Islam an offense to our LORD.

[Nine_Two]

Definitions:
Omnipotent: almighty or infinite in power, as God.

Contradiction: a statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous.

Paradox: a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.

You seem to be having issues with these. And yes, a Paradox is something where both conclussions are held as truths (it means “dual truth” as I already pointed out). As I’ve pointed out, they do exist.

Nonetheless I’d like to quit this line of argument as it has taken us off topic, feel free to make a new topic on it, I will probably post.
The original point I brought up was that Islam limits God, you attempted to argue that it does not by trying to say that Christianity imposes limits on God as well, and thus we must hold that same limitation to mean omnipotence.

As I have shown the above definition specifies there are no limits.

Now, I’d like to see an actual argument on the topic as to how Muslims don’t hold that God is limited, because every single thing you’ve said indicates you believe that you can impose limits on God, even going so far as to deny the possibility of paradoxes (what you dismiss as contradictions, and which I’ve shown you actually exist in nature). So show me how you Muslims don’t hold God to be limited, show me how you don’t box him in, because so far that’s all you’ve been doing.

 

[Hypatia]

God did not die. The incarnation died, and even then he came back to life after three days.

You pretty much have to say that the Logos died since the Logos is the subject of the Incarnation (along with suffered, hungered, slept, was born of a woman (the whole basis of identifying Mary as Theotokos). So this is just orthodox Christianity, so far (see Cyril of Alexandria). Again, this is why we find it contradictory, because you have to say these things of the Logos who is God. Saying that the Logos did these things through or according to the human nature that was assumed (this is Cyril’s tactic) doesn’t help, since the Logos is the subject of that human nature, and is, by nature, God.

This is about as absurd as saying that Mohammed ascended into heaven, or that God took him on a journey to Jerusalem in the middle of the night.

This misunderstands the objection that is being made. The objection isn’t to the death and resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection is scientifically implausible, but it is not involve us in logical contradiction. The question of its truth is not a logical question (it is not impossible), but a historical and empirical question. The Incarnation, on the other hand, does involve us in logical contradiction.

 

[Hypatia]

Now, I’d like to see an actual argument on the topic as to how Muslims don’t hold that God is limited, because every single thing you’ve said indicates you believe that you can impose limits on God, even going so far as to deny the possibility of paradoxes (what you dismiss as contradictions, and which I’ve shown you actually exist in nature). So show me how you Muslims don’t hold God to be limited, show me how you don’t box him in, because so far that’s all you’ve been doing.

If a paradox only seems contradictory, then I assume it is, in fact, not. You have not shown that the things I have been calling contradictions are in fact not contradictions. You have only said that the things I have called contradictions may not be (and you still haven’t told us how we would tell the difference between the two). This is still relevant since “omnipotence” is just a way of affirming God as the Infinite. The discussion so far has been about whether or not Christian claims violate that.

 

[Nine_Two]

The ressurection is scientifically implausable but Mohammed accending into heaven is not?

Whatever you say.

 

[Nine_Two]

If a paradox only seems contradictory, then I assume it is, in fact, not. You have not shown that the things I have been calling contradictions are in fact not contradictions. You have only said that the things I have called contradictions may not be (and you still haven’t told us how we would tell the difference between the two). This is still relevant since “omnipotence” is just a way of affirming God as the Infinite. The discussion so far has been about whether or not Christian claims violate that.

The discussion is not whether Christian claims violate that idea. The discussion is whether Muslim claims violate the idea of omnipotence.

You were given leeway to make your arguments and you’ve shown yourself as slippery as any other Muslim. Perhaps it was a mistake to grant you this, in light of your obvious familiarity with rhetorical construction (Your misdirected use of Ethos and self-defeating use of Pathos lulling me into the false idea that you could be reasoned with).

You have not made a single argument to show that you don’t actually think your god is limited, and in fact have made several more to show you do. Thus I must conclude that you and your ilk do consider your god to be a limited being, and thus I will continue to bring forth the idea as a reason why Islam is not only a false religion, but a blasphemous one.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

You are quite right. I hope that everyone will understand that that comment was nothing more than a little outburst of hyperbole on my part and was, in no way, meant as a serious representation of what Christians believe nor was it advanced as a serious argument. I shouldn’t have allowed it distract from the point (which it is certainly bound to do in a setting like this).

It’s quite all right. As I said to someone in another thread, we’ve all been there.

 

[SonofAdam]

Nine_Two says

No, you said God was understandable. He can be understood to a limit.

I don’t think you were paying attention because I said: “I’m not saying that we can understand everything about God,” hence I agree also that He can be understood to a limit i.e.,through knowledge only that He has given us.

Also(from your other post) nobody said that God can be 'contained within human understanding’. This does not mean, however that we do not know anything about God. We know that He is The Creator and He has unlimited power to create, Knowledge and the Will to specify.

When you talked about God should be able to go where He wants to go, well, if you say that God is in a place this is limiting Him because you limit Him to that place. Also, if the eternal can have a body, there would be no evidence that the universe needs a Creator.

The who purpose behind the square-circle example was to show self contradiction is impossible and is in reality nothing because they cancel each other out. If for instance we asked you what is a square circle, you would not be able to respond intelligently because it doesn’t exist.

We don’t fall into idol worship because we obey what he says, not because we understand him.

Understanding Him means having knowledge of Him. If you obey what He says, then you also know what to abstain from because abstaining from something is also a part of obedience and the main thing to abstain from is a false deity.

God did not die. The incarnation died, and even then he came back to life after three days. This is about as absurred as saying that Mohammed ascended into heaven, or that God took him on a journey to Jerusalem in the middle of the night. As I have already argued, science has proven paradoxs exist, so don’t dismiss something as a contradiction just because you can’t understand it.

First point: What does it mean when you say ‘God did not die. The incarnation died, and even then he came back to life after three days.’ Your belief is that God incarnated i.e., became flesh and was put to a cross, but it wasn’t God that died it was the ‘incarnation’ that died. I’m assuming you mean the ‘flesh’ died. Then you said ‘even then he came back to life after three days.’ Who do you mean when you use the pronoun ‘he’ in this sentence.

Second point: I didn’t say you said that God died. I was giving an example of contradiction in terms. Why? because you said 'Well first off he says we’re trying to contain the infinite in the finite, as though somehow God can not exist in both forms at once, thus limiting God,

From what I understand from your statements is that we talk about what God is and what He isn’t, you equate ‘impossible’ with ‘limit’. So what do you say to these examples;

Is it impossible or possible for God to be The Creator and created at the same time? If the answer is impossible, please explain why.

Is it impossible or possible for The Ever Living One to die? If the answer is impossible, please explain why.

Third point: The miracle of Prophet Muhammad’s journey, peace and blessings be upon him, has got nothing to do with if God is limited or not; this was a miracle. A miracle is an event that has the ‘possibility’ to happen because Allaah is in control of His creation and makes them behave How He wills; there is no contradiction in this. Now saying God, The Ever Living can die? This is something that is ‘impossible’ to happen because Allaah is Ever Living and ‘death’ and ‘Ever Living’ are contradictory terms.

LOL!!!
And the only way Hannover could be in Iran is if they picked up the city and moved it!
The argument makes no sense and has no bearing on anything in this thread.

The point was you have to use words only after knowing their meaning in order to make a valid point.

God is incorporeal, however the incarnation during its 33 years on this earth had a human body. There was a point in time when it took up that body, and a point in time when it discarded that body, but that doesn’t change that God is eternal. Having a body did not change God, as you and Hypatia keep trying to force the idea the God was contained into the body. God wasn’t contained in the body, God continued to be God.

This is what I mean by you not understanding words that you use. You use the word ‘incorporeal’ and ‘incarnation’ describing the same Being; but these two states are contradictory. Incorporeal means ‘not having any physical existence’ and incarnation means to become in the flesh’. Does ‘flesh’ have a physical existence? If yes, then you cannot describe The Incoporeal One to be in a state of material existence.

What contradicts God according to the book written by a pagan desert merchant.

I’ll ask you to have a little bit more respect and rephrase the question before I answer that.

Would you agree that God is and has always been perfect even before the beginning of time i.e.,He didn’t need anything added to Him or subtracted from Him because He was perfect?

 

[Nine_Two]

SonOfAdam, I would suggest you find out what Christians actually believe before trying to get into an argument on semantics. I also suggest you look at the definitions I posted, this will answer a great deal of the things you posted.

Secondly, as I said to Hypatia, this tract started seeking apologetics from Muslims on how you can believe in an omnipotent god while still having a holy book claiming things he can’t do. A discussion on whether Christians limit God should be a whole other topic. Many of the points you mentioned have already been answered.

 

[brb3]

Definitions:

Contradiction: a statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous.

As Mohammed proved to be. Claiming to be a NEW prophet of God, when sacred scripture taught the IMPOSSIBILITY of.

 

[SonofAdam]

SonOfAdam, I would suggest you find out what Christians actually believe before trying to get into an argument on semantics. I also suggest you look at the definitions I posted, this will answer a great deal of the things you posted.

Secondly, as I said to Hypatia, this tract started seeking apologetics from Muslims on how you can believe in an omnipotent god while still having a holy book claiming things he can’t do. A discussion on whether Christians limit God should be a whole other topic. Many of the points you mentioned have already been answered.

To summarize everything that we are trying to say, I will ask you again, because you still haven’t answered:

and for this point, I do know you believe that The Creator is the Ever Living One,

so can He also be attributed with ‘dying’? (-please note that I am not asking if you believe that the Creator died)

 

[Nine_Two]

To summarize everything that we are trying to say, I will ask you again, because you still haven’t answered:

and for this point, I do know you believe that The Creator is the Ever Living One,

so can He also be attributed with ‘dying’? (-please note that I am not asking if you believe that the Creator died)

Tell you what, you answer my question and I’ll answer yours, even though yours is off topic.

Tell me how you Muslims can claim not to believe in a limited god when the Koran specifically limits your god?

 

[SonofAdam]

Tell you what, you answer my question and I’ll answer yours, even though yours is off topic.

Tell me how you Muslims can claim not to believe in a limited god when the Koran specifically limits your god?

Why do I have to answer your question first? Is this some kind of dictatorship? Since I have been asking this question before asking it again[above], and you have yet to answer it, I think you should answer first.

From post #114

Instead of using the square-circle example, lets use another. If someone said that The Creator is Ever-Living or Immortal then says that same God can die would be absurd[and no it is not limiting God it is contradicting Him]. One must be true and the other must be false. Its a contradiction in terms. If you still don’t agree with this then please explain how two contradictory statements can be true at the same time.

You then you responded in post #118 by saying,

“God did not die…”

this didn’t answer the question.

To be clear**Contradiction(throughout the discussion), meaning self-contradictory(this is what i meant). This was hinted at when i said ‘contradiction in terms’.

 

[Hypatia]

As I said to Hypatia, this tract started seeking apologetics from Muslims on how you can believe in an omnipotent god while still having a holy book claiming things he can’t do. A discussion on whether Christians limit God should be a whole other topic.

But the question you asked, back in post #83 was this

But since it is relevent to the topic, let us discuss the limitations of God here.

You claim Christ can not be God because God can not become incarnite in man while at the same time continuing to be God. Is this not placing a limitation on God?

I presume this is the question you are making reference to, since this is the post that started the conversation in this thread.

This has been answered at great length by now. It is not appropriate to attribute or predicate contradictions to God. And it has been explained why the Incarnation is just such a contradiction.

If you agree with the idea that is not appropriate to attribute or predicate contradictions (notice no one is saying anything about ‘paradoxes’) to God then we basically agree on this aspect of the Infinite. Then the only thing left is a discussion of whether or not the specific contradiction we have identified (i.e., the Incarnation) is really a contradiction.

If you disagree with the principle that it is impossible to predicate contradictions to God, then there is, obviously, real disagreement. Nonetheless, in order to defend your claim you would need to appeal to the idea that I am contradicting the idea of omnipotence. This would effectively affirm the idea that one cannot predicate contradictions to God.

---

As far as I can tell this, still, all comes down to the question of whether or not the Christian claims, regarding the Incarnation, involve contradiction. And that is where the conversation started.

 

[Vile_Servant]

To summarize everything that we are trying to say, I will ask you again, because you still haven’t answered:

and for this point, I do know you believe that The Creator is the Ever Living One,

so can He also be attributed with ‘dying’? (-please note that I am not asking if you believe that the Creator died)

The Christian belief in an Almighty God, whose divine nature is above all human comprehension (e.g. the Holy Trinity), is not incompatible with what Islam says about Allah;

No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. (Quran 6:103)

 

[Hypatia]

The Christian belief in an Almighty God, whose divine nature is above all human comprehension (e.g. the Holy Trinity), is not incompatible with what Islam says about Allah;

No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. (Quran 6:103)

no one has claimed comprehension (a full and complete grasp), as has been mentioned several times above. This does not mean we have no knowledge of God. And, the lack of full comprehension certainly cannot be used as an excuse for the predication of contradictions to God. On this much, it seems to me, most everyone is in agreement.

The disputed claim is whether or not the Trinity and Incarnation involve contradiction.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

You know, Hypatia, I can’t help but notice you ignored most of what I said in response to you on the previous pages, choosing to take one part and respond to it. I’ve answered a lot of what you’ve asked Nine_Two as well, and addressed some of the key issues you bring up. As you quoted part of the response, showing that you acknowledged it’s existence, why did you choose to ignore the larger portion, which countered what you were saying?

 

[Vile_Servant]

no one has claimed comprehension (a full and complete grasp), as has been mentioned several times above. This does not mean we have no knowledge of God. And, the lack of full comprehension certainly cannot be used as an excuse for the predication of contradictions to God. On this much, it seems to me, most everyone is in agreement.

The disputed claim is whether or not the Trinity and Incarnation involve contradiction.

does “virgin birth” involve contradiction?

 

[Hypatia]

does “virgin birth” involve contradiction?

the virgin birth can be thought coherently (however implausible it may seem). It is an empirical question, and it does not involve contradiction.

 

[Nine_Two]

Why do I have to answer your question first? Is this some kind of dictatorship? Since I have been asking this question before asking it again[above], and you have yet to answer it, I think you should answer first.

You have to answer first because I asked first.

 

[Nine_Two]

But the question you asked, back in post #83 was this

I presume this is the question you are making reference to, since this is the post that started the conversation in this thread.

This has been answered at great length by now. It is not appropriate to attribute or predicate contradictions to God. And it has been explained why the Incarnation is just such a contradiction.

If you agree with the idea that is not appropriate to attribute or predicate contradictions (notice no one is saying anything about ‘paradoxes’) to God then we basically agree on this aspect of the Infinite. Then the only thing left is a discussion of whether or not the specific contradiction we have identified (i.e., the Incarnation) is really a contradiction.

If you disagree with the principle that it is impossible to predicate contradictions to God, then there is, obviously, real disagreement. Nonetheless, in order to defend your claim you would need to appeal to the idea that I am contradicting the idea of omnipotence. This would effectively affirm the idea that one cannot predicate contradictions to God.

---

As far as I can tell this, still, all comes down to the question of whether or not the Christian claims, regarding the Incarnation, involve contradiction. And that is where the conversation started.

No it hasn’t been answered. You answered it with a horribly aimed and argued Polemic on why God must be limited. While I completely agree that language has limits, this is very different than when the Koran says God can’t manifest himself in the flesh. This is not a limit of language at all but a limit you’re placing on God.

All I’m asking for are actual apologetics. Why is this not a limitation being placed on God?