S
Sister_Amy
Guest
The Qur’an is NOT Allah.it did sink from reading the quote. Does it sink in to you that as the Word of Allah, it is Allah, but as ink and paper, it is not?
Don’t you get that? Stop saying it is. It’s NOT.
The Qur’an is NOT Allah.it did sink from reading the quote. Does it sink in to you that as the Word of Allah, it is Allah, but as ink and paper, it is not?
There is no evidence to suggest that.So are we ending this because you cannot accept the overwhelming evidence that God has the Need to Act?
the creed differentiates between the Quran **AS A BOOK OF INK AND PAPER **and the Quran AS THE ETERNAL WORD OF ALLAH.The Qur’an is NOT Allah.
Don’t you get that? Stop saying it is. It’s NOT.
The Qur’an is not Allah.the creed differentiates between the Quran **AS A BOOK OF INK AND PAPER **and the Quran AS THE ETERNAL WORD OF ALLAH.
The Quran as a book is NOT Allah. The Quran AS THE WORD of Allah IS Allah.
Clearer now? if not, then maybe you can tell me what does it mean that the Quran is not Allah, yet it is uncreated and eternal? does it mean you believe in 2 different uncreated and eternal entities?
back to the question you do not want to discuss..
So we can stop if you want, resting on the conclusion that trinity is not a logical conclusion if one assumes the existence of God. Only “ONE” and absolute “UNITY” is logical.
This is you, trying to impose a non-islamic teaching on Islam.back to the question you do not want to discuss.
One is logical, ok. How come Allah and His Word are One is logical in Islam but illogical in Christianity? or are Allah and His uncreated Word 2 in Islam?
God’s product: the Universe, is the overwhelming evidence that you refuse to see.There is no evidence to suggest that.
They would resist the term for its negative medical implications, but its technically the same thing.Christians don’t believe God has multiple personalities, for one.
In the doctrine of the Trinity, all 3 persons are the same in essence. But each differs in rank: Like Jesus always submits to the will of the Father. Agree?Secondly, you said that one personality has to be dominant which would mean that the three in the trinity couldn’t be equal by that analogy.
who said about abiding by its rules? what about looking at it in reverse? life abides by gods natural need to act. this is a jewish concept, that we reflect some of god’s attributes. because according to them, when God BREATHED life into adam & eve, he imparted some of his spirit into humanity.Thirdly, there is no proof at all that God needs anything. The existence of the universe doesn’t prove it, because God created the universe and doesn’t necessarily need to abide by its rules.
oh my goodness. i’m just using the rock’s attributes to prove my point.Plus, you said that something would be dormant, like a rock. But God created rocks. Do rocks need to act?
no, all you did is play blind. you cant open your mind to reason if it means giving the trinity a chance. because you cannot overcome your biases.Seriously, there is no evidence at all, and I’m just kind of playing with you here. You have no logic, as I’ve refuted your premises.
The Qur’an is not Allah.
ok i’ll go with you step by step. So the Quran is not Allah.
The Qur’an is the Word of Allah.
Very nice.ok i’ll go with you step by step. So the Quran is not Allah.
The Qur’an is not an “entity.”If the Quran is not Allah, then the UNCREATED AND ETERNAL Quran is another entity beside Allah.
Repeating: the Qur’an is not an entity. The Qur’an is not Allah.Otherwise, 2 different entities being eternal and uncreated are 2 Gods.
My argument actually revolves around yours:Meh.
here’s your argument:
God exists.
the universe exists.
therefore God needed to create it.
my argument:
God exists.
the universe exists.
therefore God created it.
you haven’t shown NEED.
Here is an argument that contradicts yours.My argument actually revolves around yours:
God created the Universe therefore he exhibited a Need to Act.
You have yet to show an argument that contradicts that.
The Qur’an is not an “entity.”
and your evidence to back that up?Here is an argument that contradicts yours.
“God did not “need” to act.”
Not the actual need to touch your nose. But you do need to do something. you cant just stay still. you cant just remain dormant. you need to act.I am touching my nose right now… does that mean I “need” to touch my nose?
God existed eternally, and the universe has not. The fact that God created the universe didn’t demonstrate a “need” to do anything. You’re the one who needs evidence to back up your statement. Why is “need” a factor?and your evidence to back that up?
I am not God.Not the actual need to touch your nose. But you do need to do something. you cant just stay still. you cant just remain dormant. you need to act.
and his Word existed eternally.God existed eternally.
Is your word something separate and beside you?and his Word existed eternally.
Is His Word something seperate and beside Allah?
yes or no would do![]()
Thats like trying to stay still for as long as you can, but eventually must make a move.God existed eternally, and the universe has not.
so why did god create the universe? whats the point of being omnipotent if there is nothing to show for it? doing something is something that God had to do.The fact that God created the universe didn’t demonstrate a “need” to do anything.