السبت، 22 أغسطس 2026
𝐀 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐨𝐜𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐝𝐨𝐱𝐲 In pagan Christianity, which is filled with polytheism, disbelief, and offence against Allah, Mighty and Majestic, Christians believe that their God consists of three hypostases, that is, three persons, each of whom is a complete Lord and God. They believe that Prophet Jesus, the second God in the Trinity, has a divine nature that was not separated from his human nature for even the blink of an eye. The reality is that the alleged divine nature of Prophet Jesus was, according to the Christian conception itself, in existence before the birth of the body of Prophet Jesus from his mother. That is, they distinguish between the divine and human natures and then say that the divine nature united with the human nature in the person of Christ. In the Eucharistic rite, that is, the rite of Communion, Christians, particularly in Catholicism and Orthodoxy, believe that the bread and wine truly become the body and blood of Christ, although the theological details differ among Christian denominations. On the basis of the doctrine of the Real Presence, Christians consume, according to their belief, Christ himself, not merely a symbol of him. After consecration, the bread and wine are, according to Catholic and Orthodox doctrine, the actual body and blood of Christ, while retaining the appearances of bread and wine. This food, after being consumed, then undergoes the processes of digestion and excretion. That is, what enters the human body is digested and then expelled as waste. Here, the theological and philosophical problem arises: If what a Christian consumes is the actual body and blood of Christ, how are the resulting processes of digestion and excretion to be understood? Is the waste that is expelled the body of God or part of it? If the answer is no, then what was actually present in the food that was consumed? Another question then arises: if Christ, according to Christian doctrine, is fully God and fully human, and if the divine and human natures are united in him in an inseparable union, what is the relationship between this act of Communion and the Father and the Holy Spirit, whom Christian doctrine also describes as fully God? If it is said that what is consumed is the body and blood of Christ, without the Father or the Holy Spirit being consumed in this manner, then there is a real distinction between the persons in this act, while at the same time it is maintained that the three persons are one God. This demonstrates the profound problem within the Trinitarian conception: the attempt to combine the unity of God with a real distinction between the persons while affirming that each person is fully God. As for Islam, the matter is clear and does not require such complexities: “Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ ‘He is Allah—One ˹and Indivisible˺; Allah—the Sustainer ˹needed by all˺. He has never had offspring, nor was He born. And there is none comparable to Him.’” (Qur’an 112:1–4) And He, Glorified and Exalted, said: “Had there been other gods besides Allah in the heavens or the earth, both ˹realms˺ would have surely been corrupted. So Glorified is Allah, Lord of the Throne, far above what they claim.” (Qur’an 21:22) Allah, Glorified and Exalted, is One, without partner. He is not divisible, does not become incarnate, does not indwell any created being, and does not need to unite with the body of a created being so that people may draw near to Him. Allah, Glorified and Exalted, said: “˹He is˺ the Originator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you spouses from among yourselves, and ˹made˺ mates for cattle ˹as well˺—multiplying you ˹both˺. There is nothing like Him, for He ˹alone˺ is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11) This is the pure monotheism brought by all the prophets, and it is far removed from the conception of a God who becomes incarnate, is crucified, and is eaten according to the Christian conception. Scholarly note: It is more accurate not to say that all Christians believe in exactly the same details. The doctrine of the Real Presence in the Eucharist is not identical across all Christian denominations, although it is particularly explicit in Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and some Protestant traditions. Allah Knows Best. Mohamad Mostafa Nassar X @NassarMohamadMR عرض أقل Home ISLAMCOMPASS.COM Home
Responses to Christians. 1 - IIN
𝐀 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐨𝐜𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐝𝐨𝐱𝐲
In pagan Christianity, which is filled with polytheism, disbelief, and offence against Allah, Mighty and Majestic, Christians believe that their God consists of three hypostases, that is, three persons, each of whom is a complete Lord and God.
They believe that Prophet Jesus, the second God in the Trinity, has a divine nature that was not separated from his human nature for even the blink of an eye.
The reality is that the alleged divine nature of Prophet Jesus was, according to the Christian conception itself, in existence before the birth of the body of Prophet Jesus from his mother. That is, they distinguish between the divine and human natures and then say that the divine nature united with the human nature in the person of Christ.
In the Eucharistic rite, that is, the rite of Communion, Christians, particularly in Catholicism and Orthodoxy, believe that the bread and wine truly become the body and blood of Christ, although the theological details differ among Christian denominations.
On the basis of the doctrine of the Real Presence, Christians consume, according to their belief, Christ himself, not merely a symbol of him. After consecration, the bread and wine are, according to Catholic and Orthodox doctrine, the actual body and blood of Christ, while retaining the appearances of bread and wine.
This food, after being consumed, then undergoes the processes of digestion and excretion. That is, what enters the human body is digested and then expelled as waste. Here, the theological and philosophical problem arises:
If what a Christian consumes is the actual body and blood of Christ, how are the resulting processes of digestion and excretion to be understood?
Is the waste that is expelled the body of God or part of it? If the answer is no, then what was actually present in the food that was consumed?
Another question then arises: if Christ, according to Christian doctrine, is fully God and fully human, and if the divine and human natures are united in him in an inseparable union, what is the relationship between this act of Communion and the Father and the Holy Spirit, whom Christian doctrine also describes as fully God?
If it is said that what is consumed is the body and blood of Christ, without the Father or the Holy Spirit being consumed in this manner, then there is a real distinction between the persons in this act, while at the same time it is maintained that the three persons are one God.
This demonstrates the profound problem within the Trinitarian conception: the attempt to combine the unity of God with a real distinction between the persons while affirming that each person is fully God.
As for Islam, the matter is clear and does not require such complexities:
“Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ ‘He is Allah—One ˹and Indivisible˺;
Allah—the Sustainer ˹needed by all˺.
He has never had offspring, nor was He born.
And there is none comparable to Him.’”
(Qur’an 112:1–4)
And He, Glorified and Exalted, said:
“Had there been other gods besides Allah in the heavens or the earth, both ˹realms˺ would have surely been corrupted. So Glorified is Allah, Lord of the Throne, far above what they claim.”
(Qur’an 21:22)
Allah, Glorified and Exalted, is One, without partner. He is not divisible, does not become incarnate, does not indwell any created being, and does not need to unite with the body of a created being so that people may draw near to Him.
Allah, Glorified and Exalted, said:
“˹He is˺ the Originator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you spouses from among yourselves, and ˹made˺ mates for cattle ˹as well˺—multiplying you ˹both˺. There is nothing like Him, for He ˹alone˺ is the All-Hearing, All-Seeing.”
(Qur’an 42:11)
This is the pure monotheism brought by all the prophets, and it is far removed from the conception of a God who becomes incarnate, is crucified, and is eaten according to the Christian conception.
Scholarly note: It is more accurate not to say that all Christians believe in exactly the same details.
The doctrine of the Real Presence in the Eucharist is not identical across all Christian denominations, although it is particularly explicit in Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and some Protestant traditions.
Allah Knows Best.
Mohamad Mostafa Nassar
X @NassarMohamadMR
١
السيد البدوي (صوفيه مصر)
بإختصار: اسمه الحقيقي أحمد البدوي ،
ولد بمدينة فاس بالمغرب عام 596هجرياً / 1199م
وكان شيعياً اسماعيلياً باطنياً
كما كان أبوه علي البدوي وأخوه الحسن علي ذلك،
وكان أبوه من العلويين والذي كان يدعي أنه من نسل علي بن أبي طالب.
وقبل ان يأتي إلي مصر ذهب إلي العراق
وكان يطوف حول القبور وطاف ساجداً حول قبر الحلاج،
ثم بعد ذلك رجع الي مكة ثم هاجر واستقر في مصر،
في طدنتا ( طنطا الحالية) في عهد السلطان الكامل محمد بن العادل،
واختار البدوي طنطا حتي يكون بعيدا عن عيون السلطان
وأتخذها مقراً لنشر دعوته الخبيثة،
اشتري البدوي سطح منزل ليسكن به وكان صاحبه تاجر يدعي ركن الدين أبي شحيط،
ثم بعد ذلك سكن علي ظهر مسجد،
و كان البدوي وأتباعه يطلق عليهم السطوحية بسبب جلوسهم طوال الليل يصرخون ويهللون بعبارات الشرك..
وكانوا يتبولون ويتبرزون ثم يرمون قذارتهم من فوق السطوح
كان السيد البدوي يرتدي عمامة حمراء
وهذا السبب الرئيسي لتسميته بالبدوي لأنه يلبس عمامة مثل البدو،
كان البدوي يقول النظرة إلي برجل أي الذي ينظر إلي يجب أن يموت،
وكان لا يخلع عمامته حتي تذوب كما ذكر الشعراني في كتابه،
فتخيل الرائحة التي كانت تخرج منه، وهذا سبب مرض الجدري الذي أصابه في وجهه،
لم يصلي أحمد البدوي ولم يركع لله ركعة
بل انه دخل المسجد وتوجه إلي القبلة وبال فيها،
ورفع يده وقال :
" نظرت فرقيت فعليت فوجدته علي الكرسي أنا هو وهو أنا "
أي إنه هو الله (من كتاب الشعراني أيضا)ً،
وهذا كفر صريح !
ظل البدوي عزباً بلا زواج طوال حياته فرفض أحمد البدوي الزواج عندما اقترح عليه أخيه الاكبر حسن وقال " تأمرنى بالزواج و أنا موعود أن لا أتزوج إلا من الحور العين الحسان "
كان يعمل علي إعادة الشيعة الي حكم مصر ولم تكن تلك الخزعبلات التي اخترعها هو وأتباعه إلا للتضليل علي مخططهم،
ما الذي تركه أحمد البدوي من علم وتفسير أو أي شيئ من العلوم الشرعية؟
لم يترك سوي الأوهام والخرافات.
فكيف هو والي من أولياء الله؟؟؟
ماذا يساوي هذا الزنديق بجانب ابن تيمية وابن القيم وابن كثير ومحمد بن عبد الوهاب والألباني وابن عثيمين إلخ من علماء المسلمين،
لماذا لا نطلق عليهم أولياء وهم عندهم كل هذا العلم.
كتب :
1- السيد أحمد البدوي، د. سعيد عاشور.
2- الطبقات الكبرى للشعراني.
3- طبقات الرفاعية.
4- دائرة المعارف الإسلامية
الاشتراك في:
الرسائل (Atom)


