islam is the youtube shorts of religion

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

You claim that aseity (self-existence) is a property of the hypostasis (the person) not the essence (ousia). if the divine essence itself lacks aseity then it’s not worthy of being called "God" in the absolute sense. and if the essence has aseity but the son and spirit don’t possess it because they’re derived then they don’t fully possess the divine essence. you can’t have it both ways. your analogy about "predication" vs "identity" doesn’t fix it it worsens it. if the father is God by identity, and the son/spirit only by predication then you're literally saying the son and spirit are not God by essence just called God by some borrowed title or role. that’s not coequality that’s hierarchical theism with one true God and two ontologically lesser beings. and saying "they share the same will" because they share the essence only works if they are not truly distinct hypostases with distinct properties. if they’re distinct persons then either each has a center of willing (which = three wills) or they’re not real persons but just modes which collapses into modalism. im not discussing you again i think either you were raised in the streets or you are intellectually bankrupt.

Why is it not worthy of being called God? As I said God is about the WHATness the QUIDDITY. Is what determines what god is. The son and spirit are equally the same WHATness as the father but they are distinct in their hypostatic origins as stated by St Gregory of Nyssa

Unbegottenness is not an essential attribute of God, but a personal property of the Father. The Son and Spirit share fully in the one divine essence — therefore, they are fully God, even though they are begotten and spirated respectively. To say otherwise is to confuse essence with hypostasis.



Everything else you said is bullshit because the son and spirit possess the same essense as god eternally before time always they however are not the Father hence they don’t have his Property unique to him that picks him out as a person.

Unbegottenness is not a property of the nature that’s the problem your having and that’s why your a retard and the whole forums laughing at you


It is on you now to prove that the person essense distinction is illogical but you cannot and will not because your own God yes the demon faggot god of Muslims nigger faggot Allah multi right armed deformed abomination with one shin is dependant on his Sifat of eternity so your gods dependant on his Sifat and not only this but your gay gods Sifat are dependant on one another for example the Sifat of Creation is dependant on the Sifat of Will and the Sifat of Will is dependant on ??? Well we dunno what causes Allahs Sifat to will lol

So by your own logic your god is not the first for he is dependant on his own attributes for his own externality and existence so you just debunked Islam for me thank you, dickhead so Allah the being isn’t before his sifat of eternity huge Mohammeden L imagine trying to disprove the trinity and ending up disproving your own religion

 

[LenotheMOGGER]

have fun walking around a giant black brick aka Kevin the Cube three times in the name of Allah.
@PrinceLuenLeoncur

Shut the fuck up please, all you can do is disrespect others while yours is getting raped, instead of doing that you should defend yours.

 

[PsychoH]

Shut the fuck up please, all you can do is disrespect others while yours is getting raped, instead of doing that you should defend yours.

Look above retarded shit. @PrinceLuenLeoncur killed it.

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

Shut the fuck up please, all you can do is disrespect others while yours is getting raped, instead of doing that you should defend yours.

I destroyed your gay faggot religion now bow down before me and accept your L bitch or I’ll find you irl and fuck you up bitch

 

[emeraldglass]

Calls me stupid

Can’t answer a simple question on how he knows Allah



I get that you belive you can go to revelation but I’m asking you as an empiricist how can you discern what Allah is saying as he clearly has no simlitude and thefore even analogies fail at representing him in any meaningful wah so you literally cannot know him.

I’m also then asking you how can you link anything in the created order to an being that is so removed from the causal chain or creation that there’s no linkage as you have weighted the diffidence between the two such that it is impossible to relate infer or make analogies of Allah in any way.

I don’t have this issue was I can link creation back to God thanks to St Maximus the confessor who gave the divine rays stating that the 4 steps are creation which finds its fulfilment in the Principles which finds fulfilment in the Logoi (mind of God) which finds its fulfilment in the Logos (the word) through which God creates

Notice how there’s a link how creation goes back to god how god interacts from the get go?


Now your stupid religion lacks this and even your gods actions are such that they collapse the act and effect such that an act doesn’t take place but an affect magically happens according to Ash’aris and Maturidis.

If Allah isn’t acting then the effect cannot be caused by him and his act DUH

It’s metaphysically incoherent to condense the act and effect into one as that implies the act (God) is his effect (creation) which is an oxymoron.

So this leads to epistemic Agnosticism as you cannot reasonably state how and why everything comes from Allah And why we even need Allah considering nothing can be linked back to him so there’s no reason to even believe in him clearly.

Also if alllahs will is permanent as I said what is causing the will to “will” what is it that makes the will effect different sifat at different times for those sifat to activate and deactivate at different times be it temporal or non temporal? You have yet to explain this part. The fact that his will does different things and affects different sifats implies an change in said sifats and an change in the will and if there is no change then your gods an Automaton running on a script removing divine sovereignty

Either way you look at it your COOKED


And finally like your boyfriend @sigmamogger @JasGews69x and @Basedman420 you end up defaulting to “ERR I DUNNO ALLAHU SALEM BILLAH KHAIF “

You are applying a limited, humanized model of causality and deliberation to the Divine. That’s why you don’t understand.

All the proof you need is simple and in the Quran

Surah Al-Ikhlas (112:1–4)
“Allah is declared to be One, Eternal, and utterly unlike anything in creation.”

There is no suggestion here that an eternal, perfect Being requires a changeable process to communicate or act.

Surah Al-Ḥadid (57:3) proclaims,

“He is the First and the Last, the Ascendant and the Intimate,”

Highlighting the fact that His attributes are unchanging, eternal, and not subject to any form of alteration or development over time. These verses provide textual evidence that Allah’s will and qualities are not subject to fluctuation, they are absolute and self existent.


What looks like change in the world isn’t a change in God’s will, it’s just His one eternal command playing out through time. What looks like a chain of causes is actually just how the timeless will of God appears within our limited, temporal perspective.



You are arguing from an empiricist standpoint that a transcendent Being without any analogues in creation is unknowable,
Islamic epistemology teaches that Allah gives us signs both through the world around us and through revelation. The Qur’an together with the clear order in the universe, are signs that offer a way to know God without making Him like His creation, keeping His transcendence fully intact.



Unlike the view you’ve described from St. Maximus, where knowledge of God flows through layers like the logos, Islam teaches that no intermediaries are needed to know Allah. His direct revelation and the rational signs built into creation are more than enough to prove His existence and His unchanging nature. Thinking that changes in the world mean God’s will also changes is a stupid mistake, it applies human thinking to something far beyond it. It is a misapplication of human categories to a realm that operates on entirely different principles.


Allah’s will isn’t a series of decisions unfolding over time, it’s one eternal decree that plays out in creation through time’s structure, without ever changing itself.


You say

“If there’s no link, there’s no knowledge”

Islam says: the link isn’t ontological, it’s revelatory. God is known not by being like the world, but by choosing to speak into it.



Creation is the direct result of God’s will, not through intermediaries (Logoi/Logos), because that would imply mediation between Creator and creation, which Islamic theology rejects because it’s inherently flawed.

You say

Act = effect? Then act isn’t even an act, just a magical appearance.

But God’s “act” isn’t a temporal transition. It’s an eternal attribute whose effects are created in time. So the act is not in time, the effect is. There is no natural causality It’s divine immediacy.


You say

What determines when the effect occurs if there’s no change in God?

The answer is, God wills all things eternally, but brings them into being when He eternally willed them to be brought forth.

Islam doesn’t attempt to solve metaphysical mystery the way Christian Platonism does. It accepts apophatic limits (you can’t know God’s essence).


Christianity seeks to unite God and world through participation. This will lead to creating flaws in to god which he does not have.


You criticize our system as flawed, yet the doctrine of St. Maximus you hold to is the one problematic, it carries its own contradictions under the surface.


Your system of divine rays says

God is knowable through participation

Then I would say, that is risk of undermining transcendence.


It says

God’s actions are rational and moral

But then you are making God’s will necessary, not free.

It says

God enters history through Incarnation

But this is temporal/human limitations imposed on a timeless God.

It says

Revelation is embodied through Christ

But this requires accepting paradoxes like Trinity and dual natures.


What you Christians have done is meddled in matters better left untouched, unlike us Muslims. Your faith wasn’t firm enough, so you needed to build a metaphysical crutch like the Logos-Logoi system. But in doing so, you complicated what should’ve remained simple: the oneness and simplicity of God. You ended up making Him resemble His creation.

 

[Sonneillon]

you just start talking about something else, not disproving anything.

the guy i tagged will explain.

+ your prophet is a childfucker.

That guy you tag is a joke and doesnt even take him self seriously

 

[Sonneillon]

Shut the fuck up please, all you can do is disrespect others while yours is getting raped, instead of doing that you should defend yours.

WHy do ethnic arguments just end up being them seething and saying how they will rape white women

 

[hilley]

WHy do ethnic arguments just end up being them seething and saying how they will rape white women

''Religion of peace''

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

You are applying a limited, humanized model of causality and deliberation to the Divine. That’s why you don’t understand.

All the proof you need is simple and in the Quran

Surah Al-Ikhlas (112:1–4)
“Allah is declared to be One, Eternal, and utterly unlike anything in creation.”

There is no suggestion here that an eternal, perfect Being requires a changeable process to communicate or act.

Surah Al-Ḥadid (57:3) proclaims,

“He is the First and the Last, the Ascendant and the Intimate,”

Highlighting the fact that His attributes are unchanging, eternal, and not subject to any form of alteration or development over time. These verses provide textual evidence that Allah’s will and qualities are not subject to fluctuation, they are absolute and self existent.


What looks like change in the world isn’t a change in God’s will, it’s just His one eternal command playing out through time. What looks like a chain of causes is actually just how the timeless will of God appears within our limited, temporal perspective.



You are arguing from an empiricist standpoint that a transcendent Being without any analogues in creation is unknowable,
Islamic epistemology teaches that Allah gives us signs both through the world around us and through revelation. The Qur’an together with the clear order in the universe, are signs that offer a way to know God without making Him like His creation, keeping His transcendence fully intact.



Unlike the view you’ve described from St. Maximus, where knowledge of God flows through layers like the logos, Islam teaches that no intermediaries are needed to know Allah. His direct revelation and the rational signs built into creation are more than enough to prove His existence and His unchanging nature. Thinking that changes in the world mean God’s will also changes is a stupid mistake, it applies human thinking to something far beyond it. It is a misapplication of human categories to a realm that operates on entirely different principles.


Allah’s will isn’t a series of decisions unfolding over time, it’s one eternal decree that plays out in creation through time’s structure, without ever changing itself.


You say

Islam says: the link isn’t ontological, it’s revelatory. God is known not by being like the world, but by choosing to speak into it.



Creation is the direct result of God’s will, not through intermediaries (Logoi/Logos), because that would imply mediation between Creator and creation, which Islamic theology rejects because it’s inherently flawed.

You say


But God’s “act” isn’t a temporal transition. It’s an eternal attribute whose effects are created in time. So the act is not in time, the effect is. There is no natural causality It’s divine immediacy.


You say


The answer is, God wills all things eternally, but brings them into being when He eternally willed them to be brought forth.

Islam doesn’t attempt to solve metaphysical mystery the way Christian Platonism does. It accepts apophatic limits (you can’t know God’s essence).


Christianity seeks to unite God and world through participation. This will lead to creating flaws in to god which he does not have.


You criticize our system as flawed, yet the doctrine of St. Maximus you hold to is the one problematic, it carries its own contradictions under the surface.


Your system of divine rays says


Then I would say, that is risk of undermining transcendence.


It says

But then you are making God’s will necessary, not free.

It says

But this is temporal/human limitations imposed on a timeless God.

It says

But this requires accepting paradoxes like Trinity and dual natures.


What you Christians have done is meddled in matters better left untouched, unlike us Muslims. Your faith wasn’t firm enough, so you needed to build a metaphysical crutch like the Logos-Logoi system. But in doing so, you complicated what should’ve remained simple: the oneness and simplicity of God. You ended up making Him resemble His creation.

Allah is declared one utterly and unlike creation….


Proceedes to explain how Allah is oneness is like that of his created interpretation of oneness and when a Christian shows god is one not in a way anything in creation is one you lose your shit .

Funny you mention the first last etc did you know those are Jesus divine titles which were written in my book 600 years before your pedophile prophet cribbed it like a dickhead faggot copying another’s homework.

Rev 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

Why is your gay god stealing my gods divine titles? I should punch you and your faggot Allah in his mouth for this.

We aren’t trying to solve the mysteries of Gods transcendence we only explain what has been revealed to us by god. For us to be able to relate and present analogues for god there must be a simlitude in a way

What maximus is saying is essentially that creation is a reflection Gods divine mind as that’s what he used to create everything. Creation hasn’t got a 1 to one likeliness with god in any way don’t strawman me abdoool

God the father is only known through his Son, both the essense and him are unknowable we haven’t breached gods transcendence but you as a retard have a completely transcendent god which MEANS YOU CANNOT KNOW HIM THANKS FOR ADMITTING MY POINT ISLAM IS LUDICROUS AS THERES NO LOGICAL REASON TO BELIVE IN ALLAH AS HES SO TRANSCENDENT YOU CANNOT TELL ME ANYTHING ABOUT HIM EVEN THE WORD ALLAH MEANS NOTHING FOR HE IS SUCH THAT HE HAS 0 RELATION TO CREATION IN ANY WAY THUS THE CREATED ORDER CANNOT ANALOGUE FOR HIM.

The Christian god is both Transcendent and Immanent, he’s unknowable in his nature but knowable via his energies which come down to us as stated in St Basil letter 234.

I can link creation to the Lord GOD, you cannot therefore I can provide analogues to reach him you cannot.


Oh and BTW the Logos is just the “Word” in Greek and “Logoi” just refers to the structures of creation nothing to do with intermediaries lmfao maximus is saying that gods word structures and creates reality based on his divine mind… not rocket science but those rules and principles such as logic are reflections of God which is beyond logic however logic reflects in an analogical sense so not UNIVOCAL that god is not contradictory


Do you get it MR MO MO pedo follower @Sonneillon @PsychoH see what Islam does to one’s IQ makes them say stupid shit, nigga believes in a God be literally cannot possibly know or equivocate on because his own metaphysics weights the difference between Allah and the created order such that the two have 0 way of logically interacting in any way that you’d be able to comprehend him making revelation a sham, the name Allah a sham, the Quran a sham, everything they speak about a sham for it is impossible to even reference him in any way due to him being completely unknowable. Shitslam is so cringe

 

[PsychoH]

That guy you tag is a joke and doesnt even take him self seriously

Bullshit.

 

[Sonneillon]

Allah is declared one utterly and unlike creation….


Proceedes to explain how Allah is oneness is like that of his created interpretation of oneness and when a Christian shows god is one not in a way anything in creation is one you lose your shit .

Funny you mention the first last etc did you know those are Jesus divine titles which were written in my book 600 years before your pedophile prophet cribbed it like a dickhead faggot copying another’s homework.

Rev 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

Why is your gay god stealing my gods divine titles? I should punch you and your faggot Allah in his mouth for this.

We aren’t trying to solve the mysteries of Gods transcendence we only explain what has been revealed to us by god. For us to be able to relate and present analogues for god there must be a simlitude in a way

What maximus is saying is essentially that creation is a reflection Gods divine mind as that’s what he used to create everything. Creation hasn’t got a 1 to one likeliness with god in any way don’t strawman me abdoool

God the father is only known through his Son, both the essense and him are unknowable we haven’t breached gods transcendence but you as a retard have a completely transcendent god which MEANS YOU CANNOT KNOW HIM THANKS FOR ADMITTING MY POINT ISLAM IS LUDICROUS AS THERES NO LOGICAL REASON TO BELIVE IN ALLAH AS HES SO TRANSCENDENT YOU CANNOT TELL ME ANYTHING ABOUT HIM EVEN THE WORD ALLAH MEANS NOTHING FOR HE IS SUCH THAT HE HAS 0 RELATION TO CREATION IN ANY WAY THUS THE CREATED ORDER CANNOT ANALOGUE FOR HIM.

The Christian god is both Transcendent and Immanent, he’s unknowable in his nature but knowable via his energies which come down to us as stated in St Basil letter 234.

I can link creation to the Lord GOD, you cannot therefore I can provide analogues to reach him you cannot.


Oh and BTW the Logos is just the “Word” in Greek and “Logoi” just refers to the structures of creation nothing to do with intermediaries lmfao maximus is saying that gods word structures and creates reality based on his divine mind… not rocket science but those rules and principles such as logic are reflections of God which is beyond logic however logic reflects in an analogical sense so not UNIVOCAL that god is not contradictory


Do you get it MR MO MO pedo follower @Sonneillon @PsychoH see what Islam does to one’s IQ makes them say stupid shit, nigga believes in a God be literally cannot possibly know or equivocate on because his own metaphysics weights the difference between Allah and the created order such that the two have 0 way of logically interacting in any way that you’d be able to comprehend him making revelation a sham, the name Allah a sham, the Quran a sham, everything they speak about a sham for it is impossible to even reference him in any way due to him being completely unknowable. Shitslam is so cringe

Christians arent much smarter they just call you satanist when you expose it

 

[JasGews69x]

You failed badly and you realise even St Clement of Roman and Ignatus both apostles of the deciples claim Jesus was god in the 1st century right?

No i didnt i already know they were considered gods
Side effects of 1+1+1=1
You said i was 'running to the bible' and dont use philosophy. well duh, why do i need to when your own bible refutes you? i will use textual evidence and not philosophical mumbo jumbo like you to try and justify how god can be obliterated by his own creation.
nO sTop USinG tHe BiBle To rEfUtE mY pOLyTheIsm -

Those 2 people you mentioned (st clement and Ignatious) believed Jesus to be a lower god to the father and he was subordinate which is not the trinity you believe in(co-equal and eternal to the father) . Tertullian also believed in a trinity

Since you mentioned Ignatious, im gonna use him to refute your polytheistic man made mythological man-god saviour.
Nobody in the first 300 years before Nicea believed in a con substantial trinity as you do today which is what you're trying to imply.
By todays standards, Ignatious is a Subordinationist heretic as well as Clement which means you're using heretics to justify your trinity.

This means that your god was so bad explaining him being divine that the people that were with him and near to him took 300+ years to finally realise that Jesus was equal to the father That also means the people in the first 3 centuries didnt believe Jesus as The True God

Do you have anyone before Nicea that believed in the trinity that you believe today? Answer?
NO

Can The Father,the Son , The Holy Spirit change roles? Can the Son become The Father etc?
If they cant that means they are not All Powerful and forced into their roles...Hmph...

Can the Son think he is the father etc?

@Basedman420

Thank you for allowing me to obliterate the foundations of the your religion...Hahaha

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

No i didnt i already know they were considered gods
Side effects of 1+1+1=1
You said i was 'running to the bible' and dont use philosophy. well duh, why do i need to when your own bible refutes you? i will use textual evidence and not philosophical mumbo jumbo like you to try and justify how god can be obliterated by his own creation.
nO sTop USinG tHe BiBle To rEfUtE mY pOLyTheIsm -

Those 2 people you mentioned (st clement and Ignatious) believed Jesus to be a lower god to the father and he was subordinate which is not the trinity you believe in(co-equal and eternal to the father) . Tertullian also believed in a trinity

Since you mentioned Ignatious, im gonna use him to refute your polytheistic man made mythological man-god saviour.
Nobody in the first 300 years before Nicea believed in a con substantial trinity as you do today which is what you're trying to imply.
By todays standards, Ignatious is a Subordinationist heretic as well as Clement which means you're using heretics to justify your trinity.

This means that your god was so bad explaining him being divine that the people that were with him and near to him took 300+ years to finally realise that Jesus was equal to the father That also means the people in the first 3 centuries didnt believe Jesus as The True God

Do you have anyone before Nicea that believed in the trinity that you believe today? Answer?
NO

Can The Father,the Son , The Holy Spirit change roles? Can the Son become The Father etc?
If they cant that means they are not All Powerful and forced into their roles...Hmph...

Can the Son think he is the father etc?

@Basedman420

View attachment 3679615

Thank you for allowing me to obliterate the foundations of the your religion...Hahaha

Your arguments are so bad. Plz stop replying your actually the worst debater here


1 + 1 + 1 =3

But what’s 1 to the power of 3 ??

What is 1 x 1 x 1 ?

What is 1 ÷ 1 ÷ 1?


Yeah sit down

How could the father be the son and the spirit be the son or father? That’s ridiculous? Their origin is what makes them distinct their mode is the distinguishing feature. The father son and spirit cannot “change” roles because their “roles” are reflective of their hypostatic origin which is what distinguishes the personal properties that’s why all begins with the father through the son in the spirit. This is trinity 101

Knowing btw is a property of nature so the person know they aren’t each other lmfao are you a fucking idiot? Dude plz stop replying to me

My Bible refutes me…. Despite every verse you used supporting my belief… your dumbass even used John 17 and 5 and ended up making yourself look like a fucking retard

None of the church fathers taught Jesus was a ontologically lesser god they believed in monarchical trinitsrianism even Ignatus states he only believes because there is one god not 2 lmfao

Just 2 random PRE NICENE fathers

Ignatus states Jesus isn’t created in his divinity he’s eternal… “There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible—even Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Tertullian states “We have also shown that two gods are related in Scripture, and two lords. And yet, let them not be scandalized by this—we give a reason why there are not said to be two gods nor lords but rather two as a Father and a Son. And this not from separation of substance but from disposition…” we affirm one god but 2 distinct particulars both with the same divinity (nature) if you think this is against what Christian’s believe then your cooked and this is evidence your not worthy of this conversation

This is prime monarchical Trinitarianism I’m beginning to think Mohammedens are so fucking mentally cooked that they legitimately don’t know what Christian’s even belive in this is very sad.


If your going to critique my belief at least understand what we believe in first… yes the father is the Head I affirm this this is literally part of our Nicene creed we literally say this every time before communion and it’s like our Shahada. One more shit reply and I’m putting you on my ignore I hate retards even your other Muslim brothers never annoyed me with their low iq arguments this much


Even @Basedman420 is better at this than you he doesn’t just throw my own beliefs in my face like how am I gonna argue with yon when your literally stating what I already belive… yes the father is greater than the son…. Just as all the church fathers said and I agree and to disagree means your a Kafir.

 

[bp3nthusiast]

arabs are 25 years old flexing their max town hall 14 to niggas in their college class. arab men love love love perms and think girls care about them having the newest and latest iphones

im half arab and i agree lmfao most of the people ik are low iq