Imagine ...

[Whatsthepoint]

So let me get this straight.

You'd believe your deceiving theory even though it flies in the face of every religion on earth.

But.

You'd believe there is no god because (in your mind) it flies in the face of everything you've thought.


This is hypocritical and illogical and your reasons for acting so are highly debatable.





And as a post script, Muslims can provide reasons to refute the second statement yet the deceiving theory is conclusively contrary to all religions.

Well the fact that it contradicts every existing religion is the general idea, I said god may have created them to have a laugh.
It was a response to Angel's post.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Well the fact that it contradicts every existing religion is the general idea, I said god may have created them to have a laugh.
It was a response to Angel's post.

You understand my point about hypocrisy?

 

[Whatsthepoint]

You understand my point about hypocrisy?

Not really.
I'm not saying my theory is true or that I have a single peace of evidence to support it, all I sad is that it is valid which you opposed.
On the other hand, I never claimed the concept of god was invalid.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Not really.
I'm not saying my theory is true or that I have a single peace of evidence to support it, all I sad is that it is valid which you opposed.

You speak exactly like a blind follower of a false religion.

"I'm not saying my RELIGION is true or that I have a single peace of evidence to support it, all I said is that it is valid which you opposed."

 

[Whatsthepoint]

You speak exactly like a blind follower of a false religion.

"I'm not saying my RELIGION is true or that I have a single peace of evidence to support it, all I said is that it is valid which you opposed."

Well I'm not talking about religion but about a single claim the logic of which you opposed without logically debunk it, rather you brought up your own concepts of god.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Are you gonna try to debunk the theory using logic and common sense?
It may have flaws I haven't thought of, I haven't really thought much of it, but I still think it is logically valid.
To your second line: who says god is bothered by disbelief? Sure, the Quran does, the Bible etc, but let's not use holy books right now. I'm not saying my theory is right or claim to have any evidence whatsoever, but it's valid.

I'm the one lacking logic?

 

[Whatsthepoint]

I'm the one lacking logic?

so far you haven't suceeded in point out any logical fallacy contained in my theory so I still have the reason to think it is valid.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

so far you haven't suceeded in point out any logical fallacy contained in my theory so I still have the reason to think it is valid.

I'd request that you reread my posts then. For now, I'm done arguing with your imagination.

 

[Grace Seeker]

That would necessitate that God lied to us and deceived us - and God if far removed from such things!

I understand, but there are already things in Islam that strike me as God deceiving people. One of them is:

[4.157] And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure.

Now, I see three potential interpretations based on this passage:
1) In the first, Isa is not actually put on the cross. Rather someone else is crucified in Isa' place. This is because God cause it to appear to those who witnessed the crucifixion that it was Isa who hung on the cross when in fact it was someone else.
2) Isa appeared on the cross because he was in fact crucified, but the Qur'an speaks of it as "appearing" because though he appeared to die, he didn't really die, but only swooned and subsequently recovered.
3) Isa appeared on the cross because he was in fact crucified, but the Qur'an speaks of it as "appearing" because though he appeared to die, his death was only temporary as he would soon be resurrected to life again.

I'm guessing that we would both eliminate #2 as a tenable option, for the idea that whoever was on the cross only swooned, when he was being crucified by people who were paid to make sure that the victim was indeed dead before taking them down from the cross is beyond fathomable. The usually way of assuring this was the breaking of legs, though the Christian Gospels tell us this was unnecessary in Jesus' case because he was already dead as evidenced from having a spear stuck into his heart through his side.

And I'm also guessing that you would reject #3 as this is the standard Christian understanding of what happened.

Therefore I suspect that you are most likely to accept #1 as the proper interpretation of the passage as I understand this to be the standard Islamic view of the event: "The Quranic teaching is that Christ was not crucified nor killed by the Jews, not with standing certain apparent circumstances which produced that illusion in the minds of some of his enemies; that disputations, doubts, and conjectures on such matters are vain; and that he was taken up to Allah Almighty." (source: www.answering-christianity.com, an well-known Islamic apologetic website)


So, here you have Muslims saying that this was an illusion. As Allah is sovereign in all things, then was it not Allah who perpetrated this illusion on Isa's enemies? And is this not an act of deceiving them?

 

[Whatsthepoint]

I'd request that you reread my posts then. For now, I'm done arguing with your imagination.

That's fine.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

C'mon Seeker, you can't be serious?

I guess we should count life itself as a deceit since it makes so many of us forget the afterlife?

Allah punished those people who wanted to kill Isa by perpetuating their ignorance and making it seem like it.

He rewarded those who wanted to save him.

Allah did not lie to them or break any promises. He did not tell them Isa was dead then kept him alive. They thought they had killed him, Allah had saved him and let them wander in their ignorance as a punishment.

 

[Yanal]

Allah knows everything. And heres a story:

A father had three sons called Abdullah,Abdul and zakp)
Father: Take this fruit,go somewhere no one can see you and eat it.
Abdullah: Went in his room and ate them.
Abdul: Went in the bathroom and ate it.
Zak thought Allah sees everything.

Abdul and Abdullah came to the father empty handed while zak gave the fruit back and said: Allah sees everything so I can't eat this when nobody is looking.
Father: Excellent son,You two should learn a lesson or two from zak.

That proves it.

 

[Grace Seeker]

C'mon Seeker, you can't be serious?

Don't you think that Malakiah was serious? I do.

Allah punished those people who wanted to kill Isa by perpetuating their ignorance and making it seem like it.

There, you said it yourself, he made it seem like. You can sugar coat it all you want, but by your own words you are saying that Allah made something to seem different than what it really was. Malaikah called that deception in her post, I'm saying that if it is there, then it is in the Qur'an as well. It matters not the reason for the deception. What does matter is that the reason that they were deceived is because Allah made it appear that they had done one thing when they had not. In other words, Allah is the instigator of the deception -- at least according to your version of the story, my version I accept as true doesn't have anyone deceived.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Don't you think that Malakiah was serious? I do.

There, you said it yourself, he made it seem like. You can sugar coat it all you want, but by your own words you are saying that Allah made something to seem different than what it really was. Malaikah called that deception in her post, I'm saying that if it is there, then it is in the Qur'an as well. It matters not the reason for the deception. What does matter is that the reason that they were deceived is because Allah made it appear that they had done one thing when they had not. In other words, Allah is the instigator of the deception -- at least according to your version of the story, my version I accept as true doesn't have anyone deceived.

Instigator of deception? Perhaps you aren't aware of the type of deception we were talking about. We talked about malevolent deception for the hell of it. Not a punishment of perpetuating the deception that the Jews themselves originally held.

They were deluding themselves when they thought they could kill Isa and Allah punished them by letting them stay in that delusion.

That is not instigating, that is punishing by perpetuating it.

By the way, life is deceptive in that it lures away from the afterlife.
Allah created life.
Is Allah deceptive for that?

 

[Grace Seeker]

By the way, life is deceptive in that it lures away from the afterlife.
Allah created life.
Is Allah deceptive for that?

See, I don't think that life is deceptive in the way you describe. I think that it is sin that lures us away from the afterlife, and sin is not something that God created. As you said, Allah created life, and that life which Allah created and places within us actually awakens us to his presence and woos us back to him when we have drifted away into sin.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

See, I don't think that life is deceptive in the way you describe. I think that it is sin that lures us away from the afterlife, and sin is not something that God created. As you said, Allah created life, and that life which Allah created and places within us actually awakens us to his presence and woos us back to him when we have drifted away into sin.

God is omnipotent and controls all.
Sin is under Gods control.
He allows sin to deceive us.
God deceives.

You see the silliness of generalization?

 

[Grace Seeker]

God is omnipotent and controls all.
Sin is under Gods control.
He allows sin to deceive us.
God deceives.

If this is your view, then it is by your standards, not mine, that God actually is deceptive.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

If this is your view, then it is by your standards, not mine, that God actually is deceptive.

I'm interpreting your view here hence my comment about your generalization. Isn't this what logically follows according to your statement about sin?

 

[Grace Seeker]

I'm interpreting your view here hence my comment about your generalization.

OK. I guess I missed that the first time.

Isn't this what logically follows according to your statement about sin?

But, still no. I don't believe that because God allows us freedom to make choices for ourselves that God is the author of sin just because we choose it. Sin is the perversion of God's will for our lives. But without true freedom to choose differently than God's will, then following God's will would not be a real choice it would only be a type of puppetry, and God didn't create us to be puppets but to be people who freely submit ourselves to him.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

OK. I guess I missed that the first time.

But, still no. I don't believe that because God allows us freedom to make choices for ourselves that God is the author of sin just because we choose it. Sin is the perversion of God's will for our lives. But without true freedom to choose differently than God's will, then following God's will would not be a real choice it would only be a type of puppetry, and God didn't create us to be puppets but to be people who freely submit ourselves to him.

And I fully agree with your post. But back on topic, you understand my disagreement with what you called "instigating deceit?"