Calvin on How Far to Speculate on Predestination

James, good morning. I need a reference for a quote from Calvin. He said something like, "Where God has stopped speaking, we should also stop speaking." In other words, don't try to pry into areas where God has not revealed any information. Where can I find this quote from Calvin? Thanks.

See Calvin's comment on Romans 9:14

14. What then shall we say? etc. The flesh cannot hear of this wisdom of God without being instantly disturbed by numberless questions, and without attempting in a manner to call God to an account. We hence find that the Apostle, whenever he treats of some high mystery, obviates the many absurdities by which he knew the minds of men would be otherwise possessed; for when men hear anything of what Scripture teaches respecting predestination, they are especially entangled with very many impediments.

The predestination of God is indeed in reality a labyrinth, from which the mind of man can by no means extricate itself: but so unreasonable is the curiosity of man, that the more perilous the examination of a subject is, the more boldly he proceeds; so that when predestination is discussed, as he cannot restrain himself within due limits, he immediately, through his rashness, plunges himself, as it were, into the depth of the sea. What remedy then is there for the godly? Must they avoid every thought of predestination? By no means: for as the Holy Spirit has taught us nothing but what it behoves us to know, the knowledge of this would no doubt be useful, provided it be confined to the word of God. Let this then be our sacred rule, to seek to know nothing concerning it, except what Scripture teaches us: when the Lord closes his holy mouth, let us also stop the way, that we may not go farther. But as we are men, to whom foolish questions naturally occur, let us hear from Paul how they are to be met.

The Deaths of the Reformers According to "Fanatical Romanists"

Luther reconverted to the Roman Church on his deathbed? No he didn't. I receive many Google visits to this blog from people searching for information on "Did Luther Recant on His Deathbed?"

I recently came across this related section from Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church vol. 8 (pp. 827-828) on the deaths of the major Protestant Reformers from what Schaff calls "fanatical Romanists." I've added some hyper-links to Schaff's text of the sources he mentions.

NOTE. A CALUMNY.
It is painful to notice that sectarian hatred and malice followed the Reformers to their death-beds. Fanatical Romanists represented Zwingli’s heroic death as a judgment of God, and invented the myths that Oecolampadius committed suicide and was carried off by the devil; that Luther hung himself by his handkerchief on the bed-post and emitted a horrible stench; and that Calvin died in despair.


The myth of Luther’s suicide was soberly and malignantly repeated by an ultramontane priest (Majunke, editor of the "Germania" in Berlin), and gave rise to a lively controversy in 1890. It must be added, however, that learned and honest Catholics indignantly protested against the calumny. (Cf. my article, Did Luther commit Suicide? in "Magazine of Christian Literature," New York, for December, 1890.)


As to Calvin, it is quite probable that his body, broken by so many diseases, soon showed signs of decay, which put a stop to the reception of strangers, and may have given rise to some "calumnies," of which Beza vaguely speaks. But it was not till fifteen years after his death, that Bolsec, the Apostate monk, fastened upon Calvin’s youth an odious vice (see above, p. 302), and spread the report that he died of a terrible malady,—that of being eaten by worms,—with which the just judgment of God destroys His enemies. He adds that Calvin even invoked the devils and cursed his studies and writings. ("Il mourut invoquant les diables … . Même il maudissait l’heure qu’il avait jamais étudié et écrit.") But he gives no authority, living or dead.


Audin (Life of Calvin, p. 532, Engl. transl.) repeats this infamous fabrication with some variations and dramatic embellishments, on the alleged testimony of an unknown student, who, as he says, sneaked into the death-chamber, lifted the black cloth from the face of Calvin and reported: "Calvinus in desperatione furiens vitam obiit turpissimo et faedissimo morbo quem Deus rebellibus et maledictis comminatus est, prius excruciatus et consumptus, quod ego verissime attestari audeo, qui funestum et tragicum illius exitum et exitium his meis oculis praesens aspexi. Joann. Harennius, apud Pet. Cutzenum!"


We regret to say that a Roman Catholic archbishop, Dr. Spalding, whose work on the Reformation gives no evidence of any acquaintance with the writings of Calvin or Beza, retails the slanders of Bolsec and Audin, and informs American readers that Calvin was "a very Nero" and "a monster of impurity and iniquity!" (See above, § 110, p. 520.)


Calvin’s whole life and writings, his testament, and dying words to the senators and ministers of Geneva, and the minute account of his death by his friend Beza, who was with him till his last moments, ought to be sufficient to convince even the most incredulous who is not incurably blinded by bigotry.

Good Evidence for Historical Reliability for 2 Peter as written by Peter Himself

2 Peter is constantly being attacked by Muslims and liberals and skeptics as not an authentic book of the NT and not written by Peter, the disciple of Jesus Christ. Shabir Ally makes this one of his main points in debates. We believe that 2 Peter was inspired by God, God-breathed ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17) and written by the apostle Peter around 64-66 AD, before his martyrdom by Nero, and we have good and reasonable evidence to back up that faith.

Dr. James White has a little article with an excellent graphic of an ancient manuscript of P-72
which has both I and 2 Peter (and Jude) in it. One of the pages of this manuscript shows the end of 1 Peter and the beginning of 2nd Peter and this manuscript called P-72 is dated at around 200 AD. That is very good early dating for a copy of one of the most attacked books of the NT by skeptics, atheists, and Muslims and others, sometimes by good scholars. (the Muslims like to use Bruce Metzger as authoritative evidence that 2 Peter was not written by the apostle Peter. But many other conservative scholars and all Christians who believe in inerrancy believe that 2 Peter is "God-breathed" and was written by Peter. ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21)

Dan Wallace makes an excellent case for Peter himself being the author of 2 Peter, before his death at the hands of Nero sometime around 64-65 AD. Dan Wallace on 2 Peter.
-->I Peter was authored by Peter, but Silvanus actually wrote it for Peter, because Silvanus' Greek was excellent. ( I Peter 5:12) This also explains why the Greek of I Peter is so excellent and the Greek of 2 Peter is not as polished. It is reasonable, based on the evidence that Peter, a Hebrew Galilean, wrote 2 Peter, and used Silvanus as his secretary or amanuensis for I Peter.

Dr. White did us a great service by blowing up the lines of this manuscript so we can see the Granville-Sharp rule and the use of scribes in those days to save space by using a short-hand for God's name, called using the "nomina-sacra" (Sacred Name). God, (Theos) θεος is shortened. ιησου χριστου (Jesus Christ) is also shortened here.



Here is a clearer typed out Greek text line of the part that Dr. White has blown up for us:


--> λαχουσιν πειστιν εν δικεοσυνη του θυ̅ ημων και σωτηρος ιη̅υ χρ̅υ
It says, "to those who have received a faith by/in the righteousness of the God of ours and savior Jesus Christ." It is saying that Jesus Christ is both "God and Savior".
_ _ _ _
You can see the θυ and ιηυ and χρυ more clearly now. (with the lines over them indicating they are abbreviations for the "sacred name" (nomina sacra). θυ is the "nomina-sacra" short for "Theos" θεου (Theou is the genitive form of Theos) and ιηυ is short for Ιησου (easou = Jesus) and χρυ is the short form for Christ ( χριστου). (with the lines over the last letters indicate these are nomina-sacra.) [as I preview this, the lines are not coming out over the letters I want them to; so I needed to point that out. Blogger moved the lines to the far left.]

-->
Dr. White explains the Granville-Sharp rule.
This a clear teaching of the Deity of Christ, "the God of ours and Savior, namely Jesus Christ". when only the first noun has the definite article ( του = tou = "the") it points to the definite article functioning for both "God and Savior". Titus 2:13 also has this Granville Sharp construction, more evidence of the Deity of Christ - "our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ".
By the way, did you know that Granville Sharp, the man whom this Greek syntax structure was named after, not only was an excellent scholar, and studied the Greek text, but also helped William Wilberforce get the slave trade abolished in England? A true Christian, both in mind and heart and life and action. Certainly, these are fruits of the Holy Spirit!

From the Wikipedia article about Granville Sharp:
"One of Granville's letters written in 1778 (published in 1798), propounded what has come to be known as The Granville Sharp Rule (in actuality only the first of six principles involving the article that Sharp articulated):

“When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho, or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle ...”^[4]

This rule, if true, has a profound bearing on Unitarian doctrine, which led to a ‘celebrated controversy’, in which many leading divines took part, including Christopher Woodsworth.
Daniel B. Wallace says about Sharp:

“His strong belief in Christ’s deity led him to study the Scriptures in the original in order to defend more ably that precious truth ... As he studied the Scriptures in the original, he noticed a certain pattern, namely, when the construction article-noun-και-noun involved personal nouns which were singular and not proper names, they always referred to the same person. He noticed further that this rule applied in several texts to the deity of Jesus Christ.”^{[5] "}

Turretinfan also has an excellent article on 2 Peter showing that some ancient Christians had Bibles and how the α on the page stands for 1st Peter and the β (beta or letter B, used for 2nd) shows where 2nd Peter starts.

Here is an interesting web-site [August 8, 2013 - Addendum:  I just noticed, that, unfortunately, all of those excellent clear photos of many Greek manuscripts is no longer there. ]  that shows very clear photos of many of the ancient Greek manuscripts that give us more and more evidence for the reliability of the NT. It has the same photos of 1 and 2 Peter that Dr. White showed and even more extensive.

And here is an excellent lecture on the reliability of the NT from scholar Peter Williams.

And here is another lecture by Dr. White on the general reliability of the NT.

The Bible has not been hopelessly corrupted. Puny man cannot change the word of God. For Muslims: "No one can change the word of Allah"! The Injeel is reliable! The Bible is reliable. And we are honest and open about the few textual variants. And 2nd Peter was written by Peter, a disciple of Jesus the Messiah, and eye-witness of His life, miracles, teachings, death, resurrection, and ascension.

Winning a Prize from Rome

http://www.zenit.org/article-32861?l=english

Winners of Ratzinger Prize Announced

The Ratzinger Prize was inaugurated by the new Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI Vatican Foundation, founded last March.

These first three winners will get their prize -- €50,000 ($70,000) -- from the Holy Father on June 30. The ceremony will include an address from Father Heim and from the Pontiff.

Rome's "Significant Common Ground" Found With Pentecostals

http://www.zenit.org/article-32883?l=english

"The Vatican said participants 'rejoiced in the significant amount of common ground that was identified despite the differences between the two traditions. Both Catholics and Pentecostals recognize the abundance of gifts given freely by the Holy Spirit, and that the Church has a discerning role to play concerning their exercise.'

The group considered topics such as the biblical foundations of charism, the historical and theological overview of the subject, the spontaneity or permanence of gifts, and the roles of clergy and laity."

Female Priests Defy Catholic Church At The Altar

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/12/137102746/women-priests-defy-the-church-at-the-altar


As members of the Roman Catholic Church, these female priests are all breaking church rules, which allow ordination only to baptized males. No member of the Roman Catholic Womenpriests has been excommunicated by the Church, but they have felt repercussions. They've not only been threatened but also have lost friends and colleagues within the Church — many of whom fear they will lose their jobs if they support the women's ordination movement openly.

LaRosa recognizes they are breaking Church law — specifically Canon 10:24 — but says, "when you have an unjust law, sometimes it needs to be broken before it can be changed."

The Ironic Missing Relic

A 780-year-old religious relic of St. Anthony of Padua has been stolen, and parishioners at a Southern California Catholic church are praying to the patron saint of lost causes and missing objects for its speedy return.

..."I'm hoping we've got some higher sources who've got our backs here and we can get it back," Magana said. "People here are pretty upset but they're praying. They're praying to St. Anthony for the return of his own object." Source

Curator of the Vatican Secret Archives

In his capacity as Curator of the Vatican Secret Archives, James Swan discovered a long lost letter from Leo X to Luther, in which Leo admitted that Exsurge Domine was all a big misunderstanding, and preemptively excommunicated anyone who denied sola Scriptura or sola fide. [source]

The first thing I would do is send Tfan and Skyman in to do the hard work. I'd then sift through the crumbs left. All kidding aside, in 1880, Leo XIII opened the secret archives of the Vatican to Roman Catholic scholars. Luther’s then-unknown Roman’s treatise was found by Denifle. He was working as an assistant archivist and was able to utilize it in his Luther biography, which was highly anticipated in the academic world, until the biography actually came out, and now proves to be an embarrassment to Roman Catholic scholarship. It would indeed be interesting to find out what they've got.

Scripture Over the Church and the Devastating Results of Not Following that Rule

An Evangelical Introduction to Church History, Part 4

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

The sad reality of the history of the Church in North Africa after Augustine died in 430: The effects of the Donatist Controversy and the Vandal Barbarian Invasions, who were Arian in their theology.

This is an excellent summary of some of Augustine’s statements on the priority of Scripture above the church against the Donatists, from Augustine’s work, “On the Unity of the Church” ( De Unitate Ecclesiae), which has never been fully translated into English and is not part of the standard Early Church Fathers book sets.

Addendum: (Oct. 20, 2016)
Augustine's "On the Unity of the Church" has been recently fully translated into English.
see here.

Credit goes to David T. King for putting them in a com-box a while back at “Green Baggins” blog. (scroll up to comment # 136 - I have not learned how to get it exact yet. )

They are provided here without the original Latin text, but Pastor King has the Latin text with it at his posting. I am fairly certain that all of these are in the three volume set, Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, by David King and William Webster. (also highlighted at the side bar of this web site.) Most of these are also quoted in James White’s excellent book, Scripture Alone.

This demonstrates the truth of the often quoted statement by B. B. Warfield, “For the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine's doctrine of grace over Augustine's doctrine of the Church. “ (Warfield, Calvin and Augustine, p. 321-322)

http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/whitaker-on-the-canon-part-1/#comment-75498

·comment # 136

D. T. King said,

Augustine (354-430): Let us not hear, You [i.e., the Donatists] say this, I say that; but let us hear Thus saith the Lord. There are the Dominical books, whose authority we both acknowledge, we both yield to, we both obey; there let us seek the Church, there let us discuss the question between us. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p 164. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput III, §5, PL 43:394.

Augustine (354-430): Therefore let those testimonies which we mutually bring against each other, from any other quarter than the divine canonical books, be put out of sight. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 164. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput III, §5, PL 43:395.

Augustine (354-430): I would not have the holy Church demonstrated by human testimonies, but by divine oracles. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, pp. 164-165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput III, §6, PL 43:395.

Augustine (354-430): Whoever dissents from the sacred Scriptures, even if they are found in all places in which the church is designated, are not the church. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput IV, §7, PL 43:395-396.

For trans., See Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3 Vols., trans. George Musgrave Giger and ed. James T. Dennison (Phillipsburg: reprinted by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1992), Vol. 3, pp. 109-110.

Augustine (354-430): We adhere to this Church; against those divine declarations we admit no human cavils. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XI, §28, PL 43:410.

Augustine (354-430): I have the most manifest voice of my pastor commending to me, and without any hesitation setting forth the church, I will impute it to myself, if I shall wish to be seduced by the words of men and to wander from his flock, which is the church itself, since he specially admonished me saying, “My sheep hear my voice and follow me”; listen to his voice clear and open and heard; who does not follow, how will he dare to call himself his sheep? Let no one say to me, What hath Donatus said, what hath Parmenian said, or Pontius, or any of them. For we must not allow even Catholic bishops, if at any time, perchance, they are in error, to hold any opinion contrary to the Canonical Scriptures of God. Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, trans. George Musgrave Giger, ed. James T. Dennison, Jr., (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1992),Vol. 3, pp. 91-92 and William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XI, §28, PL 43:410-411.

Augustine (354-430): All such matters, therefore, being put out of sight, let them show their Church, if they can; not in the discourses and reports of Africans, not in the councils of their own bishops, not in the writings of any controversialists, not in fallacious signs and miracles, for even against these we are rendered by the word of the Lord prepared and cautious, but in the ordinances of the Law, in the predictions of the Prophets, in the songs of the Psalms, in the words of the very Shepherd himself, in the preachings and labours of the Evangelists, that is, in all the canonical authorities of sacred books. Nor so as to collect together and rehearse those things that are spoken obscurely, or ambiguously, or figuratively, such as each can interpret as he likes, according to his own views. For such testimonies cannot be rightly understood and expounded, unless those things that are most clearly spoken are first held by a firm faith. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XVIII, §47, PL 43:427-428.

Augustine (354-430): We ought to find the Church, as the Head of the Church, in the Holy Canonical Scriptures, not to inquire for it in the various reports, and opinions, and deeds, and words, and visions of men. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XIX, §49, PL 43:429.

Augustine (354-430): For we do not say that we ought to be believed because we are in the Church of Christ, or because that Church to which we belong, was commended to us by Optatus, Ambrose, or other innumerable Bishops of our communion; or because miracles are everywhere wrought in it. . . . These things are indeed to be approved, because they are done in the Catholic Church, but it is not thence proved to be the Catholic Church, because such things are done in it. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, when He rose from the dead, and offered His body to be touched as well as seen by His disciples, lest there should be any fallacy in it, thought it proper to convince them, rather by the testimony of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, showing how all things were fulfilled which had been foretold; and so He commanded His Church, saying, that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His Name, among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. This He testified was written in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms; this we hold, as commended from His mouth. These are the documents, these the foundations, these the strong grounds of our cause. We read in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 17:11), of some believers, that they daily searched the Scriptures if these things were so. What Scriptures? but the canonical books of the Law and the Prophets; to which are added the Gospels, the Apostolical Epistles, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Revelation of St. John, Search, then, all these, and bring forth something manifest, by which you may prove the Church to have remained only in Africa, or come out of Africa in order that it might be fulfilled which the Lord said, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” For translation, see Charles Hastings Collette, Saint Augustine: A Sketch of His Life and Writings, A.D. 387-430 (London: W. H. Allen & Co., 1883), pp. 48-49. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XIX, §47-51, PL 43:430.

David King wrote, citing Joseph Ignaz Von Dollinger, the Roman Catholic historian who opposed the Infallibility of the Pope dogma in 1870:

“But of all the works of Augustine that have been translated, there is one work, De Unitate Ecclesiae that has never been fully translated into English; . . .

But in his controversy with the Donatists, Augustine wrote this work to refute their schism from the Church Catholic. Notice how Augustine does not lodge his argument in an appeal to apostolic succession in this particular work, in fact he bids his adversaries not to look in the direction of human testimonies. Over and over, he argues with the Donatists that the church is to be found in and defined by the Scriptures. Obviously, Augustine did not share the skeptical pessimism of our present day opponents with respect to the testimony of Holy Scripture. Of Augustine’s writings and this one in particular, Johann Joseph Ignaz von Döllinger observed:

“St. Augustine has written more on the Church, its unity and authority, than all the other Fathers put together. Yet, from all his numerous works, filling ten folios, only one sentence, in one letter, can be quoted, where he says that the principality of the Apostolic Chair has always been in Rome,—which could, of course, be said then with equal truth of Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria. Any reader of his Pastoral Letter to the separated Donatists on the Unity of the Church, must find it inexplicable, on the Jesuit theory, that in these seventy-five chapters there is not a single word on the necessity of communion with Rome as the centre of unity. He urges all sorts of arguments to show that the Donatists are bound to return to the Church, but of the Papal Chair, as one of them, he knows nothing. “

See Janus, The Pope and the Council, trans. from the German, 2nd ed. (London: Rivingtons, 1869), pp. 88-89.

The Islamic Invasions and conquests - wiping out Christianity in North Africa:

Age of the Caliphs

Expansion under Muhammad, 622–632/A.H. 1-11

Expansion during the Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661/A.H. 11-40

Expansion during the Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750/A.H. 40-129

A.H. = After the Hegira (Muhammad's flight to Medina from Mecca in 622 AD)

Sad Reality of Church History in North Africa: Donatist Controversy, Vandals Invade, Muslims Invade and Conquer

The sad reality of church history is that the Donatist controversy sapped the life out of the church in N. Africa (In summary, it seems that the violence and lack of flexibility of the Donatists, coupled with the Catholic church at that time labeling them not only schismatics, but eventually heretics outside of the church, Augustine's change from using debate and persuasion to sanctioning the state to use force and violence to 'compel them to come in', and the state using force, based on Augustine's statement, the false doctrine of the Vandals and their violence also; all contributed to the life of the church being gone by the time the Muslims came.) The barbarian invasions, especially the Vandals had a lasting impact upon the next generations. The Vandals were Arian in their theology – they rejected the doctrine of the doctrine of the Deity of Christ, so “a generation arose that did not know the Lord” (see book of Judges 2:10) Between 430 – 632 AD, most of N. Africa became Arians. As a result, when the Arab Muslims invaded after 632 – 732 AD, the peoples of N. Africa, a mixture of the Berbers, Punic, and Latinized Berbers on the coasts with the Vandals and other Germanic invaders, became Muslims, because they had already given up the gospel and the doctrines of the Deity of Christ and the Trinity. Only the Coptic Church in Egypt survived the Arab Muslim invasions in N. Africa. The Coptic Church was Monophysite (or as they like to call themselves, Miaphysite, “that Christ’s divine nature absorbed His human nature”, so that He had only one Divine nature.) Their holding on the doctrine of the Deity of Christ and the Trinity seems to have given them strength to survive under Islamic domination and persecution.

Failure to Contextualize the Gospel for the frontier fields

Today in North African countries such as Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya, Muslims make up 96 to 99% of these countries populations. Turkey is 99% Muslim. What happened to Christianity that was once there? The Church in North Africa was once a thriving church, with famous church leaders such as Tertullian in the second century, Cyprian in the 3rd Century, and Augustine of Hippo, the great theologian in the fourth Century. Kane asks the question, “How shall we account for the demise of such a church?” [1] After mentioning some of the social and political factors that contributed to the fall of the North African church, he writes, “The real reason for the disappearance of the church in North Africa must be sought somewhere else. Actually, the church was not so strong as it appeared. Numerically it was large, but spiritually it was weak. To begin with, it had never become truly indigenous. It was too closely identified with Latin culture and Roman power. The congregations were composed mostly of Latin-speaking people in and around Carthage. Few of the Punic people ever embraced the Christian faith, and the Berbers were left untouched. Because of this the church never took root in the native soil. “[2]

Indeed, historian David F. Wright writes in the Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, that Augustine “. . . was born to African parents of Romanized Berber origins in Tagaste in Numidia (modern Algeria) in 354 AD.” [3] Augustine himself was not Berber in his culture or thinking, but only ethnically tied to his people through his parents. (his father was pagan, but his mother Monica was a Christian, and she has become a very famous one because of her prayers for Augustine.) Augustine's father would be like the second generation son of a Japanese or Arab immigrant born in the U. S. , who has never been to the country of his parents and does not speak the language. This points out one of the most tragic trends in mission history, especially in the history of missions to Muslims: that converts are too often extracted from their own people and eventually take on a new foreign culture, totally separated from their own people and culture, even though many times they are near-neighbors geographically. This is called “extraction Evangelism” by many missiologists, but sometimes it is unavoidable as some believers have eventually fled persecution in Muslim lands.

So, the first reason that Kane gave was a failure to contextualize [by "contextualize" we mean the good and proper kind of contextualization of translation of the gospel into another language and culture and communication of it accurately, not the modern or post-modern extremes of it.] the gospel into the culture of the North Africans. “A second reason of the demise of the church in N. Africa was the failure to give the Scriptures to the people in their own language. They were available in Latin, but no translations were ever made into the language of the Punic people or the Berbers.”[4] The third reason was emphasizing the truth without the love and power to go with it: “Moreover, theological controversies had sapped the energies of the church. Before the time of Augustine, the church had been racked by the Donatist controversy. Theologians, instead of closing their ranks and presenting a united front to the common enemy, were pre-occupied with fratricidal warfare. They were more interested in defending the purity of the gospel than in demonstrating its power.”[5] Of course, the church must do both, defend the purity of the gospel and demonstrate its power by preaching the gospel accurately, defending the truth and being willing to suffer for it; and loving our enemies and living holy lives.

It seems the church had long since "left its first love" (see Revelation 2:4-5), as it had in Asia Minor, in Ephesus especially, and Jesus warned the churches about this issue. There was false doctrine and unholy living in some of the other churches in Revelation 2-3 also. Eventually, the newly converted to Islam, the Seljuk Turks in the 900s to 1071 AD conquered the eastern areas of Anatolia known as Turkey today. Then came the Crusades (1095-1299 AD); then the Ottoman Turks conquered the rest of the Byzantine Empire. Constantinople fell in 1453 AD and was renamed Istanbul.

As we have pointed out before, Muhammad, the founder of Islam, never heard the gospel or the full truth of the Bible in his own language. The Bible was not translated into Arabic until around 900 AD. Muhammad heard that Jesus was the Messiah ( Al Masih); that He was born of the virgin Mary, and did miracles, was sinless, and had "the Gospel" (the Injeel), but he thought the Trinity was God, the Son Jesus, and the mother, Mary. (Surah 5:116; 5:72-75; 6:101). He said that Jesus the Messiah was not crucified. (Qur'an, Surah 4:157) He said Jesus was not the Son of God and was only a prophet. ( Surah 4:171) This is proof that that the Qur'an is not inspired by God, as it denies clear historical facts, doesn't get the doctrine of the Trinity right, and denies things that Christians had been teaching for around 600 years. False doctrine had corrupted the churches; they exalted Mary too much. The combination of both sound doctrine and evangelism and missions is so important.

Muslims use Surah 2:78-79 to accuse Christians and Jews of making up Scriptures. The context there in the Qur'an is the Jews at the time of Moses. It says that there are some illiterate folk who only know the Scriptures through hearsay; and then it pronounces a "woe" on them that write something and say, "this is from Allah". This is honestly what Muhammad seems to have done. They admit he was illiterate and the Bible was not in Arabic yet. Which one gives the greater historical evidence of just "making up Scriptures"? Who is the one who just "heard" about some stuff without actually knowing what the Scriptures taught?

[1] J. Herbert Kane, A Global View of Christian Missions, Baker Books, 1971, pp. 52.

[2] Ibid, p. 52.

[3] David F. Wright, “Augustine of Hippo”, in Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, edited by Tim Dowley, Eerdman’s, 1977, p. 198.

[4] Kane, p. 52.

[5] Ibid, Kane, p. 52.

Addendum:

For an interesting read of the History of the Donatists, and perspective that they were falsely accused and unjustly persecuted, first by Constantine, then Augustine himself. It seems Augustine started with argument, debate, and persuasion, as we see in the quotes above in this post, but later justified the use of force.

http://www.reformedreader.org/history/benedict/donatists/toc.htm

Augustine's Letter 173, written in 416 AD, where he [wrongly] uses the passage in Luke 14:23, "compel them to come in" as justification for state and police force against the Donatists. This famous mis-usage of Scripture by Augustine was subsequently used a lot by many in Church history to justify the use of force against heretics, schismatics, inquisitions, crusades, etc.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102173.htm

Years ago, a pastor said to me, when I was first studying the Early Church Councils, schisms, excommunications, etc. and then the application of harshness of some of them in church history, namely against the Donatists in N. Africa, the Monosphysites in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia, and the Nestorians in Persia (Mesopotamia, today's Iraq): "The balance of mercy and love was needed with the battle for truth in "contend earnestly for the faith" (Jude 3)". See I Peter 3:15, Jude 20-23, and Ephesians 4:15.

A Setback for Positive Thinking?

Crystal Cathedral, California's Famous Multimillion-Dollar Megachurch, Is Up For Sale

Scott Thumma, a professor at Hartford Seminary who studies megachurches, said troubles at Crystal Cathedral don't necessarily "foreshadow doom and gloom for the megachurch phenomenon. Schuller and the Crystal Cathedral have always been outliers," Thumma said, though "his ideas and innovations propelled several prominent mega-pastors."

"This announcement ought to teach astute large church leadership teams [to] not to over-build, especially monuments to architectural and ministerial hubris ... to make sure to have a reasonable plan of succession, and above all, to engage in wise fiscal policies," Thumma added.

Harold Camping in the Hospital, Stroke?

I'm looking to get this verified.  It's interesting how fast "news" travels as Wikipedia already includes  the fact that Camping's had a stroke.

Update: I listened to the entire Open forum for June 9, and did not notice anything odd. As of the posting of this entry, the link for the June 10 Open Forum was not posted.

Looking through news feeds, as of 2 pm Eastern Time, I haven't found any stories reporting this.

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "AudioHQ@..."
To: Latter_Rain@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, June 10, 2011 8:51:02 PM
Subject: [LR] MR. CAMPING


Hello Group,

Sorry to report that Mr. Camping suffered a stroke last night shortly after the Open Forum and is currently in a local hospital. I have no other details. Please just pray for him and do not try to contact anyone at his home or Family Radio. He and Shirley have enough family members to handle the situation. I'm sure we'll be able to publicly update everyone on Monday.

Meanwhile, tonight's Open Forum is a repeat from 1991 from my achieves and KFTL and WFME-TV is a repeat of a very recent program.

Once again, let's continue to pray for his swift recovery.

Charlie Menut
WFME

A few Recent Camping Clips

I caught these clips from the Open forum, 6/2/11

Mr. Camping's advice to a Campingite

The Earthquake on October 21, 2011

Interesting stuff.

If Mr. Camping survives his stroke, perhaps he'll spiritualize the earthquake on October 22.

"Luther, Exposing the Myth": a Response

Luther, Exposing the Myth is one of the worst Luther webpages I’ve ever come across: context, history, and truth don’t seem to be any sort of factor in its analysis of Martin Luther. The issues raised are the usual Roman Catholic invective. The hosting website is Catholic Apologetics Information, an Australian Roman Catholic website. Luther Exposing the Myth has also gone through revisions. Simply compare the original 2004 version to the one currently posted. Luther, Exposing the Myth appears to have been partially plagiarized from: Verbum the newsletter of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Ridgefield, CT, Spring 1985.

A few years back I reviewed a portion of the material presented. I wrote to the hosting website letting them know of my reviews. I received the following reply, "We will forward [the author] your comments and ask him to send us a respond. Once he has sent us a response to your article, we will try to forward to you what he sends back to us." That was in 2006. I have yet to receive any response. I probably never will.


Why Respond to Luther Exposing the Myth?
Why go through the material from this hostile Roman Catholic web page? Shouldn't most people reading Luther, Exposing the Myth realize one or two sentences from a historical figure without a context is propaganda? Unfortunately, over the years I've watched the material from Luther, Exposing the Myth heavily used and quoted. I've come across various web discussion boards in which the material is accepted without scrutiny. I've watched many of the quotes utilized multiply like gremlins (from the movie) onto other web pages and Facebook groups.

I realize most people don't have the time nor the resources to look into the Luther quotes presented. Research takes time. It's my hope that the 1 out 100 people that love truth will come across the following research, utilize it, and set the record straight. I love truth. It's one thing to disagree with Luther's theology; it's quite another to deliberately misrepresent his theology and character.

My Original Introductory Response to Luther, Exposing the Myth
Back in 2006 I began reviewing Luther, Exposing the Myth. I had intended to work through the material in 2006, but the project eventually got put on the back burner. Here are my original reviews:

Part one of my original review of Luther, Exposing the Myth

Part two of my original review of Luther, Exposing the Myth

In Depth Review of Luther, Exposing the Myth
In the summer of 2010, I began once again to work through Luther, Exposing the Myth. I came across this discussion board thread, as well as other mentions on blogs. These provoked me to take a fresh look at this propaganda piece. Below are all the quotes used by Luther, Exposing the Myth and my responses hyperlinked as I work through them. 

If you're looking for more information on a specific Luther quote or topic used in Luther, Exposing the Myth, use the search engines on the right hand column of this blog. Chances are, I've covered the material elsewhere.

The Commandments

1. "Their only purpose is to show man his impotence to do good and to teach him to despair of himself"

2. “Thou shalt not covet,’ is a commandment which proves us all to be sinners; since it is not in man’s power not to covet, and the same is the drift of all the commandments, for they are all equally impossible to us.”

3. "Moses is an executioner, a cruel lictor, a torturer a torturer who tears our flesh out with pincers and makes us suffer martyrdom . . . Whoever, in the name of Christ, terrifies and troubles consciences, is not the messenger of Christ, but of the devil . . . Let us therefore send Moses packing and for ever."

4. "We must remove the Decalogue out of sight and heart” (deWette 4, 188).

5. “It does not matter what people do; it only matters what they believe.”

6. “If we allow them - the Commandments - any influence in our conscience, they become the cloak of all evil, heresies and blasphemies” (Comm. ad Galat, p.310).

from the original 2004 Luther Exposing the Myth:

“If Moses should attempt to intimidate you with his stupid Ten Commandments, tell him right out – chase yourself to the Jews”


Free Will

7. "...with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, (man) has no 'free-will', but is a captive, prisoner and bond slave, either to the will of God, or to the will of Satan."

8. "...we do everything of necessity and nothing by 'free-will'; for the power of 'free-will' is nil..."

9. "Man is like a horse. Does God leap into the saddle? The horse is obedient and accommodates itself to every movement of the rider and goes whither he wills it. Does God throw down the reins? Then Satan leaps upon the back of the animal, which bends, goes and submits to the spurs and caprices of its new rider... Therefore, necessity, not free will, is the controlling principle of our conduct. God is the author of what is evil as well as of what is good, and, as He bestows happiness on those who merit it not, so also does He damn others who deserve not their fate."

10. “His (Judas) will was the work of God; God by His almighty power moved his will as He does all that is in this world.”

On Reason

11. “No good work happens as the result of one’s own wisdom; but everything must happen in a stupor . . . Reason must be left behind for it is the enemy of faith.”

12. “Reason is the devils handmaid and does nothing but blaspheme and dishonor all that God says or does.”

13. “Reason is directly opposed to faith, and one ought to let it be; in believers it should be killed and buried.”

14. “One should learn Philosophy only as one learns witchcraft, that is to destroy it; as one finds out about errors, in order to refute them”

On Sin

15. “A person that is baptized cannot, thou he would, lose his salvation by any sins however grievous, unless he refuses to believe. For no sins can damn him but unbelief alone.”

16. "Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides... No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day."

17. "Do not ask anything of your conscience; and if it speaks, do not listen to it; if it insists, stifle it, amuse yourself; if necessary, commit some good big sin, in order to drive it away. Conscience is the voice of Satan, and it is necessary always to do just the contrary of what Satan wishes."

Faith and Good works

18. “For we account a man to be justified by faith alone, without the works of the law.” – On Translation and on the Intercession of the Saints

19. “It is more important to guard against good works than against sin.”

20. "Good works are bad and are sin like the rest."

21. “There is no scandal greater, more dangerous, more venomous, than a good outward life, manifested by good works and a pious mode of life. That is the grand portal, the highway that leads to damnation."

22. “He that says the Gospel requires works for salvation, I say, flat and plain, is a liar.”

Social Justice

23. “Peasants are no better than straw. They will not hear the word and they are without sense; therefore they must be compelled to hear the crack of the whip and the whiz of bullets and it is only what they deserve.”

24. “To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” – “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs”

25. “I, Martin Luther, have during the rebellion slain al the peasants, for it was I who ordered them to be struck dead. All their blood is upon my head. But I put it all on our Lord God: for he commanded me to speak thus.”26. “God has given the law, and nobody observes it. He has in addition instituted rod masters, drivers and urgers; so then are rulers to drive, beat, choke, hang, burn, behead, and break upon the well of the vulgar masses.”

27. “Like the drivers of donkeys, who have to belabor the donkeys incessantly with rods and whips, or they will not obey, so must the ruler do with the people; they must drive, beat throttle, hang, burn, behead and torture, so as to make themselves feared and to keep the people in check”

28. “Wherever the princes take their power from, it does not regard us. It is the will of God, irrespective whether they have stolen their power or assumed it by robbery”

The Jews

29. "My advice, as I said earlier, is: First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire... Second, that all their books-- their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible-- be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted...Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country...Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it... He who hears this name [God] from a Jew must inform the authorities, or else throw sow dung at him when he sees him and chase him away"

30. "Burn their synagogues. Forbid them all that I have mentioned above. Force them to work and treat them with every kind of severity, as Moses did in the desert and slew three thousand... If that is no use, we must drive them away like mad dogs, in order that we may not be partakers of their abominable blasphemy and of all their vices, and in order that we may not deserve the anger of God and be damned with them. I have done my duty. Let everyone see how he does his. I am excused."

31. “ If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone round his neck and push him over with the words I baptize thee in the name of Abraham”

32. “The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows seven times higher than ordinary thieves.”

Marriage and Women

33. “If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.”

34. “Suppose I should counsel the wife of an impotent man, with his consent, to giver herself to another, say her husband’s brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a women in a saved state? I answer, certainly.”

35. “It is not in opposition to the Holy Scriptures for a man to have several wives.”

36. “Know that Marriage is an outward material thing like any other secular business. The body has nothing to do with God. In this respect one can never sin against God, but only against one’s neighbour.”

37. “As to divorce, it is still a debatable question whether it is allowable. For my part I prefer bigamy to it.”

38. “The word and work of God is quite clear, viz., that women are made to be either wives or prostitutes.”

39. “In spite of all the good I say of married life, I will not grant so much to nature as to admit that there is no sin in it. .. no conjugal due is ever rendered without sin. The matrimonial duty is never performed without sin.”

Virtue and Vice


On Lying

40. "What harm could it do if a man told a good lusty lie in a worthy cause and for the sake of the Christian Churches?”

41. “To lie in a case of necessity or for convenience or in excuse – such lying would not be against God; He was ready to take such lies on Himself”

On God

42. “I look upon God no better than a scoundrel”

On Drunkenness

43. “We eat and drink to kill ourselves, we eat and rink up to our last farthing.”

On Pride

44. “St. Augustine or St. Ambrosius cannot be compared with me.”

45. “What I teach and write remains true even though the whole world should fall to pieces over it”

On the Person of Christ

46. “Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.”

47. “I have greater confidence in my wife and my pupils than I have in Christ”

48. “It does not matter how Christ behaved – what He taught is all that matters”

Sacred Scripture

49. "to my mind it (the book of the Apocalypse) bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character... Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it."

50. "If your Papist annoys you with the word ('alone' - Rom. 3:28), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and ass are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil's thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom."

51. "The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible."

52. "The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish foolishness." [this link also]

53. "Of very little worth is the Book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch might be."

54. "...the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical."

55. "We cannot claim to fathom completely the meaning of a single verse of Scripture; we succeed in apprehending only the A B C of it, and even that imperfectly." - Luther, Table-talk, trans. Gustave Brunet, Paris, Garnier, 1844, pg. 288.

56. "Let no one believe himself competent to understand Holy Scripture, unless he has, for a hundred years, governed the Church with the Prophets, with Elijiah and Elisha, St. John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and the Apostles." -Luther, Table-talk, trans. Gustave Brunet, Paris, Garnier, 1844, pg. 290.

Submit or Die! Early Islamic Da'wa

Letter of Omar, the second Khalif of Sunni Islam, to Yazdegird III, the Shah (King of Persia)

Omar died in 644 AD; Islamic expansion in Jihad and War was carried out under him from 636-644 AD.
The letter was written sometime after the Battle of Qadesiyyeh in 636 AD and before the battle of Nahavand, in 642 AD.



This is all in Farsi, the language of Iran ( also spoken in about half of Afghanistan and all of Tajikistan and parts of Uzbekistan).

I will give you a rough translation and synopsis of what she said here:

This Iranian lady is telling of how the trial of Saddam Hussein, a few years ago [ June of 2004- Dec. 2006 ], "the defeated Khalif of Iraq" (An Iranian friend told me she uses the word "khalif" in the sense of "cruel dictator", because Omar Ibn Khattab, the second Khalif of Sunni Muslims, especially was a cruel and ruthless dictator who attacked Persia in Islamic Jihad. Saddam was not really a "Khalif", but she uses it to show contempt for Omar, the second Khalif of Sunni Muslims.

She says,

"On the Monday morning when the trial of Saddam Hussein was widely publicized, Saddam Hussein, that defeated dictator ( "Khalif" ), in the storm and confusion of my own thoughts, I was reminded of when Mohammad Pahlavi, the Shah (King) of Iran, when he was a boy during a drought, asked his father, Reza Shah Pahlavi, about the dry land to the west of them, "What is that dry land in that corner?" Reza Shah answered, "that is Iraq".

"O Justice! for us! [because Saddam is being tried ] When this dry land without water or grass, of Iraq attacked our borders and people and raped our women! - soon after the tragedy of the Islamic revolution in Iran. [1979 was the Islamic Revolution in Iran, and in 1980 Saddam attacked Iran and they had a 8 year war until 1988.] Yes, with the same praise to Allah and the Qur'an in his hand and swearing to Allah, Saddam testified to Islam at his trial, it reminded me of the ancient document in the British Museum of the letter of Omar, the second Khalif of Islam (for Sunnis) to the Shah of Persia, Yazdegird III.

It is interesting how in history that the name of Allah is again proclaimed and spread. This historical document of the letter of Omar, the second Khalif of the Muslims, to Yazdegird III, the Sassanian King of Persia, and then the letter of Yazdegird back to Omar, after the battle of Qadesiyeh and before the battle of Nahavand, that took place over a period of about four months.

We translate these two letters for you (Iranians), which the original manuscripts of them exist today in the London Museum, we hope that in the future day in our own homeland (Iran), the place that these historical documents are connected to, we now translate them for you. . . "

(the video fades out before her sentence is complete, and then she reads the actual letter of Omar to Yazdegird)

[ Background info:
Yazgird III and Omar Al Muslemin letters

Copy of communications between Sassanian Yazdgird III (632 AD - 651 AD) and Omar Ibn Al Khatab Khalifat Al Muslemin, after the battle of Ghadesiyeh. The original copy of this letter from Yazdgird III (632 AD - 651 AD) is kept in the British museum of London. The date in which this letter has been written is after the battle of Ghadesiyeh.

A natural disaster in the form of a massive sand storm was blown upon the front line of Iranian troops and so took away their battle vision thus causing the loss of this battle. Later on Muslim Khalif mentioned that Allah sent the massive Sand Storm in Iranian faces which was why they lost the battle. Allah was the protector of Muslim against Ajams.

The battle of Ghadesiyeh did not just cost Iran a great loss due to a natural disaster, yet it also cost the life of greatest Iranian hero the Commander in Chief of Iranian Army, "Rostam-e Farokhzad." Arabs killed Rostam in this battle. Rostam and his squad fought until the last drop of their blood and at the end even after he lost his sword, he fought the Arabs with bare hands and his shield.]

Then she reads the letter of Omar to Yazdegird, the Shah of Persia -

From: Omar Ibn Al Khatab Khalifat Al Muslemin
To: Yazdgird III Shahanshah of Persian Empire

Yazdgird, I see not a fruitful future for you and your nation unless
you accept my offer and commit Bei'at (Joining with Khalifat and bringing Islam). Once upon a time your land ruled half the known world but what has it come down to now? Your troops are defeated in all fronts and your nation is bound to collapse. I offer you a way to rescue yourself. Start praying to a mono God, a single union God, the only God who created everything in the universe.

We bring you and the world his message, he who is the true God. Stop your Fire Worship, command your nation to stop their Fire Worship which is false; join us by joining the truth. Worship Allah the only true God, The creator of universe. Worship to Allah and accept Islam as your salvation. End your Pagan ways and your false worships now and bring Islam so you can accept Allah as your savior. By doing so, you will find the only way to your survival and peace for Persians. If you know what is best for Ajam (Arabic term for Persians meaning Retarded & Weird), you will choose this path. Bei'at is the only way.

Allah O Akbar
sign, Khalifat Al Muslemin
Omar Ibn Al Khatab

See the historical background and English translation of the letters of Omar to Yazdegird and Yazdegird's response here.

http://www.iran-heritage.org/interestgroups/islam-article4.htm

We may put the letter of Yazdegird to Omar up in a later post. This video stops here. You can see her facial expression at the end of reading this letter. Iranians do not like Omar, because he attacked Persia in unjust and aggressive warfare, only because the Persians were Zoroastrians and did not accept the message of Islam at first. The Arabs thought the Zoroastrians worshipped fire, but actually they believed fire was a symbol of God, whom they called "Ahura Mazda". ( By the way, Hebrews 12:29 is a good verse to use in witnessing to Iranians.) The Arabs attacked the Persians in Jihad warfare, and, according to some of my Iranian friends, it actually took about 3 centuries to fully subjugate the Iranians and integrate them into Islam.

Omar Ibn Al Khatab, learned this Da'wa (invitation to Islam) from his mentor and the founder of Islam, Muhammad.

Sahih Al Bukhari - the most respected Hadith collection of Sunnis.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 190:
:Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:

Allah's Apostle sent his letter to Khusrau and ordered his messenger to hand it over to the Governor of Bahrain who was to hand it over to Khusrau. So, when Khusrau read the letter he tore it. Said bin Al-Musaiyab said, "The Prophet then invoked Allah to disperse them with full dispersion, (destroy them (i.e. Khusrau and his followers) severely)"."

Khusrau or Khosrow was the Shah of Persia at the time of Muhammad's letter in 630 AD.

Muhammad also sent letters to other political leaders around the same time, one of them was the Emperor of the Byzantine Empire, Hericlius. Because both the Byzantine emperor and the Persian Shah rejected Mohammad's "da'wa" (invitaition); the Muslims attacked both the Byzantine Empire and the Persian Empire in holy war, which is what the ultimate application of Jihad (striving, exertion, effort) is in Islam. One cannot separate the Quran from the Hadith, as the Hadith shows us the historical context of most of the verses in the Quran.

The Historical Context of "A Common Word" - the verse in the Qur'an that 138 Muslim scholars used in October of 2007 to send to many Christian and Jewish leaders and asked them to "come together and agree with us that is no god but Allah, and call no one else Lord".

The verse in the Qur'an of 3:64, "come together in agreement with us", which is what the "Common Word" initiative is based on, does not mean only “agree with simple Monotheism”; it includes the rejection of Jesus the Messiah as “the Lord”. “take no other lords”. We have no right to re-interpret verses in the Qur'an out of their context and according to our understanding. We don't like this when Muslim debaters like Ahmad Deedat did this to the Bible (eisegesis) and we should not be doing that to the Qur'an.

See the Hadith, Al Bukhari, the letter and context of Muhammad's invitation to Byzantine and Persia to embrace Islam:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html#004.052.191

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 191:
Narrated Abdullah bin Abbas:
Allah's Apostle wrote to Caesar and invited him to Islam . . .
"In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad, the slave of Allah, and His Apostle, to Heraclius, the Ruler of the Byzantine. Peace be upon the followers of guidance. Now then, I invite you to Islam (i.e. surrender to Allah), embrace Islam and you will be safe; embrace Islam and Allah will bestow on you a double reward. But if you reject this invitation of Islam, you shall be responsible for misguiding the peasants (i.e. your nation). O people of the Scriptures! Come to a word common to you and us and you, that we worship. None but Allah, and that we associate nothing in worship with Him; and that none of us shall take others as Lords besides Allah. Then if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are (they who have surrendered (unto Him)..(Qur'an 3.64)

Evangelicals were very naive and seemingly ignorant of the historical context of Qur'an 3:64, when the Evangelicals then responded with the Yale Reconciliation initiative, "Loving God and Neighbor: An Evangelical Response", which had no gospel proclamation or explanation or apologetic answer to the Muslims.

John Piper gave an excellent response to the Yale Reconciliation Evangelical letter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4EJShp5_kM

Muhammad's invitation (Da'wa) was "embrace Islam or we will fight" to pagans - it was "convert or die" ( Qur'an 9:5) and to Christians and Jews it was "submit by paying the Jiziye and become Dhimmis and you cannot evangelize or build new churches anymore" (Surah 9:29) - and they carried that out. Omar learned from him.

A summary of some of the most explicit verses on Jihad and violence in Islam:

Surah 8:39 – fight them until there is no more rebellion and religion is all for Allah. "Fitneh" does not mean "persecution", rather, "rebellion", "tumult", 'confusion", "mutiny" ( like protests in the streets and chaos).

Surah 9:5 The verse of the sword - slay the unbelievers where ever you find them.

Surah 9:29 “Fight against the people of the book, . . . Until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.”

Hadith: Sahih Al Bukhari :

• Law of apostacy: If anyone turns from Islam, kill him. (9:84:57)
• "War is deceit" – repeated often. (4:52:267, 268, 269)
• “If you embrace Islam, you will be safe.” (4:53:392)
• Muhammed wrote letters to Khosrow, king of Iran and Hericlius, Byzantine Emperor, “If you become a Muslim, you will be safe.” (1:1:6) (also, 4:52:190-191)