Like many converts to a faith, Barbara Grant is a serious student of Christianity. She has had a lively, if polite, disagreement with Barely A Blog’s Catholic contributors, here, here, and elsewhere on BAB. She writes:

There can be no theological “kum-ba-ya” sessions in which both Christians and Muslims can joyfully participate—there can be no theological reconciliation between the two faiths. Those who suggest this is possible have strayed from scriptures. With reference to Catholics, they should rely more on reading the Bible and less on Church authority.
The Bible clearly refers to Israel and the Jewish people as God’s Chosen, and Christian believers as those grafted onto the tree (of belief, and therefore, salvation) and does not make accommodation for those of other faiths who appreciate Jesus, but do not regard Him as their Savior. In short, the Bible doesn’t accommodate Islamic belief.
Nor does the New Testament invalidate the promises made by God to the Jewish people in the Old.
Paul writes: “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means!” (Romans 11:1). “…But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous.” (Romans 11:11). These passages can hardly be referring to the Church, as many Catholics aver. They refer literally to the Jewish people.
Ezekiel 37:21 states: “…Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all sides, and bring them to their own land.” Ezekiel is not referring to the Church, but to the re-establishment of Israel in its own land. [By the way, the American affinity for Jews—and for Israel—is said to be rooted in Protestantism, more oriented towards the Hebrew Testament than Roman Catholicism.—ILANA]
Nor is he referring to the Church in Chapters 38 and 39 when he describes how Israel’s would-be invaders will come from “the uttermost parts of the north” and ally with the nations surrounding Israel. The recognition of Hamas by Russia, the fact that Russian technologists now work at Iranian nuke plants, among other factors, make it difficult if not impossible to believe that there is any “Israel” in prophecy other than the nation state re-established in 1948.
Biblical Christians will adamantly reject any compromise between the Christian and Muslim faiths, no matter how ardently some Catholic, Muslim sympathizers may try to initiate interfaith dialogue. That is because biblical Christians believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, and refer to both Old and New Testament Scriptures as the basis of their faith. We do not rely on a “Church authority,” (a ruling pontiff) to tell us what’s what: instead, we argue our points directly from the Bible. I recommend that those who do not appreciate this point, re-read Scripture.

Like many converts to a faith, Barbara Grant is a serious student of Christianity. She has had a lively, if polite, disagreement with Barely A Blog’s Catholic contributors, here, here, and elsewhere on BAB. She writes:

There can be no theological “kum-ba-ya” sessions in which both Christians and Muslims can joyfully participate—there can be no theological reconciliation between the two faiths. Those who suggest this is possible have strayed from scriptures. With reference to Catholics, they should rely more on reading the Bible and less on Church authority.
The Bible clearly refers to Israel and the Jewish people as God’s Chosen, and Christian believers as those grafted onto the tree (of belief, and therefore, salvation) and does not make accommodation for those of other faiths who appreciate Jesus, but do not regard Him as their Savior. In short, the Bible doesn’t accommodate Islamic belief.
Nor does the New Testament invalidate the promises made by God to the Jewish people in the Old.
Paul writes: “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means!” (Romans 11:1). “…But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous.” (Romans 11:11). These passages can hardly be referring to the Church, as many Catholics aver. They refer literally to the Jewish people.
Ezekiel 37:21 states: “…Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all sides, and bring them to their own land.” Ezekiel is not referring to the Church, but to the re-establishment of Israel in its own land. [By the way, the American affinity for Jews—and for Israel—is said to be rooted in Protestantism, more oriented towards the Hebrew Testament than Roman Catholicism.—ILANA]
Nor is he referring to the Church in Chapters 38 and 39 when he describes how Israel’s would-be invaders will come from “the uttermost parts of the north” and ally with the nations surrounding Israel. The recognition of Hamas by Russia, the fact that Russian technologists now work at Iranian nuke plants, among other factors, make it difficult if not impossible to believe that there is any “Israel” in prophecy other than the nation state re-established in 1948.
Biblical Christians will adamantly reject any compromise between the Christian and Muslim faiths, no matter how ardently some Catholic, Muslim sympathizers may try to initiate interfaith dialogue. That is because biblical Christians believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, and refer to both Old and New Testament Scriptures as the basis of their faith. We do not rely on a “Church authority,” (a ruling pontiff) to tell us what’s what: instead, we argue our points directly from the Bible. I recommend that those who do not appreciate this point, re-read Scripture.