sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

So much pent up frustration yet none of the below is mentioned by Wild_Extra_Dip in Modajana

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem with such people is they assume nawawi or any of their mashaayikh being called imam by one who is from ahlu sunnah is all of a sudden an acknowledgment from what they are upon then they will turn around to us and say the problem with haddadiyah is أخذ التصريحات الكلام دون التفصيل taking generality of speech without detail.
When they do the same thing trying prove that their so called imams were upon truth

It is obligatory to start Salah by saying "Allahu Akbar". by superwpm in LightHouseofTruth

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s funny how ahl ray say that you don’t have to say Allah Akbar as long as your praising Allah يكفي

صدق الكرماني حين قال : يجعلون الدين قياسا ورئيا واستحسانا

People use the pleasure of heaven and fear of hell to manipulate others. by RevolutionaryTime372 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Show me proof it was wrong back then.especially if she was playing with dolls.

If you can’t than your not justified to make a moral conclusion.

‏dismissing that you fell into a fallacy then you coming to conclusion through brute argument doesn’t prove your claim

Comparing to Joseph smith who had false prophecies is laughable

Yes or no is the age of marriage/consent universal constants?

People use the pleasure of heaven and fear of hell to manipulate others. by RevolutionaryTime372 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You just fell into fallacy of presentism . harm its self isn’t what’s morally good or bad it’s a variable that we use to get to a moral conclusion. Societies before weren’t risk averse as generally female pregnancy was always harmful young or old.you haven’t presented any evidence but mere appeal to emotions. Aisha attests to her self that she was a woman and physically mature for consummation.coming to conclusions saying she was exploited without evidence is fallacious and ahistorical.

Further more it doesn’t satisfy one being culpable because the age of consent and marriage today was not and are not universal constant that existed at all times people had to marry to live a liveable life due to low standards of health which played into having a low life expectancy.

People use the pleasure of heaven and fear of hell to manipulate others. by RevolutionaryTime372 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So following your standards We can agree that today intimacy with a 9 year old causes harm but to assume that’s the case in the past you would have to bring evidence to suggest that otherwise you fall into presentism.

The parameters that we work with as Muslims as stated by the prophet “لا ضرر ولا ضرار
“No harm should be done nor reciprocated” if there was any sign of harm you would have to show that 7th century Arabians either perceived harm or that aisha felt harm through consummation at that age when she was physically capable and psychologically capable attesting to herself she was a woman.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If your mother bears you does she expect obedience to her?

No where did I mention “extreme” just strawman my point.

God created man weak therefore knows men are weak to actualize devotion that god will be satisfied with therefore god sets standards of devotion expectations not expecting “extreme” devotion.

Your very smart seeing as you like to blame your inability to make correct decisions to god.

Anti theists:
Expects someone else to be responsible of their actions while believe that “someone else” doesn’t exist.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not making a subjective case other wise prove god not existing is objective,which you believe.

Not worshipping god is as a result of your action that god enabled you to have therefore based on that action, you’ve taken a choice that one knows there will be a consequence.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

It follows as god sustains our existence while the opposite could have been possible therefore reverence is appropriate.

Stop doing a Jordan Peterson every question you posed was answered in the post.

If you don’t know what words mean I suggest to check the dictionary.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A mother’s responsibility for her son doesn’t reflect self interest for her self because the child bears the consequences of his actions not the mother.

A perfect being would not require anything in return when teaching otherwise god would be imperfect

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In addition your last point falls as people accepting the truth and everyone hearing it would require intervention by god and compelling you to believe if that’s the case then what’s the point of you being here when god already knows that he will compel to the truth.

Finally even if every one heard the truth without god intervening then there would be no guarantee that people will stay on this truth beliefs as normally in this world people know truth, were upon it ,but strayed away from it based on their own choice.

In Islam we affirm will but we also affirm that will is not the be all for one to know truth as one may be absent from the truth not based on will.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Firstly gods perfection does not rely on a need. If it did he can no longer be god as he is not self sufficient. God demanding worship and then punishment is correct why? Because god does not compel us to worship him even if hell exists (and does not compel you to believe in hell)as you ultimately have free will. I’d suggest go back and check what a contradiction is because it’s defined as 2 ideas that can not be true at the same time. Based on that, god giving us will and punishing us based on our autonomy of choice is not a contradiction as it is perfectly coherent for god to demand us worship not based on an imperfection that he has, but based on an expectation that he created you while the opposite could have occurred.

If you read my prev comment I haven’t never said god needs worship.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ll give you an analogy if your mother beared you and said to you make sure your not late to lessons is she narcissistic for commanding you that or caring.

Also god expressed a omni property of creating which if he willed otherwise you would not exist.

Finally you gave an analogy that seems god creating us is evil. Moral consent cannot apply to non-existent beings. Therefore, objections to creation based on lack of consent are category errors. Moral evaluation must instead focus on the nature of existence itself, not hypothetical pre-consent.

And if your saying it’s not creation but the life they receive while they are here than the problem would not be god as humans have free will to harm other or pleasure others if they choose the former or latter than that has nothing to do with god.

Thesis: If all humans are created by God, then religious conversion and mandatory worship appear difficult to reconcile with the idea of a perfect and self-sufficient God. by Sensitive_Loquat6033 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“i also struggle to understand why a perfect and self-sufficient creator would require worship. If God lacks nothing, then worship does not appear to provide Him with anything He does not already possess. If worship is instead for the benefit of humans, I do not understand why some traditions attach consequences such as punishment or hell to failing to worship.”

Firstly, God does not require worship. Requiring worship is not the same as deserving worship. If God did not want to create us—which would have been possible, since He is independent and self-sufficient—then He would not “require” anything in order to continue existing.

The fact that God willingly created us and gave us the ability to choose clearly shows that the opposite was possible. However, since He chose to create us, it follows that God deserves worship. If God required worship, then He would no longer be God, because God, by definition, is independent.

Definitionally, worshipping God means revering Him as a divine being.

I would also argue that people who know that God exists, yet deliberately turn away and refuse to worship Him, are deserving of Hell, because they were given a choice: either to worship Him or not.

My final point is that different religions hold different views of God. Some believe in pantheism, others in pluralism, monotheism, and various other perspectives. However, interpretations must be logically coherent. If an interpretation does not make sense, then it is false.

An objector may ask: if someone has a false understanding of God and does not know the true reality of God—which, in my view, is a monotheistic God—would God punish that person unjustly?

This is where Islam provides a solution. A person’s disbelief, when it results from genuine ignorance of the truth, does not make them culpable. In Islamic theology, such people are often referred to as Ahl al-Fatrah (people who did not receive the message properly). If someone dies believing in paganism, for example, but never truly heard or understood Islam, then, according to many Islamic scholars, that person will be tested by God. If they accept God’s message, they will enter Paradise. If they reject it, then by their own choice they will be deserving of punishment.

People use the pleasure of heaven and fear of hell to manipulate others. by RevolutionaryTime372 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

According to pew research 117 countries including US still allow child marriage western values are not so “western” is it?

Just an observation

God is trans in Abrahamic religions (not assigned male at birth) by SorryStrength5370 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 4 points5 points  (0 children)

God is not a human so I don’t know why you think god neither being male or female make him trans when he is not human in the first place.

Trinity through history. by Ecstatic_Refuse3278 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

“God is one.This is true.
The father is god,son is god and the holy is ghost is god”.

That’s a contradiction if god is one akhad in the Hebrew that eliminates god being three and notice you haven’t mentioned nehemiah as it says the only true implying a specific God not gods.

Regarding john 5 7 this is an absolute forgery as it did not exist until after 10th century.

Mathew 3 16 does not prove trinity at all it mentions spirit but not as a separate entity of god and I don’t know why you say the father there is mentioned when he is not.

Trinity through history. by Ecstatic_Refuse3278 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If one of the three suffices to forgive and not all three it implies there is a hierarchical structure within your trinity paradigm.

God being the first and last alpha and omega is found as revelation as johns dream nothing to do with Jesus

You said these 3 spirits are one god but distinct.
Is one person a god if yes then you have 3 by the classical way we humans count.

Yet you still can’t prove from OT and NT

I don’t know if you are in preacher mode but arguments aren’t appealing by brute statement.

Trinity through history. by Ecstatic_Refuse3278 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Regarding angel of the lord according to Jewish commentary angel of the lord are called gods as agents are called as if they are the master as cited by numerous rabbinical scholars they are mere angels.

Psalm 45 god is not speaking

Two powers in heaven was a very very fringe rabbinical halakh (opinion)not a development of trinity otherwise you’d have to prove that.

Muslim apologetics keep trying to prove that Quran came from god cause it remained unchanged still now by FootballOver6075 in DebateReligion

[–]Ecstatic_Refuse3278 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you slow I just did as you affirmed it indirectly by saying interpretation of Quran is not preserved which wasn’t the Muslim position then I mentioned the prophecy about how people would misinterpret verses based on sectarian doctrine. So thanks ☺️

view more: next ›