and its contents. Anyway, Muslims believe that “the Torah” is a generic name given to the revelation God sent down to Prophet Moses as a law, which prophets from the children of Israel even after Prophet Moses’ demise used for judgment among Jews. In the Qur’an, God says:

Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah ] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the disbelievers. (Al-Ma’idah 5:44)

Is the Torah the Same as the Old Testament or even the First Five Books?
Though Muslims believe in the Torah, they do not believe that the Torah is the same as the Old Testament or even the first five books thereof. Rather, Muslims believe that the original Torah has been distorted throughout centuries, and so numerous interpolations and omissions have been made until the first five books assumed the deplorably corrupted form they have for the time being.

Some Muslims have gone further, holding that the first five books went beyond distortion and went through a farther stage that is alteration and substitution, which make it impossible for one to believe that the first five books are even partly the word of God for the uncertainty whether the part which is attributable to God is still in the same pure wording revealed by God. According to those Muslims, the first five books are the word of man, partly inspired from the word of God, which makes it unsafe to believe that the first five books are totally or even partly the word of God.

As for the rest of the Old Testament books, they are not a part of the Torah revealed to Moses by consensus among Jews, Christians and Muslims. In fact, they are not more than annals of some prophets from the children of Israel which succeeded Moses. Such books may be quoted from some books revealed to prophets after Prophet Moses’ demise. However, there is no evidence for this probability which makes it difficult to believe that those books are from God either by wording or meaning.

Evidence that the Torah is not the Old Testament or even the First Five Books
Indeed, the evidence that the Torah is not the same as the Old Testament or even the first five books is uncountable:

* Human Narration rather than Direct Talk by God: when we read the Old Testament, we feel that a human being quotes God or narrates to us (Genesis 1:1), unlike the case in the Qur’an, where we feel that God directly talks to us.

* Neither the Old Testament nor the First Five Books were Written in Moses’ Lifetime: supposing that the Torah is the Old Testament or even the first five books thereof, that necessarily means that they, according to the Islamic concept, were revealed and written down, in their current form, in Prophet Moses’ lifetime. However, the conclusion of the last of the five books indicates that those books were written down only after Moses’ demise in times other than Moses’ (Deuteronomy 34:5-6).

* Contradictory Genealogies in the Old Testament: for example, the names of Jacob’s eleven sons in Genesis (Genesis 35:22-26) contradict those in Revelation (Revelation 7:4-8). Likewise, the names of Simeon’s sons in Genesis (Genesis 46:10) contradict those in 1 Chronicles (1 Chronicles 4:24). Similarly, the names of Levi’s sons in Genesis (Genesis 46:11) contradict those in Ezra (Ezra 8:18) and those in (1 Chronicles 6:1). Besides, the names of Benjamin’s sons in Genesis (Genesis 46:21) contradict those in Numbers (Numbers 26:38-41), those in 1 Chronicles (1 Chronicles 7:6) and those also found in 1 Chronicles (1 Chronicles 8:1-2).

* Contradictory Numbers in the Old Testament: for example, the number of Jacob’s family members who went to Egypt in Genesis (Genesis 46:26-27) contradicts those in Acts (Acts 7:14).

* Contradictory Historical Facts in the Old Testament: for example, the name of the buyer of the tomb of Jacob and his children in Joshua (Joshua 24:32) contradicts that in Acts (Acts 7:15-16).

* Contradictory Rulings in the Old Testament: for example, the Old Testament sometimes prohibits alcohol consumption (Leviticus 10:8-9), (Numbers 6:3-4), and sometimes permits alcohol and tells us that even prophets themselves used to consume alcohol (Genesis 9:20-24), (Genesis 19:32-35).

* Contradictory Proper Names in the Old Testament: contradictory names of persons, things and places are commonplace in the Old Testament, e.g. (2 Samuel 23:8), (1 Chronicles 11:11). See Dictionary of the Most Important Contradictions in the Bible

* Excessive Violence & Brutal Killing in the Old Testament: the Old Testament books and chapters abound in terms and contexts excessively permitting and even inciting wrongful violence and killing. (Exodus 23:23-24), (Exodus 13:15)

* Sexually Explicit Content in the Old Testament: sexually explicit contexts are rife in the Old Testament, especially the Song of Songs and other similar books. See: Glossary of Sexual Terminology in the Bible and their Counterparts in the Qur’an

* Blatant Racism in the Old Testament: going against the simplest concepts of justice and equality, overt racism is rampant in the Old Testament. Explicit discrimination is practiced in favor of the children of Israel against all other peoples and nations based on no fair or equitable grounds. Moreover, discrimination is wrongfully practiced in favor of some children of Israel against other children of Israel (Genesis 27:37-40).

* Duplication & Identity in the Old Testament: many of the Old Testament books and chapters are reproduced from one another with contradictions instead of complementation among those books and chapters. See: Dictionary of Long Duplication & Identity within the Chapters of the Bible and the Qur’an.

The Injeel
Muslims believe that God sent down to Prophet Jesus a holy scripture called “Injeel”. In the Qur’an, God says:

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Injeel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous. And let the People of the Injeel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient. (Al-Ma’idah 5:46-47)

In Islamic terms, the Injeel, like the Torah and the Qur’an, is a scripture God revealed to Prophet Jesus. It was written down neither by Jesus nor his disciples nor the disciples of his disciples.

Is the Injeel the Same as the New Testament or even the Four Gospels?
Though Muslims believe in the Injeel, they do not believe that the Injeel is the same as the New Testament or even the four gospels thereof. In fact, the New Testament contents, including gospels narrating the biography of Jesus or books narrating the acts of Jesus’ apostles or containing their letters to people or dreams, are just man-made writings. They were written down neither by Jesus nor the disciples but by anonymous authors who were not contemporary with Jesus or his disciples and wrote about Jesus and his disciples in a language not spoken by Jesus or his disciples.

Evidence that the Injeel is not the New Testament or even the Four Gospels
Indeed, the evidence that the Injeel is not the same as the New Testament or even the four gospels is uncountable:

* Oldest New Testament Manuscripts not Written in the Language of Jesus or his Disciples: the oldest New Testament manuscripts are written down in Greek though the language of Jesus and his disciples was most preponderantly Aramaic. This means that the author of the New Testament books was Greek and was not one of Jesus’ disciples.

* Long Interval between the Times of the Gospel Authors and the Times of Jesus & the Disciples: the New Testament involves numerous indications confirming that there was a long interval between the times of Jesus and the disciples and the times of the gospel authors (Luke 1:1-4), (John 21:24-25) and (Acts 1:1) amidst multitudes of fanciful tales about Jesus and his disciples. There is no clearer evidence than the fact that two out of the four gospels are attributed to Mark and Luke who were not disciples of Jesus. Furthermore, there is no single usage of the first person pronoun in the Gospel of Matthew indicating that it was written down by Matthew, the tax-collector, who was Jesus’ disciple. Only third person pronouns are used for the above-mentioned Matthew which confirms that he is not the author of the Gospel of Matthew. In the Gospel of John, no mention is made of any John except for John the Baptist. There is no evidence that John, Jesus’ disciple, is the author of this gospel. Besides, the four gospels and the Book of Acts involve indications that they were written down long time after the times of Jesus and the disciples. (Matthew 27:3-8), (Luke 1:1-4) and (Acts 1:1).

* Writings by People other than Jesus’ Disciples: epistles attributable to Paul and others are included in the Bible and considered the word of God though Paul and some epistle authors were not Jesus’ disciples.

* Human Narration rather than Direct Talk by God: when we read the New Testament, we feel that a human being quotes God or narrates to us, unlike the case in the Qur’an, where we feel that God directly talks to us.

* Multiplicity and Contradictions among Gospels: had the four gospels been from God, only one gospel would have been sufficient. Should there have been multiple gospels, they should have complemented rather than contradicted one another as the four gospels do.

* Contradictory Genealogies of Jesus: the simplest information about Jesus, that is, his genealogy, is contradictory. Jesus’ genealogy in the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 1:1-17) contradicts his genealogy in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 3:23-38).

* Contradictory Proper Names in the New Testament: contradictory names of persons, things and places are commonplace in the New Testament, e.g. (Matthew 8:28), (Mark 5:2) and (Luke 8:26).

* Contradiction between the New Testament and the Old Testament: though the New Testament came as a complement to the Old Testament, we notice flagrant contradictions between the New Testament rulings and the Old Testament ones, e.g. (Matthew 5:31-32).

* Quotations not Found in the Old Testament: the New Testament includes quotations supposed to be from the Old Testament, but they are not found in the Old Testament (Romans 10:11), (James 4:5). This means that the Old Testament is either incomplete or that the New Testament misquotes the Old Testament.

* Having Dreams as the Word of God: the New Testament ends in the Book of Revelation, which contains dreams of John considered words of God

The Zabur
Muslims believe that God sent down to Prophet David a holy scripture called “Zabur”. In the Qur’an, God says:

Indeed, We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], as We revealed to Noah and the prophets after him. And we revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, the Descendants, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We gave the Zabur. (An-Nisaa’ 4:163)

God also says:

And your Lord is most knowing of whoever is in the heavens and the earth. And We have made some of the prophets exceed others [in various ways], and to David We gave the Zabur. (Al-Israa’ 17:55)

 

Is the Zabur the Same as the Book of Psalms in the Bible?
In a prophetic statement (hadith), Prophet Muhammad told us that Prophet David had psalms. Abu Musa reported that Prophet Muhammad said: “O Abu Musa, you have been given a psalm of the Psalms of David’s family.” (Al-Bukhari)

However, Muslims do not believe that the Zabur is the Book of Psalms in the Bible. Since Moses’ Torah and Jesus’ Injeel were distorted in the Bible, the Book of Psalms is more likely to have been distorted if it is David’s Zabur.

Conclusion
To conclude, Muslims believe in all Holy Scriptures, mainly the Torah, the Injeel, and the Zabur, not to mention the Qur’an. However, they do not believe that those scriptures are currently included in the Bible either for distortion and alteration like in the Torah’s case, or for loss and substitution with the word of man like in the Injeel’s case or for inclusion in an apparently man-made context which makes it open to corruption like in the Zabur’s case.

References:

The Glorious Qur’an
Sahih Al-Bukhari
The Holy Bible

Source: www.islamforchristians.com

The Bible abounds in almost identical chapters involving duplication in details with, sometimes, irreconcilable contradictory differences, unlike the Qur’an

To download the Dictionary of Long Duplication & Identity within the Chapters of Bible and Qur’an, click:

http://www.islamforchristians.com/dictionary-duplication-identity-chapters-bible-quran/

Source: http://www.islamforchristians.com/

Though Christianity was supposed to have come to complement the previous heavenly messages, combat and replace the polytheistic paganism, we observe that the contemporary Trinitarian Christianity in its current form and since the Council of Nicaea held in 325 A.D. up to date is nearer to the polytheistic paganism and farther from the monotheistic heavenly messages, including the previous ones, mainly Prophet Moses’ message (Judaism), and the final message of (Islam) brought by Prophet Muhammad.

The Heavenly Messages’ Attitudes towards the Trinity

We do not come across any origins of the contemporary doctrine of the Trinity in the divine messages of the previous prophets or the subsequent message of Prophet Muhammad in the light of the Jewish scriptures, especially the Hebrew Bible called “Tanakh”, the Muslim holy book, namely the Qur’an and even the Christian scriptures called the “Bible” including the Old Testament and the New Testament.This false doctrine is foreign to the true religion of God as introduced by prophets every time and everywhere according to the current scriptures despite the distortion caused to the Jewish and Christian scriptures. In the Tanakh, the Qur’an and the Bible itself, we only find out a clear-cut, explicit call to pure monotheism. The examples of such a frequent call is even too numerous to be enumerated here.However, about pure monotheism in the Tanakh, for example, we read: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” (Deuteronomy 6:4)About pure monotheism, in the Qur’an, for example, we read:And your god is one God There is no deity [worthy of worship] except Him, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful (Al-Baqarah 2:163)

About pure monotheism, in the Bible itself, for example, the New Testament quotes Jesus as saying: “Get thee hence, Satan! For it is written: ‘Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.’” (Matthew 4:10)Accordingly, it becomes clear that the alleged doctrine of the Holy Trinity has no scriptural basis either in Judaism, Islam or Christianity itself. It originates only from the blind Christian tradition which derived this false creed from the Council of Nicaea and the subsequent ecumenical councils.Regardless of the scriptural basis, this bizarre doctrine contradicts the simplest axioms of logic and reason. The following are the most basic questions to be asked in this regard:Does it sound reasonable that God did not tell His servants from Adam to Jesus that He has three persons, including Jesus himself, and that those three persons deserve worship?Does it sound logical that humanity remained ignorant of the alleged three persons until the First Council of Nicaea was held in 325 A.D.?How come the Christian clergymen differ at all early ecumenical councils over the divinity of those three persons?Is it palatable that God dropped the two persons of “the Son” and “the Holy Spirit” from the final message of Islam brought by Prophet Muhammad?What about the millions of human beings who lived and died before the advent of Jesus’ message and did not know that God allegedly has three persons, including Jesus himself, and that they had to worship those three persons?What about the millions of human beings who have come after the advent of the final message of Islam brought by Prophet Muhammad and found out that the alleged three persons have no basis except in the sight of the followers of only one heavenly message, namely the contemporary Christianity, out of numerous heavenly messages, none of which makes any mention of those persons?Let’s plunge into the depths of history in order to explore the historical roots of the alleged doctrine of the Holy Trinity, of which the three main heavenly messages are devoid, in the light of their current scriptures despite the distortion caused to most of them.

The Historical Roots of the Trinity

Jesus’ message was preached in time and space polarized by two main theistic belief systems, one of them is monotheistic and heavenly, namely Judaism, which is a mixture of the heavenly messages revealed to the prophets of the children of Israel, especially Prophet Moses. The other was polytheistic and idolatrous, namely the paganism with which the earth, including the Roman Empire itself, was rife at the time.Jesus’ message was supposed to be such a monotheistic extension of the previous heavenly messages which was expected to alleviate the materialism which characterized the children of Israel and, at the same time, combat the polytheistic paganism which was dominant on the earth at the time.However, unfortunately, the universal norm of change on earth applied. Thus, Jesus’ message was subject to the corruption and alteration to which the previous messages were subject. But, in this time, several factors played a very dangerous distortive role which brought Jesus’ message out of its monotheistic context and aligned it with the false polytheistic, pagan faiths.The stated factors include the miraculous factor which beset Jesus’ life both upon his birth without a human father and his Ascension without the end of lifetime.Those factors also include the figurative factor which characterized his statements and his message in general. This caused his followers to misunderstand many of his statements and misinterpret many of his acts.The last factor is that of the polytheistic pagan environment which was predominant during and a long time after Jesus’ mission.However, the true shift from the original monotheistic Christianity to the polytheistic Trinitarian paganism took place only when the Roman Empire under Constantine I’s command procured the last factor, that is, the environment factor as represented by the milieu supporting the polytheistic Trinitarian paganism in its war against the original monotheistic Christianity in the Council of Nicaea held in 325 A.D.Up to that point of time, there was strong presence of such Christianity which was closer to monotheism and of believers in the same. However, from this time on, such Christianity began to lose ground, whereas the pagan Trinitarian Christianity began to gain ground, thanks to the pagan background of the Roman Empire at the time.The Roman Empire was a polytheistic pagan realm which never professed monotheism in most if not all of its times. Such an idolatrous dominion used to embrace polytheism, as this was a prevalent belief in most of the Roman territories, as well as the neighboring and contemporaneous countries and civilizations both in the East and the West.No wonder, this belief was bequeathed by the past empires and civilizations. Therefore, monotheists, mainly the Jews, were very few in number vis-à-vis multitudes of polytheists including pagans and idolaters as represented by most of the then peoples, civilizations and cultures.In particular, belief in a triad rather than tetrad, pentad or the like has deep historical roots in the Roman heritage. Historical evidence for the Roman belief in a triad is uncountable.Ancient Trinitarian temples still exist in Rome, the historical metropolis of the Roman Empire, as conclusive evidence for the dogmatic plagiarism and the religious shift which took place from the original monotheistic Christianity to the contemporary Trinitarian Christianity.The most prominent historical evidence which may be given here is the “Capitolia” (singular Capitolium) and other older temples which were established to worship holy triads in the Roman history. Some Capitolia were demolished and turned into churches when the Roman Empire converted to Christianity, while others survived and still exist up to date like the Capitolium which still stands at the Capitoline Hill in Rome, the Capitolium of Brixia, and the Temple of Jupiter, Capitolium or the Temple of the Capitoline Triad in Pompeii.There is no denying that such Capitolia used for the worship of pagan triads were widespread across the Roman domain. No wonder, the Trinity was a predominant belief in the Roman Empire for long stretches of time, including the timespans preceding and coinciding with the profession of Christianity by the Roman Empire, not to mention the fact that belief in the Trinity was commonplace in neighboring, contemporaneous and even past cultures and civilizations.


Instances of the Trinity in the Roman History

The Romans did not believe in the Trinity in only one point in their history, but at several, successive points of the Roman history as follows:

The Archaic Triad

The earliest known triad in which the Romans believed was “the Archaic Triad” which consisted of: 1- Jupiter: the king of gods, 2- Mars: the god of military prowess and a war deity, and 3- Quirinus: the enigmatic god of the Roman populus (“people”).This triad antedated the establishment of the Roman Empire. The exact time this triad was worshipped is unknown.

The Capitoline Triad

The Capitoline Triad was a group of three deities who were worshipped in the ancient Roman religion in an elaborate temple on Rome’s Capitoline Hill (Capitolium).This triad consisted of: 1- Jupiter: the king of gods, 2- Juno: a goddess believed to be Jupiter’s wife and sister, and 3- Minerva: a goddess believed to be Jupiter’s daughter and the goddess of wisdom.Jupiter, Juno and Minerva were honored in temples known as Capitolia, which were built on hills and other prominent areas in many cities in Italy and the provinces, particularly during the Augustan and Julio-Claudian periods. Most had a triple cella.

Instances of the Trinity before the Roman Republic

The Trinity was not something innovated by the Roman Empire. Rather, it was inherited from the past cultures and civilizations. The following are just instances of the ancient cultures and civilizations from which the Roman Empire borrowed their belief in the Trinity:

The Umbrian Triad

Umbria was a region located in Central Italy. The regional capital was Perugia. This region was named after the Umbri people who settled in this region in the 7th century BC.According to Georg Wissowa in his manual of the Roman religion, the Umbri people had a holy triad that they used to worship in Iguvium (Gubbio). This triad was: “love, Marte and Vofionus”.

The Etruscan Triad

The Etruscan civilization is the modern name given to a powerful and wealthy civilization of ancient Italy in the area corresponding roughly to Tuscany, Western Umbria, and northern Lazio in the 7th century BC.In the beginning, the Etruscan civilization worshipped the following triad: “Aritimi (Artemis), Menrva (Minerva) and Pacha (Bacchus)”. In the course of time, the above triad was changed to: “Tinia, Uni and Menrva”, which is equivalent to the Roman triad: “Jupiter, Juno and Minerva”.

The Ancient Greek Triads

Ancient Greece was a civilization belonging to a period of Greek history from the Greek Dark Ages of the 12th–9th centuries BC to the end of antiquity (c. 600 AD). Immediately following this period was the beginning of the Early Middle Ages and the Byzantine era.Classical Greek culture had powerful influence on ancient Rome, which carried a version of it to many parts of the Mediterranean Basin and Europe. For this reason, Classical Greece is generally considered to be the seminal culture which provided the foundation of modern Western culture and is considered the cradle of Western civilization.The ancient Greeks were such polytheistic people who used to worship numerous gods in the form of triads. The neighboring, both contemporary and subsequent, civilizations, like the Roman civilization, borrowed the Trinity from the ancient Greeks in different forms and names.Click this link to review the numerous triads the Greeks had worshipped before conversion to Christianity.

Comments

We observe that the Romans borrowed the Trinity from the ancient civilizations with slight changes in names. In the beginning, the Romans worshipped the triad consisting of “Jupiter, Mars and Quirinus”.Then, they retained Jupiter and replaced the other two gods with Jupiter’s family, including Goddess Juno, Jupiter’s sister and wife, and Goddess Minerva, his daughter. So, the new triad became “Jupiter, Juno and Minerva”.The Roman Empire continued to worship this triad until it converted to Christianity. Thereupon, they replaced “Jupiter” as the king of gods with “Father” and replaced Jupiter’s family, including Juno and Minerva, with a new family, including the Son and the Holy Spirit.Thus, the Romans worshipped a new, albeit old, triad consisting, as usual, of a king of gods and his family. So, the Christian triad was formed as follows: “Father, Son and Holy Spirit”.This may decipher the Roman Catholic Church’s exaggerated sanctification of Lady Mary, the Virgin, as it believes, inter alia, that she is Jesus’ partner in salvation. Before conversion to Christianity, they used to believe in a king of gods as well as his wife and the mother of his children.That is why the Roman Catholics sanctify Mary after conversion to Christianity and give her some divine attributes though it is not included in the new triad.


_________

References:
The Glorious Qur’an
The Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible)
The Holy Bible
st-takla.org
Georg Wissowa’s manual of the Roman religion

Source: http://www.islamforchristians.com/

Source: www.islamforchristians.com

Undoubtedly, the true religion of God every time and everywhere from the times of Adam to Muhammad inspires deep spirituality and self-control rather than desire suppression. Man is an intermediate being that is midway between inanimate objects and angels. While a human has earthly desires, one also has celestial faculties.

Man may not, and even cannot, be purely earthly or purely celestial. Otherwise, man would have become an inanimate object or an angel. That is why one should steer a middle course between the earthly soil and the celestial light so that one can convey the message for which man was created.

Therefore, the successive heavenly messages of the true religion of God every time and everywhere took into consideration man’s physical and spiritual dimensions so that man can feel utmost spirituality while having adequate satisfaction of one’s worldly desires paving the way for spiritual development.

Man is a body and a soul. Each has its own requirements and needs. Neither of them can survive without the other. The negligence of the needs of one of them adversely affects the other and ultimately leads to man’s unhappiness.

It is safe to say that the indulgence or negligence of the needs of any of man’s two components to the detriment of the other per se serves as evidence of the falsehood of the faith, law and way of life. While God does not allow total immersion in the earthly soil through the indulgence of the bodily desire, He does not command such spiritual development which negatively affects body. In the Qur’an, we read:

Seek, through that which Allah has given you, the home of the Hereafter; and [yet], do not forget your share of the world. (Al-Qasas 28:77)

Thus, false is such a religion or faith which permits indulgence or negligence of any of man’s two components, that is body and soul, to the detriment of the other.

Unfortunately, in the contemporary Christianity, the clergymen often mouth off about pure spirituality coupled with the total suppression of man’s worldly desire or the so-called “monasticism”. About that, in the Qur’an, we read:

Then We sent following their footsteps Our messengers and followed [them] with Jesus, the son of Mary, and gave him the Gospel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy and monasticism, which they innovated; We did not prescribe it for them except [that they did so] seeking the approval of Allah . But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient. (Al-Hadid 57:27)

It is worth noting, according to the above verse, that the stated monasticism goes against man’s very nature. God neither wants nor commands it. What is more, most people cannot put it into practice for it contradicts the purpose of man’s creation, that is, obedience through both earthly and spiritual proportions, as well as spiritual development coupled with reasonable gratification.

The most conclusive evidence of the falsehood of monasticism, pure spirituality and desire suppression promoted by the contemporary Christianity is its most prominent followers’ failure to adhere to the same from the dawn of Christianity and throughout history. Let’s review the history of the early Christianity to spotlight a few instances of the inapplicability of pure spirituality or even desire suppression propagated by the contemporary Christianity.

Mary’s Giving Birth to Jesus while Betrothed to Joseph

Mary and the angel
Mary and the angel
First of all, where is the pure spirituality in the contemporary Christianity though God is portrayed as begetting a son by a woman betrothed to someone else?

In the New Testament, we read: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by [the power of] the Holy Spirit.” (Matthew 1:18)

If looking at or coveting the woman of someone else is forbidden in the Bible, how come God begets a son by the woman of someone else? In the Old Testament, we read:

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s.” (Exodus 20:17), (Deuteronomy 5:21)

Joseph and Jesus
Joseph and Jesus
The New Testament quotes Jesus as saying: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You must not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that if a man looks at a woman and wants to sin sexually with her, he has already committed that sin with her in his mind. If your right eye makes you sin, take it out and throw it away. It is better to lose one part of your body than to have your whole body thrown into hell.” (Matthew 5:27-29)

If impregnation out of wedlock is deemed adultery and has a capital punishment, how come God commits that offence?

About the adultery punishment in the Bible, we read: “If a man has sexual relations with his neighbor’s wife, both the man and the woman are guilty of adultery and must be put to death!” (Leviticus 20:10)

Immodesty even at Churches

Immodesty in dress in church
Immodesty in dress in church
Where is the pure spirituality in the contemporary Christianity though immodesty is shown at churches?

For example, while immodesty in dress is prohibited both in the Bible and the early popes’ decrees, immodesty in dress is widely shown at churches. In the Bible, we read:

“Every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since that is one and the same as having her head shaved. For if a woman doesn’t cover her head, she should have her hair cut off. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her head be covered.” (1 Corinthians 11:5-6)

No dress code in church
No dress code in church
We also read: “Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?” (1 Corinthians 11:13)

We further read: “Also, the women are to dress themselves in modest clothing, with decency and good sense, not with elaborate hairstyles, gold, pearls, or expensive apparel” (1 Timothy 2:9)

According to Liber Pontificalis, Pope Linus, the second pope of the Catholic Church from 67 A.D. to 76 A.D., issued a decree that women should cover their heads in church.

Also, while looking at and touching women is prohibited in the Bible, looking at and touching women is commonplace at churches either for blessing, prayer, shake-hands, baptism or confirmation or other purposes.

Looking at and touching women in church
Looking at and touching women in church
The New Testament quotes Jesus as prohibiting looking at women. We read: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You must not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that if a man looks at a woman and wants to sin sexually with her, he has already committed that sin with her in his mind. If your right eye makes you sin, take it out and throw it away. It is better to lose one part of your body than to have your whole body thrown into hell.” (Matthew 5:27-29)

In his epistles, Paul disapproved touching women. In the Bible, we read: “Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” (1 Corinthians 7:1)

Popes’ Marriages

Though the Bible commands neither monasticism nor celibacy either in the Old Testament or in the New Testament, the Council of Nicaea imposed monasticism and celibacy on deacons and bishops.

It is ironic that this is something not commanded by Jesus in the four synoptic gospels or even Paul in his epistles. The latter only approved that without obligation or imposition.

While monasticism and celibacy are seen as manifestations of pure spirituality in the modern Christianity, we observe that this is something which even the early popes themselves could not abide by.

Pope Demetrius I of Alexandra

Pope Demetrius I of Alexandra
Pope Demetrius I of Alexandra
Pope Demetrius I, the 12th Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark, was married for 47 years both before and even after he had been chosen a patriarch.

Still, Christians claim that he lived with his wife as a brother and a sister. But, how did he get married in the first place? Were pure spirituality and celibacy better than this marriage?

For more information, please visit: CopticChurch.net

Pope Mina II of Alexandria

Pope Mina II, the 61st Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark, was married. He concealed his marriage and entered the monastery, but he was exposed after he had become the pope.

For more information, please visit:  www.St-Takla.org (in Arabic)

Pope Benedict IX
Pope Benedict IX
Pope Benedict IX

Pope Benedict IX was the Pope of the Catholic Church on three occasions between October 1032 and July 1048. Wishing to marry, Benedict IX sold papacy to Gregory VI who became the next pope on the 1st of May 1045.

For more information, please download: Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy

Permission of Remarriage & Infanticide

Pope Callistus I
Pope Callistus I
Despite the contemporary Christianity’s prohibition of remarriage, bishops’ marriage and even infanticide, Tertullian (De Exhort. Castitatis, vii) speaks with reprobation of bishops who had been married more than once.

Hippolytus charges Pope Callistus I, the Bishop of Rome from 218 to 223, with being the first to allow this, against St. Paul’s rule. But in the East marriages before baptism were not counted, and in any case the law is one from which the pope can dispense if necessity arise.

Again, Callistus allowed the lower clergy to marry, and permitted noble ladies to marry low persons and slaves, which by the Roman law was forbidden; he had thus given occasion for infanticide. Here again Callistus was rightly insisting on the distinction between the ecclesiastical law of marriage and the civil law, which later ages have always taught.

For more information, please visit:  Catholic Encyclopedia

Popes’ Desire for Revenge, Killing, Mutilation and Devastation

Pope Stephen VI

Pope Stephen VI
Pope Stephen VI
Pope Stephen VI was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 896 to 897. Stephen VI is chiefly remembered in connection with his conduct towards the remains of Pope Formosus, his penultimate predecessor.

The rotting corpse of Formosus was exhumed and put on trial, before a synod of the Roman clergy, in the so-called Cadaver Synod (or Synodus Horrenda) in January 897.

With the corpse propped up on a throne, a deacon was appointed to answer for the deceased pontiff. The corpse was found guilty, stripped of its sacred vestments, deprived of three fingers of its right hand (the blessing fingers), clad in the garb of a layman, and quickly buried; it was then re-exhumed and thrown in the Tiber.

For more information, please download: The Lives of the Popes from the Time of our Saviour Jesus Christ to the Accession of Gregory VII

Cadaver Synod
Cadaver Synod
Pope Sergius III

Pope Sergius III was the Pope of the Catholic Church from January 904 to 911. He actively participated in the farcical Cadaver synod that condemned the pontificate of Formosus.

Sergius III reputedly ordered the murder of his two immediate predecessors, Leo V and Christopher. According to the pro-Formosan Eugenius Vulgarius, Sergius ordered both men to be strangled in prison sometime in early 904.

For more information, please download the following article: The Cadaver Synod: Strangest Trial in History

Pope John XII
Pope John XII
Pope John XII

Pope John XII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 955 to 964. According to Liudprand of Cremona, John XII blinded his confessor Benedict, and thereafter Benedict had died; killed John, cardinal subdeacon, after castrating him; set fires, girded on a sword, and put on a helmet and cuirass.

For more information, please visit: Catholic Encyclopedia

Pope Gregory IX

Crusades
Crusades
Pope Gregory IX was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1227 to 1241. He is known for issuing the Decretales and instituting the Papal Inquisition, a mechanism that severely punished people accused of heresy.

Gregory IX began his pontificate by suspending the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II, for dilatoriness in carrying out the promised Sixth Crusade. The suspension was followed by excommunication and threats of deposition, as deeper rifts appeared.

Inquisition
Inquisition established by Pope Gregory IX
Frederick II went to the Holy Land and in fact managed to take possession of Jerusalem. In June 1229, Frederick II returned from the Holy Land, routed the papal army which Gregory IX had sent to invade Sicily, and made new overtures of peace to the pope.

A new outbreak of hostilities led to a fresh excommunication of the emperor in 1239 and to a prolonged war. Gregory denounced Frederick II as a heretic and summoned a council at Rome to give point to his anathema.

Pope Gregory IX
Pope Gregory IX
Frederick responded by trying to capture or sink as many ships carrying prelates to the synod as he could. Eberhard II von Truchsees, Prince-Archbishop of Salzburg, in 1241 at the Council of Regensburg, declared that Gregory IX was “that man of perdition, whom they call Antichrist, who in his extravagant boasting, says, ‘I am God, I cannot err’.” He argued that the Pope was the “little horn” of Daniel 7:8.

The struggle was only terminated by the death of Gregory IX on 22 August 1241. He died before events could reach their climax; it was his successor Pope Innocent IV who declared a crusade in 1245 that would finish the Hohenstaufen threat.

For more information, please download: Lives and Times of the Popes

Pope Paul IV

Pope Paul IV
Pope Paul IV
Pope Paul IV was the Pope of the Catholic Church and the ruler of the Papal States from 1555 to 1559. The strengthening of the Inquisition continued under Paul IV, and few could consider themselves safe by virtue of position in his drive to reform the Church; even cardinals he disliked could be imprisoned.

Therefore, crowds of people gathered at the Piazza del Campidoglio and began rioting even before Paul IV died. His statue, erected before the Campidoglio just months before, had a yellow hat placed on it (similar to the yellow hat Paul IV had forced Jews to wear in public). After a mock trial, the statue was decapitated. It was then thrown into the Tiber.

Inquisition during Paul IV's papacy
Inquisition during Paul IV’s papacy
The crowd broke into the three city jails and freed more than 400 prisoners, then broke into the offices of the Inquisition at the Palazzo dell’ Inquisizone near to the Church of San Rocco. They murdered the Inquisitor, Tommaso Scotti, and freed 72 prisoners.

The people ransacked the palace, and then set it afire (destroying the Inquisition’s records). That same day, or the next day (records are unclear), the crowd attacked the Church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva. The intercession of some local nobility dissuaded them from burning it and killing all those within.

On the third day of rioting, the crowd removed the Carafa family coat of arms from all churches, monuments, and other buildings in the city.

Paul IV’s nephew, Cardinal-nephew Carlo Carafa, arrived in Rome late on August 19. Worried that the rioters might break in and desecrate the pope’s corpse, at 10 PM Cardinal Carafa had Pope Paul IV buried without ceremony next to the Cappella del Volto Santo (Chapel of the Holy Face) in St. Peter’s.

For more information, please review: The Popes: A Concise Biographical History

Popes’ Adultery, Incest and Homosexuality

Pope Sergius III

Pope Sergius III
Pope Sergius III
Pope Sergius III was the Pope of the Catholic Church from January 904 to 911. According to Chronicler Liutprand of Cremona, Pope Sergius III had mistress, namely Marozia, the mother of Pope John XI and the daughter of Theodora whom Liutprand characterized as a “shameless whore… [who] exercised power on the Roman citizenry like a man”

For more information, please download: The Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages

Pope John XII

Pope John XII
Pope John XII
Pope John XII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 955 to 964. His pontificate became infamous for the alleged depravity and worldliness with which he conducted it.

He was depicted as a coarse, immoral man in the writings which remain about his papacy, whose life was such that the Lateran Palace was spoken of as a brothel, and the moral corruption in Rome became the subject of general disgrace. His lifestyle suited the secular prince he was.

According to John, bishop of Narni, and John, a cardinal deacon, John XII fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father’s concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse.

For more information, please download: A Complete History of the Popes of Rome

Pope Benedict IX

Pope Benedict IX
Pope Benedict IX
Pope Benedict IX was the Pope of the Catholic Church on three occasions between October 1032 and July 1048.

Historian Ferdinand Gregorovius wrote that in Benedict, “It seemed as if a demon from hell, in the disguise of a priest, occupied the chair of Peter and profaned the sacred mysteries of religion by his insolent courses.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia calls him “a disgrace to the Chair of Peter.” He was the first pope rumoured to have been primarily homosexual. Pope Victor III, in his third book of Dialogues, referred to “his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts of violence and sodomy. His life as a pope was so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it.” Bishop Benno of Piacenza accused Benedict of “many vile adulteries and murders”.

His reputed dissolute activities provoked a revolt on the part of the Romans. Benedict was driven out of Rome. In September 1044, opposition to Benedict IX’s sodomitic lifestyle forced him out of the city.

For more information, please download: Benedict IX and Gregory VI

Pope Boniface VIII
Pope Boniface VIII
Pope Boniface VIII

Pope Boniface VIII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1294 to 1303. According to Guillaume de Nogaret (William of Nogaret), Boniface VIII was Sodomite.

For more information, please visit: The Free Dictionary (Wikipedia)

Pope Alexander VI

Pope Alexander VI was the Pope of the Catholic Church from August 1492 to August 1503. He acknowledged fathering several children by his mistresses. Therefore his Italianized Valencian surname, Borgia, became a byword for libertinism and nepotism, which are traditionally considered as characterizing his pontificate.

Pope Alexander VI
Pope Alexander VI surrounded by his illegitimate children
Of Alexander’s many mistresses the one for whom passion lasted longest was Vannozza (Giovanna) dei Cattanei, born in 1442, and wife of three successive husbands. The connection began in 1470, and she had four children whom he openly acknowledged as his own: Cesare (born 1475), Giovanni, afterwards duke of Gandia (commonly known as Juan, born 1476), Lucrezia (born 1480), and Gioffre (Goffredo in Italian, born 1481 or 1482).

For a period of time, before legitimizing his children after becoming Pope, Rodrigo pretended that his four children with Vannozza were his niece and nephews and that they were fathered by Vannozza’s husbands.

Pope Alexander VI
Pope Alexander VI
Before his elevation to the papacy, Cardinal Borgia’s passion for Vannozza somewhat diminished, and she subsequently led a very retired life. Her place in his affections was filled, according to some, by the beautiful Giulia Farnese (“Giulia la Bella”), wife of an Orsini.

However, he still very dearly loved Vannozza, and his love for his children by Vannozza remained as strong as ever and proved, indeed, the determining factor of his whole career. He lavished vast sums on them and lauded them with every honor.

Cesare
Cesare, Pope Alexander VI’s illegitimate son
Vannozza lived in the Palace of a late Cardinal, or in a large, palatial villa. The children lived between their mother’s home and the Papal Palace itself.

Four other children, Girolama, Isabella, Pedro-Luiz, and Bernardo, were of uncertain maternal parentage. His daughter Isabella was the great-great-grandmother of Pope Innocent X.

A daughter, Laura, was born to his mistress, Giulia Farnese; paternity was officially attributed to Orsino Orsini (Farnese’s husband).

For more information, please review: The Bad Popes

Also, please download: Chronicles of the House of Borgia

Pope Leo X

Pope Leo X
Pope Leo X
Pope Leo X was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1513 to 1521. Leo’s most recent biographer, Carlo Falconi, claims Leo hid a private life of moral irregularity behind a mask of urbanity.

Suggestions of homosexual attraction appear in works by two contemporary historians, Francesco Guicciardini and Paolo Giovio. Zimmerman notes Giovio’s “disapproval of the pope’s familiar banter with his chamberlains – handsome young men from noble families – and the advantage he was said to take of them.”

Martin Luther, who had spent time in Rome, said that Leo had vetoed a measure that cardinals should restrict the number of boys they kept for their pleasure, “otherwise it would have been spread throughout the world how openly and shamelessly the pope and the cardinals in Rome practice sodomy”; encouraging Germans not to spend time fighting fellow countrymen in defense of the papacy.

For more information, please review: Leone X. Giovanni de’ Medici (in Italian)

Pope Clement VII

Giuliano de' Medici
Giuliano de’ Medici
Pope Clement VII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1523 to 1534. He was born as an illegitimate child for his father Giuliano de’ Medici was assassinated one month before his birth. His father had not married his mother, Fioretta Gorini, who was just betrothed to him.

For more information, please review: The Papacy since 1500: From Italian Prince to Universal Pastor

Pope Gregory XIII

Pope Gregory XIII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1572 to 1585. He had an illegitimate son, Giacomo Boncompagni, after an affair with Maddalena Fulchini.

Giacomo Boncompagni
Giacomo Boncompagni
He appointed his illegitimate son Giacomo, born to his mistress at Bologna before his papacy, castellan of Sant’Angelo and Gonfalonier of the Church; Venice, anxious to please, enrolled him among its nobles.

Philip II of Spain appointed him general in his army. Gregory also helped his son to become a powerful feudatory through the acquisition of the Duchy of Sora, on the border between the Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples.

For more information, please download: History of the Christian Church

Pope Benedict XVI

Pope Benedict XVI
Pope Benedict XVI
Pope Benedict XVI was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 2005 to 2013. From his pontificate on, sexual abuse and homosexual cases involving priests in the Catholic Church have become commonplace so much so that Pope Benedict XVI could not prevent such practices. What is more, he is purportedly resigned owing to such shameful behaviors which have become rife in the Catholic Church.

During his visit to the United States, the Pope also met privately with victims of sexual abuse by priests. In July 2008, the Pope travelled to Australia to attend World Youth Day 2008 in Sydney. On 19 July, in St. Mary’s Cathedral, he made an apology for child sex abuse perpetrated by the clergy in Australia.

Pope Benedict sleeping in Malta
Pope Benedict XVI sleeping in Malta
During his visit to Malta, the Pope was moved to tears while expressing his shame at cases of abuse on the island during a 20-minute meeting with victims.

In March 2010, the Pope sent a Pastoral Letter to the Catholic Church in Ireland addressing cases of sexual abuse by Catholic priests to minors, expressing sorrow, and promising changes in the way accusations of abuse are dealt with.

One of the cases Ratzinger pursued involved Father Marcial Maciel Degollado, a Mexican priest and founder of the Legion of Christ, who had been accused repeatedly of sexual abuse.

Father Marcial Maciel Degollado
Father Marcial Maciel Degollado
Biographer Andrea Tornielli suggested that Cardinal Ratzinger had wanted to take action against Marcial Maciel Degollado, but that John Paul II and other high-ranking officials, including several cardinals and notably the Pope’s influential secretary Stanisław Dziwisz, prevented him from doing so.

According to Jason Berry, Angelo Sodano “pressured” Cardinal Ratzinger, who was “operating on the assumption that the charges were not justified”, to halt the proceedings against Maciel in 1999.

When Maciel was honored by the Pope in 2004, new accusers came forward and Cardinal Ratzinger “took it on himself to authorize an investigation of Maciel” After Ratzinger became pope he began proceedings against Maciel and the Legion of Christ that forced Maciel out of active service in the Church.

On 1 May 2010 the Vatican issued a statement denouncing Maciel’s “very serious and objectively immoral acts”, which were “confirmed by incontrovertible testimonies” and represent “true crimes and manifest a life without scruples or authentic religious sentiment.”

Cardinal Hans Hermann Groer
Cardinal Hans Hermann Groer abused 2000 boys
Pope Benedict also said he would appoint a special commission to examine the Legionaries’ constitution and open an investigation into its lay affiliate Regnum Christi. Cardinal Christoph Schönborn explained that Ratzinger “made entirely clear efforts not to cover things up but to tackle and investigate them.

This was not always met with approval in the Vatican”. According to Schönborn, Cardinal Ratzinger had pressed John Paul II to investigate Hans Hermann Groër, an Austrian cardinal and friend of John Paul accused of sexual abuse, resulting in Groër’s resignation.

For more information, please read: Pope ‘obstructed’ sex abuse inquiry

Popes’ Orgies

Pope John XII

Pope John XII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 955 to 964. All, clerics as well as laymen, declared that he had toasted to the devil with wine. They said when playing at dice, he invoked Jupiter, Venus and other demons.

For more information, please review: The Bad Popes

Also, please download: Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern

Popes’ Corruption, Nepotism and Bribery

Pope Philotheos of Alexandria

Pope Philotheos of Alexandria was the 63rd Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark. During his papacy, simony was widespread. None could be appointed as a bishop without paying a large amount of money.

It is purported that much money collected during his patriarchate was bequeathed and divided among his heirs who were four siblings.

For more information, please read: History of the Coptic Orthodox People and the Church of Egypt

Pope John XII

Pope John XII
Pope John XII
Pope John XII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 955 to 964. John, bishop of Narni, and John, a cardinal deacon, professed that they themselves saw that a deacon had been ordained in a horse stable, but were unsure of the time. Benedict, cardinal deacon, with other co-deacons and priests, said they knew that he had been paid for ordaining bishops, specifically that he had ordained a ten-year-old bishop in the city of Todi…

For more information, please review: The Bad Popes

Pope Shenouda II of Alexandria

Pope Shenouda II of Alexandria was the 65th Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark. He was known as a hot-tempered, abusive, offensive person. He engaged in simony as he liked money so much so that he would take bribes from those who wanted to be appointed as a bishop.

For more information, please visit:  www.St-Takla.org (in Arabic)

Pope Benedict IX

Pope Benedict IX
Pope Benedict IX
Pope Benedict IX was the Pope of the Catholic Church on three occasions between October 1032 and July 1048. He is the only man to have been Pope on more than one occasion and the only man ever to have sold the papacy.

Benedict was the nephew of his immediate predecessor, Pope John XIX. In October 1032, his father obtained his election through bribery. However, his reputed dissolute activities provoked a revolt on the part of the Romans. Benedict was driven out of Rome.

For more information, please download: Popes, Cardinals and War: The Military Church in Renaissance and Early Modern Europe

Pope Cyril III of Alexandria

Pope Cyril III of Alexandria was the 75th Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark. Regretfully, the history of the Coptic Church remembers him as a lover of money who did not ordain a bishop nor a priest nor a deacon without getting paid (a practice which is called Simony – the act of selling church offices and roles, named after the story of Simon Magus narrated in Acts 8:9-24).

For more information, please read: History of the Coptic Orthodox People and the Church of Egypt

Pope Boniface VIII

Pope Boniface VIII
Pope Boniface VIII
Pope Boniface VIII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1294 to 1303. He was involved in nepotism. For example, in 1295, he appointed his nephew, Benedetto Caetano, as a cardinal.

On 17 December 1295, two more relatives were appointed, Francesco Caetano, the son of Boniface VIII’s brother Peter; and Jacopo (Giacomo) Tomassi Caetani, OFM, a son of the Pope’s sister, was made Cardinal Priest of S. Clemente.

On 2 March 1300, during the Great Jubilee, Boniface VIII created one more cardinal. He was Leonardo Patrasso, Archbishop of Capua, who was Boniface VIII’s uncle.

For more information, please download: History of Pope Boniface VIII and his Times

Pope Theodosios II of Alexandria

Pope Theodosios II of Alexandria was the 79th Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark. He was involved in simony as he liked money so much so that he appointed bishops and priests in return for money.

For more information, please visit:  www.St-Takla.org (in Arabic)

Pope Callixtus III

Pope Callixtus III
Pope Callixtus III
Pope Callixtus III was the Pope of the Catholic Church and the ruler of the Papal State from 1455 to 1458. On 20 February 1456, Callixtus III elevated two of his nephews to the cardinalate. The first of them was Rodrigo de Borja (“Borgia” in Italian) who later became Pope Alexander VI(1492–1503), infamous for his alleged corruption and immorality. The second was Luis Julian de Milà.

For more information, please review: The Borgias and Their Enemies: 1431-1519

Pope Alexander VI

Pope Alexander VI
Pope Alexander VI
Pope Alexander VI was the Pope of the Catholic Church from August 1492 to August 1503. After the election of his uncle as Pope Callixtus III, he was ordained deacon and created Cardinal-Deacon of San Nicola in Carcere at the age of twenty-five in 1456. The following year, he was appointed vice-chancellor of the Holy Roman Church. Both nepotistic appointments were characteristic of the age.

Giovanni Borgia
Giovanni Borgia
During his pontificate, he endowed his relatives at the church’s and at his neighbours’ expense. Cesare Borgia, his son, while a youth of seventeen and a student at Pisa, was made Archbishop of Valencia, and Giovanni Borgia inherited the Spanish Dukedom of Gandia, the Borgias’ ancestral home in Spain. For the Duke of Gandia and for Gioffre, also known as Goffredo, the Pope proposed to carve fiefs out of the Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples.

For more information, please download: The Prince

Pope Clement VII

Pope Clement VII
Pope Clement VII
Pope Clement VII was the Pope of the Catholic Church from 1523 to 1534. Like his cousin Pope Leo X, Clement was considered too generous to his Medici relatives, draining the Vatican treasuries. This included the assignment of positions all the way up to Cardinal, lands, titles, and money. For example, Clement VII installed his illegitimate son Alessandro as duke.

These actions prompted reform measures after Clement’s death to help prevent such excessive nepotism.

For more information, please visit: Catholic Encyclopedia

Pope Julius III

Pope Julius III
Pope Julius III
Pope Julius III was the Pope of the Catholic Church and the ruler of the Papal States from 1550 to 1555. He devoted himself to a life of personal pleasure. His reputation, and that of the Catholic Church, were greatly harmed by his scandal-ridden relationship with his adopted nephew.

One outcome of the cardinal-nephew scandal, however, was the upgrading of the position of Papal Secretary of State, as the incumbent had to take over the duties Innocenzo Del Monte was unfit to perform: the Secretary of State eventually replaced the cardinal-nephew as the most important official of the Holy See.

For more information, please review: Lives of the Popes : The Pontiffs from St. Peter to John Paul II

Pope Joseph (Yousab) II of Alexandria

Pope Joseph (Yousab) II of Alexandria
Pope Joseph (Yousab) II of Alexandria
Pope Joseph II of Alexandria was the 115th Pope of Alexandria & Patriarch of the See of St. Mark. He was infamous for the misprision of the corruption in which his valet and secretary Malik was involved.

According to various reports, Malik charged large sums of money for an audience with the Pope and sold at least sixteen of the nineteen episcopal appointments made during Yousab II’s reign. Accusations of corruption and simony against Yousab II became common in the Egyptian press during this time, stirring up discontent among the Coptic laity.

Ibrahim Hilal
Ibrahim Hilal, Pope Yousab II’s main kidnapper
In July 1954, a group of political activists known as the Umma al-Qibtiya (Society of the Coptic Nation) staged a protest demanding that Yousab II resign. On July 25, 1954, the protest culminated in the group kidnapping the Pope and taking him to the Coptic Convent of Saint George in Old Cairo where he was forced to sign a letter of abdication. However, the police were able to rescue the Pope and return him to the patriarchal residence.

A year later, the Church’s Synod and the General Congregation Council agreed to remove Pope Yousab II from office, stating that he was not fit to execute his duties.

The Church was managed by a committee formed of three of the Metropolitans from 1956 to 1959.

For more information, please review: Two Thousand Years of Coptic Christianity

Early Christian Emperors’ Adultery, Incest, Polygamy and Concubinage

Constantine – the Great

Constantine I, the Great
Constantine I, the Great
Constantine the Great was the first Roman Emperor to embrace Christianity and deem it an official religion of the Roman Empire. He had a leading role in holding the Council of Nicaea and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity it established by virtue of the Nicene Creed.

Also, to him the following is attributable: Sunday as the official day of rest, the holy week celebration, the Easter celebration, the holy cross discovery, honoring the bodies of saints and martyrs for blessings, Bible compilation, and building the holy churches.

Fausta, Constantine I's wife whom he killed
Fausta, Constantine I’s wife whom he killed
However, we do not observe in Constantine I’s life such pure spirituality about which the clergy in the contemporary Christianity mouth off. On the contrary, the lives of Constantine I and his family members abounded in much carnal appetite and worldly desire.

Constantine I’s Polygamy & Concubinage

Constantine I had two wives, namely: Minervina and Fausta, in contradiction to the contemporary Christianity’s one-wife law. At first, he married Minervina, though it is purported that she was just a concubine by which he begot his firstborn son Crispus.

Crispus, Constantine I's son whom he killed
Crispus, Constantine I’s son whom he killed
Then, Constantine I had another wife, Fausta, the daughter of his rival, Emperor Maximianus, to seal the alliance between them.

Incest in Constantine I’s Court

According to Constantine’s biographer, Paul Stephenson, following the execution of Crispus, Fausta was put to death by Constantine for her adultery with him as she was close to him in age and had adulterous pregnancy.

For more information, please review: Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor

Valentinian I

Roman Emperor Valentinian I
Roman Emperor Valentinian I
Valentinian I was one of the earliest emperors who ruled the Roman Empire after its profession of Christianity as an official religion. He ruled the Roman Empire between 364 and 375.

He enacted favorable laws for Christians, including the re-enforcement of Constantine’s decree banning judicial actions on Sundays. Moreover, he banned governors and judges from chasing Christians on Sundays.

In commemoration of the Easter, he ordered the release of all criminals on this feast. He also decreed that clerics may be tried only by fellow clerics. Accordingly, a bishop could be tried only by a fellow bishop.

Severa, Valentinian I's first wife
Severa, Valentinian I’s first wife
Valentinian I’s Polygamous Marriages

According to Socrates Scholasticus, Emperor Valentinian I had two wives, namely Severa and Justina. Before marrying Justina, he had framed a law and caused it to be published throughout all cities, by virtue of which any man was permitted to have two lawful wives, paving the way for his bigamous marriage, in violation of the contemporary Christianity’s one-wife law.

For more information, please read: Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II

Heraclius

Tremissis of Emperor Heraclius
Tremissis of Emperor Heraclius
Heraclius was the Emperor of the Byzantine Empire from 610 to 641. For Christians of the Western Medieval Europe, Heraclius was the “first crusader”.

He allegedly succeeded in returning the True Cross, one of the holiest Christian relics, to Jerusalem. At his request, Pope John IV (640–642) sent Christian teachers and missionaries to Duke Porga and his Croats, who practiced Slavic paganism.

He tried to repair the schism in the Christian church in regard to the Monophysites, by promoting a compromise doctrine called Monothelitism.

Coin of Martina
Coin of Martina
Heraclius’ Incestuous Marriage

Heraclius married his niece, Martina, in 613. He used to accompany her on his expeditions. He had at least nine children by his niece, Martina; most of them were sickly children. Of Martina’s children at least two were disabled, which was seen as punishment for the illegality of the marriage.

Heraclius’ Adulterous Affair

Heraclius had an illegitimate son from an adulterous affair with a historically unknown woman. This illegitimate son was called John Athalarichos.

It is ironic that this illegitimate son, John Athalarichos, conspired a plot against Heraclius with his cousin. When Heraclius discovered the plot, he had Athalarichos’s nose and hands cut off, and he was exiled to Prinkipo.

Battle between Heraclius's army and Persians
Battle between Heraclius’s army and Persians
Giving Virgins as a Tribute to the Persian King

With the Persians at the very gate of Constantinople, Heraclius thought of abandoning the city and moving the capital to Carthage. But, Safe behind the walls of Constantinople, Heraclius was able to sue for peace in exchange for an annual tribute of a thousand talents of gold, a thousand talents of silver, a thousand silk robes, a thousand horses, and a thousand virgins to the Persian King.

For more information, please review: Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium

Charlemagne

Charlemagne or Charles the Great
Charlemagne or Charles the Great
Charlemagne or Charles the Great (Charles I) was the King of the Franksfrom 768, King of the Lombards from 774 and Emperor of the Romans from 800. He united much of Europe during the early Middle Ages. He was the first recognized emperor in Western Europe since the fall of the Western Roman Empire three centuries earlier. The expanded Frankish state that Charlemagne founded is called the Carolingian Empire.

He was the first Holy (Western) Roman Emperor between 800 and 814. All Holy Roman Emperors considered their kingdoms to be descendants of Charlemagne’s empire, up to the last Emperor Francis II and the French and German monarchies. Charlemagne was revered as a saint in the Holy Roman Empire after the twelfth century.

A map showing Charlemagne's additions (in light green) to the Frankish Kingdom
A map showing Charlemagne’s additions (in light green) to the Frankish Kingdom
Charlemagne continued his father’s policy towards the papacy and became its protector, removing the Lombards from power in northern Italy and leading an incursion into Muslim Spain. He campaigned against the Saxons to his east, Christianising them upon penalty of death and leading to events such as the Massacre of Verden.

Charlemagne’s Court between Adultery and Concubinage

First of all, at birth, Charlemagne was an illegitimate son of Pepin the Short who married Charlemagne’s mother, Bertrada of Laon, later on.

In addition to his four wives, Charlemagne had four concubines and a fifth one the nature of the relationship with her was not identified: either a concubine or just a mistress. As a result, Charlemagne had a large number of illegitimate children.

Charlemagne and his illegitimate Son, Pippin the Hunchback
Charlemagne and his illegitimate Son, Pippin the Hunchback
It is ironic that Charlemagne’s firstborn son, Pippin the Hunchback, joined rebellion against his father, Charlemagne. That is why Charlemagne banished him to the monastery of Prüm in 792.

Moreover, Charlemagne’s daughters had extramarital relationships sometimes with even members of Charlemagne’s court circle. They even gave birth to illegitimate grandchildren for Charlemagne from those relationships.

Bernard, Charlemagne's illegitimate grandson
Bernard, Charlemagne’s illegitimate grandson
However, after Charlemagne’s death the surviving daughters were banished from the court by their brother, the pious Louis, to take up residence in the convents they had been bequeathed by their father.

Likewise, Charlemagne’s sons had extramarital relationships and begot children from those relationships. For example, Pippin of Italy had an illegitimate son, namely Bernard, upon whom Charlemagne bestowed the rule of Italy.

For more information, please read: Charlemagne: Father of a Continent

Source: www.islamforchristians.com