Skip to comments.The discreet rise of muslim conversions...
Posted on 06/11/2006 11:16:58 AM PDT by Alama
Translation: he conversions of Muslims in France to Christianity is a subterranean river only now emerging onto the surface. The Catholic Church says little about the subject except that several hundred people raised as Muslims are baptised every year. An estimated 10,000 ex-Muslims have now converted to Christianity in France, about two thirds of them to Catholicism. The numbers have been rising every year according to the Catholic Association Notre Dame de Kabylie. The reason for the relative silence is due to very heavy family and community pressure.
To lend mutual support to these ex-Muslims a Protestant prayer group called 'Oasis' was set up a few years ago. "Requests to take part in these prayer groups are on the increase " states Saïd Oujibou, one of the few Muslim converts to Christianity who does not hesitate to speak out in public. Coming from a strict Islamic background he himself exerted much pressure on a sister who converted to Christianity. "One of our brothers made her rip out the pages of the Bible one by one", he says. With his wife Fatima, who is also a former Muslim, this 'itinerant pastor' travels across France coordinating the Oasis network.
Malika, now a practising Christian, sighs : "All contact with my family has been broken off." She went on to say "I haven't rejected all aspects of Moroccan culture" she says "but only the Gospels could answer the questions that I was asking myself."...
Very interesting! Thank you. Wouldn't it be neat if the demise of Christianity in Europe were to be turned around by converted ex-Muslims? One of our problems, as Christians, is that we have become so "ecumenical" and multi-cultural we no longer preach to the pagans. Not in the West, at least. If they heard the message, they might - well, be converted.
Even in France, I would imagine converting FROM Islam is not something people want to draw attention to.
I would imagine these people are given a very rough time.
ping for Rashid
I don't know...
Don't forget that Judaism isn't a proselytising faith...
Sure, as a Muslims seeing all the death and mistreatment of women through the religion they practice, something has to tell their heart it is a false god and that they need to get out of there.
Must be the hats... /seinfeld
I think the Orthodox Christians would disagree with you VERY much as to where THEY originated.
Christ established the Church and it's Authority on earth starting with Peter.
Of course all origins of Christianity would be Christ.
No. We have an underclass that is disproportionately minority, but most members of minority groups are contributing members of society. It's important not to confuse the two observations.
One of the great American achievements of the last half century is the emergence of a large black middle class. The incidence of poverty among African Americans is still distressingly high, but it is a minority of a minority. Hispanics move up the ladder pretty quickly as a group. There is an underclass undertow, to be sure, but as with A-A's, it is a minority of a minority. Asian Americans, of course, outperform everyone else, including native born whites.
Well,actually... Peter was a MARRIED man... and ya know YOUR Priests are just not MARRIED!!LOL!!
The Apostles gave up everything to follow and walk with Christ.
Given the catholic church became nothing but a scheme by wealthy and underhanded Italian families who could blame them.
Be careful how you boast in the catholic Church as Paul pointed out the Jews were gods chosen people and he picked, from the nations, a new people when it served his plan...
Too complicated to have priests married IMO.
We are talking about it here on Free republic. I have posted several articles referring to muslim conversion to Christianity.
Thanks for posting more good news.
You've been reading too much fiction.
The mainstream media doesn't want to talk about it because most journalists have contempt for their own culture and its Christian religion. But let one Christian convert to Islam, and it's a front-page story and obviously a growing trend accoring to their analysis.
Paul was a Jew, Christ was a Jew and basically the first Christians were all born again Jews that became the first Christians.
The Jews were not god's chosen people, they are God's chosen people, and God the Father knew them before He sent His Son Christ to earth.
They always had a key to the front door of God's house.
I hope and pray that the Bible is placed within the reach of every Muslim, especially the Good News.
The origins of Christianity lie with the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.
As for the term "catholic"---If by catholic you mean universal..then fine..the church certainly was the Holy Universal Apostolic Church...until the Great Schism when the bishop of Rome and his political allies decided to split from the the Catholic Church thus dividing the Christian Church into the Eastern and Western branches followed of course by other splits in the west.
We pray daily for the reunification.
Amen...Good News, indeed....
You sir, are a Racist, with a capital "R"
There is a muslim Turk who posts here who has written that he is "investigating" Judaism.
Excellent reply to an ignorant comment with racist undertones.
"The reason Priests are not married is because they are expected to work in near poverty and they don't get to keep any estate unless they brought it with them to begin with.
All assets stay with the people and pass on to serve the next set of people."
Diocesan priests, my friend, take no vow of poverty. They are free to amass fortunes and some have, quite legitimately.
Well Le Figaro IS mainstream media in France...
Jews are still God's Chosen People... Or do you believe that God lied?
Christ originated the Church by delivering the Holy Spirit to all of the Apostles.
Was Peter a married man?
That is the point. As the article says, this conversion has been going on for a few years now, but it's only being reported now. Maybe the typist had arthritis, and it took that long to type the article. Where is the story in Le Monde or L'Express? Perhaps there is an epidemic of arthritis in Paris. Remind me to send a get-well card.
Doesn't matter, they are losing far more of their own people through low birth rate, abortion, gayness, assimilation and indifference than they can possibly hope to gain from proselytising converts.
Two words: Pope Leo
Right... because the sale of indulgences and not putting the gospel into a language teh commone people could read had nothing to do with it.... /sarcasm
I Tim 3:2 & Tit 1:6 are pretty much clear on the issue concerning married Elders of an assembly of like-minded believers. The English translation "Bishop" translated out of the Greek Episkope and Episkopos, the same Greek being rendered "overseeer" in Acts 20:28.
Moreover, I Tim 3:12 is quite clear respecting marital status of a Bishop's (Elder) assistant: Deacon. And both the qualifications for the only two Scripturally defined offices are given admonishment concerning their households: "ruling their children and their houses well" (I Tim 3:4b & 3:12b). Its extremely illogical to infer an absolute restrictive sense to the meanging of these passages.
The phrase "husband of one wife" does not mean that the Bishop (overseer/Elder) or Deacon was never married, else this would exclude a remarried widower, nor does it exclude from holding office those who've never been married. In Romans 7:1-3, Paul placed no restriction upon a widower to remarry; the restriction being that one seeking an office of the church should not be married to more than one woman simultaneously (and there would definitely be issues concerning that regarding divorcees).
The total context speaks of the exemplary moral conduct required of those who hold an office in the church.
I just simply think the Church which has Christ's authority felt it was better to have their priests single since they are often in poverty and would have no means or time for a regular family.
Priests usually serve very large congregations into the thousands these days especially.
"Jews are still God's Chosen People... Or do you believe that God lied?"
God didn't lie. They were his chosen people to bring about the Christ.
In case you missed it, once Christ established His kingdom (the church), the Jewish era had only 40 years left (1 generation). In 70 AD, the Jewish era and the Law of Moses was fully ended with the destruction of Jerusalem.
The tearing of the veil in the Tabernacle upon Christ's death at His crucifixion is of utmost importance with respect to this. The Temple in Jerusalem was divided into two portions, an outer room called the Holy Place in which a number of priests served, and an inner room called the Most Holy Place or Holy of Holies. This inner room represented God's presence. It was so sacred that the only person allowed in was the High Priest, and then only on one day of the year to make atonement for the sins of himself and the people.
This sacred room, the Holy of Holies, was separated from the rest of the temple by an elaborate and beautifully embroidered curtain. According to Jewish descriptions of the temple, this curtain was truly massive - measuring some 30 feet wide, 60 feet high and three inches thick. Its tearing in two from top to bottom at Jesus' death was a shocking and bewildering event! Not only that it tore is significant, but that it tore top to bottom signifies truly remarkable meaning: that not only was God Himself the cause of this event, He deliberately tore the curtain to make a point: mankind's sins, which had cut us off from Him (Isaiah 59:2), could now be forgiven through Jesus Christ's shed blood.
The old Levitical High Priest went into the inner chamber to perform the annual rituals only after a ritual of purification, and adherence to a strict ritual of conduct concerning the sacrifice itself. These priests entered the Holy of Holies with bells attached to their priestly garb, and a rope attached to their leg. The priests in the outer chamber listened intently, hoping the sound of the bells would not cease. If the sound of the bells ceased, the priests in the outer chamber would have to drag the dead ex-High Priest out by the rope attached to his leg (and they had to start the process all over again). Nobody could go in there to retreive a fallen High Priest, lest they be struck dead themselves. That they had to complete the annual sacrifice was beyond any question whatsoever. Any blemish whatsoever in either the purification ritual for the priest, or in the sacrifice ritual performed in the inner sanctum of the Temple would cause the High Priest to be instantly struck dead.
Comparing how the High Priest had previously only been able to pass through the curtain once a year to offer atonement for sins, Hebrews 10:19-22 explains that a new High Priest, Jesus Christ, through the sacrifice of Himself superceded this ritual for all time and gives mankind direct access to God. Imagine the incredulity and astonishment of the first janitor (or lowly stable-hand) of the Temple when he was able to peer unhindered right into the very inner sanctum of the Temple!
Heb 7-8 makes it clear that the old priesthood under the Levitical system came to an end on that day (and why). A distinction now being made concerning differnt ministries: Israel's being inward (everybody going to the Temple in Jerusalem), while the Church is called out (now a foriegn missionary society - as is seen in The Great Commission) and while Israel had a priesthood, all born-again believers in Christ not mere priests (I Pet 2:5), but members of a Royal priesthood (I Pet 2:9-10; cf. Ex 19:5,6; Rev 1:6; 5:10). To Israel God the Father was Jehovah, to the Universal Church he is Abba Father. To Israel God the Son is Messiah, while to the Church He is Saviour, Bridegroom, Head of the Body of Believers (the Church being itself the Bride of Christ), and while God the Holy Spirit was with Israel, He indwells each and every believer. The latter being underscored in Heb 9:24, and references of being "filled with the Spirit" (cf. Eph 5:18; I Cor 3:16; 6:19; II Cor 6:16, etc.)
There is no system of distintion between clergy and laity having any Scriptural basis other than the offices specifically defined: Bishop (overseer/Elder) and Deacon. The office of Pastor is actually doctrinal error, in that pastorship is not an office, but a gift of the spirit. (I Cor 12:1-11). Moreover, in Eph 4:8-16 there is no stipulation or qualifications specified (while there are qualifications for the offices of Elder and Deacon). Furthermore, while the offices are restricted exclusively for men (in accordance to the doctrine of headship), gifts of the Spirit are asexual.
The organization of the local expression of the Universal Church is clearly defined in Scripture. Acts 20:6-10 (esp. v7) intimates the church having stated meetings, each local church chooses its own leaders (Acts 6:1-3), these leaders are universally recognized as being leaders of The Faith, that a corporate discipline exists (I Cor 5), they have responsibilities to orhpans and widows (I Tim 5), have a united effort to raise money (I Cor 16: II Cor 8-9), have letters of commendation (Acts 18:27; Rom 16) and churches are autonomous from one another.
The office of "elder" emphasizes that aspect of the office of a leader within the Church pertaining to maturity; "overseer" emphasizes the accountability of the office of leader within the Church before God (Acts 20:17-28 esp. v17 & 28), while "pastor" describes the ministry of the office of leader within the Church, i.e., as shepherd - to heed, lead and feed the local flock (however, "pastor" is not an Scripturally defined office). Furthermore, each church had a plurality of elders (Acts 14:23; Phil 1:1). This being actually an essential part to maintain the purity of doctrine adhered to by any arbitrary church, in that a plurality of elders would be far less likely being led astray and teach false doctrines and heresy to the congregation. While it is common for many congregations to have one man preside as minister or pastor, with all activities under his control, this is not entirely Sciptural nor actually desireable. Nor is it Scriptural that all minstry be relegated intirely to the leader(s) of an assembly; anybody who adheres to sound doctrine as taught by the Scriptures may be permitted by Church leadership (so far as they don't preach heresy).
The finished work of Christ upon the cross has removed all human distinctions of privelege (Gal 3:28). Every believer in Christ (whether male or female), is a priest to God (Heb 13:15), both holy (I Pet 2: 5) and Royal (I Pet 2:9), able to worship and witness all they desire., not only able to partake, but to participate in the two Scriptural ordinances appointed by Christ (I Cor 11; Mt 28:19), i.e., "the breaking of bread" (Acts 2:42; 20:7), and the practice of baptism (from the Greek baptizo - placing into, or submerging, not "sprinkling") after conversion into The Faith and before taking their place in a local church (Acts 2:41; 8:12; Rom 6:1-11).
Scripture talks about a Church order, similiar to the voluntary order of subservience evident of God Himself (Father - Son - Holy Ghost). Nothing explicitely (or implicitely) respecting this order, is implied (or can be inferred), whereby married men are precluded from assuming an office (except for a lack of the specific qualifications cited in Scripture pertaining to these two offices).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.