Reason, is quite the wonderful thing and used properly, it is one of the most potent gifts that God has bestowed on us. Now reason is directed towards, and finds its end (i.e. its telos) in, truth. Hence why, man being a rational animal, ought to use this faculty above all else to guide his life choices. For if the end of reason is truth, then the end of truth must be God, for God is truth (John 14:6). So it is always with great pleasure that I tend to read works of the religious sort which place a stringent emphasis on logical thinking. Whether these works favour a Christian viewpoint or not, I must say that I quite enjoy the intellectual stimulation.
This then is how I found myself reading the blog post entitled, Talking About God, by one Mohamed Ghilan. The article, as one would expect, discusses the subject of God from an Islamic perspective and in the course of the work, touches on many things—one being Christianity and its alleged incompatibility with logic. Now, longtime readers of this blog will know that I have already shown how this is not the case and refuted the various examples that Muslims (and other non-Christians) will invariably bring up here (I would certainly recommend this article to Muslims seeing as it features a discussion between myself and Muslims on a Muslim forum), here, here, and here. I intend to make reference to the aforementioned posts and more throughout this article. It goes without saying that reading each post on its own would certainly prove beneficial as well.
The blogger, Mohamed Ghilan, seeks to pit Christianity against logical thinking and by such a manner attempt to prove how vastly superior Islam is. The fact of the matter is that it is precisely Islam that is contrary to reason and the general Muslim position that is unschooled in the proper use of thought. Granted these words can be deemed hurtful and for this fact I must apologize. We will go nowhere if our intent is to willfully denigrate the beliefs of others and this is sincerely not my intention. I say the things I say not because I want to anger Muslims, but rather because I honestly think them to be wrong and their beliefs false. At this time, let us examine the claims of Mohamed Ghilan and see who actually misconstrues logic—whether the Christian or the Muslim. (more…)
This post will be very different from those I’ve written so far. I’m not too sure how well it’ll work so I’d greatly appreciate some feedback. Anyway, it is no secret that I’m not a prolific blogger. I write maybe one or two blogs per month—and this is at my best. Most of the time, many months go by without any update on my part. I do apologize for this but updating a blog with quality content on a regular basis is no easy task. That said, in those months when I haven’t been posting, I haven’t exactly been doing nothing either—well I’ve been doing nothing for the most part—but as I was saying, I was at least somewhat productive. The following is just a small part of what I’ve been up to when too lazy to update this blog. More particularly, I took the time to test out some of my arguments and the results were so well that I got banned in the space of a little less than 2 months. I’d like for the reader to follow the exchange between Sol Invictus and whoever he is discussing with (there are quite a few participants who come and go). The subject of the discussion is the Holy Trinity (although the participants move on to different topics as the discussion goes on) and what I would like the reader to note is how it is defended repeatedly without any refutation by the opposition.
(I know that I ended up misnumbering but it would be a pain to change the numbers now. Also, clicking the picture will increase its size and make for an easier read.)
1, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, 3c, 4, 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d, 8, 9, 10, 11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, 11e, 11f, 11g, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18a, 18b, 18c, 18d, 18e, 18f, 18g, 19a, 19b, 19c, 19d, 19e, 20, 23, 24a, 24b, 24c, 25, 26, 27,
Surprisingly enough, Ms. Ruwayda has already provided me with another reply to address some of the points that I had brought up in my latest post. But before I continue I would like to make clear that if I came off as needlessly competitive and if it appeared that this discussion was little more than a game for me then I sincerely apologize. It was not at all my intention. I realize that I have made the claim more than once that Ms. Ruwayda had not refuted me yet this was in no way done out of pride but rather it was simply a statement of fact given that she had brought up certain points which as I have shown did nothing to present my argument as having been incorrect. Now this response on my part will most likely be fairly short (in comparison to my previous posts) given that this time, there is far less that she is objecting to. (more…)
edit: Ms. Ruwayda has been kind enough to also provide her response to this article in the comments section below.
It seems that there has been a response to one of my previous posts coming from Ruwayda herself. I would encourage anyone with the time, to read it because it is well-written and touches upon some of the most important difficulties that Muslims have with the Christian doctrine. I will state once more before I proceed to prove it, that the doctrine of God taking upon himself the punishment of the sins of the world is perfectly logical and a display of the highest mercy and love. Furthermore, that she has once more misunderstood Christianity and that her very argument, as much as she would like to hope otherwise, actually works in favour of the Christian position when it is examined properly. Anyway, enough of this preamble, let us dip right into the matter.
This post stems from the abundance of misinformation and subterfuge that is passed off as Christian doctrine around the internet by Muslim apologists. I would rather believe that they just sincerely lack the basest understanding of the Christian religion than to think that they, with full knowledge, lie and mislead their Muslim audience in such a fashion. I say this because I have yet to hear or read of any Muslim apologist that can state, for example, the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, the incarnation, the idea of the Christian liberty, etc. as Christians themselves believe these and then attack it with any semblance of logic to show that, as Christians believe these things to be, they are wholly unintelligible (Here’s looking at you Ahmed Deedat, Zakir Naik, Shabir Ally, Joshua Evans etc.) and just plainly wrong. What’s worse is that I find the same lack of understanding from Christian converts to Islam, to the point where I have to honestly wonder whether it was their lack of knowledge which led to their apostatizing (Hosea 4:6) or whether all their prior knowledge on these matters is somehow dissolved in the process of their recitation of the Shahada? Therefore this post is dedicated to help dispel some common myths on the matter of Christian doctrine. (more…)