Answering Nazi flag from earlier

> No, show your work. Explain yourself. You're assuming I haven't done the same thing and formed a different conclusion.

I was not expecting serious interest in my posts fren.

>You're sitting there reading a slightly more grounded book shitting on less grounded ones. You're playing Arma 3 shitting on "CoD kiddies" when in reality you're all just wannabe virtual soldiers. Do you understand?

Of course I understand your analogy, and you would be entirely correct if I did not for it being the true religion

>I can explain the logic behind my position quite easily, because I'm not doing somersaults trying to reach a conclusion that I want.

Believe me the last thing I wanted was to fit this relatively strict religion in.

>The universe exists. We know things cannot suddenly exist from nothingness, therefore there must be a creator of the universe. That's solid logic. From there, explain how Shia Islam specifically demonstrates a communion between an insignificant subset of creatures on an insignificant planet in the vastness of space.

Great question and you are on the right track as far as Im concerned (with the logical steps).

The steps are as follows:

1. Prove the existence of an absolute existence - or God with logical and philosophical arguments (have over 10 proofs - some from western philosophers, some from muslim ones and some from pure logic/philosophy)

2. Determine which religion or religions believe in said religion from the worlds religions.

3. Fine so you managed to prove the existence of God, that doesnt prove your religion - this is where you are now. Good.

>Shitting on the crazyness of Hinduism and such isn't proof,

I know that.

>it just shows you completely misunderstand what the point of those stories was and where they came from.

What stories? Hindu stories? Of course they once were guided by a prophet and then misguided after years passed, like most religions And some of the stories are valuable. Not relevant though.
(1/2)

Attached: naziflag.png (475x382, 82.79K)

4. What does God want from you? This is where you have to either prove or disprove that your own intellect and logical faculties are enough to act according to what God wants. This is where we disprove that your own intellect is enough and that we need guidance - that guidance comes from messengers of God. Prophets. There are many proofs here in shia islamic ideology to prove that God has to send representatives to guide us. But if you are high IQ you can also come to this conclusion yourself.5. So you proved that there has to be prophets - how do you prove that your prophet was the right one - this step is called specific prophecy - proving that Muhammad (s) was the last prophet.

For the uninitiated you might think well this is it, but there are several more steps to logically prove shia islam without the use of scripture.

That being said when youve gotten to the conclusion that there is a God, he does send prophets, and the last one was Prophet Muhammad (s) then you can also prove the rest using scripture as well as logic. Up to this point scripture is worthless but after this point it becomes very relevant.

There is enough logically to prove shia islam without the use of scripture of course.

(2/2)

guessing you wont see this thread anyway, fucked up with a few typos but you should get how the foundation is set.

Not the one you were talking to, but the thread is still interesting, so:

You say:
>3. Fine so you managed to prove the existence of God, that doesnt prove your religion - this is where you are now. Good.
and then out of nowhere
>that guidance comes from messengers of God. There are many proofs here in shia islamic ideology to prove that God has to send representatives to guide us.
What are these proofs? Prophets are from the "creator of the universe" because what reasons?

>That being said when youve gotten to the conclusion that there is a God, he does send prophets,
No, there is no such conclusion. But feel free to establish that this creator picked some random sandniggers to represent his will as "prophets". Go ahead

Attached: 1520074174951.jpg (400x435, 30.88K)

Why would I waste my time with one of small mind who starts with ad hominems. I was bothered to start this thread because previous nazi flag seemed geniune.

and btw if you are not literally retarded you would know that I did not prove anything in this thread, I just mentioned the steps. Each step has a bunch of proofs.

So the tldr is:

you
>Allah is real because the prophets were messengers from Allah, it says so in the holy texts the prophets wrote

the response you got
>Do you have any proof?

you
>you have a small mind. this discussion is over

Attached: 1571743244212.jpg (610x610, 180.59K)

Someone is BUTTMAD

If that is what you deduced from my posts then sure thing buddy. Have a nice life.

Damn you made the thread and got BTFO instantly lol

sure thing canada, i bet you enjoy getting "likes" on facebook.

Why do you say the universe cannot come from nothing ? We know nothing of its origin, it can very well be created from nothing, as much as it being the design of a creator. We simply dont know, therefore we cant say with certainty that the universe cannot be created from nothing. If some almighty being created the universe, what created him? Do you see where im getting at?

Holy fuck you're such a faggot
>leddit spacing
>screenshotting a post to "reply"
>"nazi"
>memeflag

ALL FIELDS

>If that is what you deduced from my posts then sure thing buddy. Have a nice life.
Thanks

Because you're not seriously saying that because
>1. the existence of an absolute existence
is true, that
>2. Determine which religion or religions believe in said religion from the worlds religions.
must also be true?

Where the hell is the logic in that? Just because something created the universe does not mean that they have had to take interest in some backwater planet in the Milky Way, or that they even can.

So all you have, is the retarded statement that
>Allah is real because the Prophets came from Allah
Which is a statement that severely requires some form of proof. Proof that you clearly cannot provide

Attached: muds.png (1519x301, 22.96K)

Nothingness does not create a thing. Nothingness is nothingness. You dont have to read 100 books of philosophy to understand this.

Everything in this material cosmos is limited. That which is limited always has to have a cause. The ultimate cause of the limited has to be that which is different from itself - meaning it has to be the unlimited - or God.

The boundaries of the limited creation does not apply to the creator. Time and space do not apply to the unlimited as these are physical characteristics.

If the created had a cause he would not be the creator. This circular logic only applies if you believe in a physical God limited in time and space.

>Do you see where im getting at?
Kindergarten logic. If the universe was created from nothing by a creator then it was not created from nothing but from the creator.
If the universe was created from nothing without a creator then it would not have been created as something can not come out of absolute nothing.
If the universe was created out of something then something must have created what was there before, so there must still be some form of creating force in the picture, and the universe would still be part of something greater; ie, the a lab experiment of a creator/god. So if the universe was created out of something, then there must have been something that created that, and the creator. But the logic is the same. Something created the universe. No one knows what.
>The main point is simply
that it does not follow that some sandnigger religion is true just because something or someone created the universe. There is no established logic to link these two points. OP clearly can't prove otherwise.

>Because you're not seriously saying that because >1. the existence of an absolute existence

>is true, that
. Determine which religion or religions believe in said religion from the worlds religions.
must also be true?

No I am not saying these things. I never typed these things. The step number two is just so you dont waste your time with obviously not true religions.

Disproving Deism as you are alluding to is done when proving that God does indeed guide people and your own faculties are not enough for.

I am a family man and seriously only have time to speak about the outline or the framework. I cannot use hours and hours writing and describing my entire worldview here and the minutia of evidence for each step.

This is not something Ive concocted on my own, a larp or a small matter. Ive studied for years. Any high IQ redpilled individual who is critical will have many questions and answering all of them is not for Zig Forums.

My point is, what we know, or what we believe we know, is solely based inside the confines of the known universe. If we cant prove that the universe was created by an almighty being, there is no reason to believe it was so. Nothingness is a concept relevant to the universe. Think outside the box.

>I cannot use hours and hours writing and describing my entire worldview here and the minutia of evidence for each step.

You've not been asked to prove that
>there is a god
You've only been asked to prove that
>he does send prophets
Because you used that part as "proof" that Allah exists and is the true god.

The only reason you come up with lame excuses instead of proving that
>he does send prophets
is because you can't, as it is obviously not true. It is very simple. You say Allah is real because he sends prophets. You've been asked to prove that, and you can not. You do not even try.

Attached: 1520687918621.jpg (841x407, 63.41K)

>Kindergarten logic
>Proceeds to demonstrate
Well done, retard user, well done.

>If we cant prove that the universe was created by an almighty being

Somewhat agreed. But it was created by something. It does not have to be almighty thing or person, but it has to be something. To believe that the universe has been without beginning or end is just low level fedora rambling. But it is equally low level deist rambling to believe that since it was created by something, then one of the religions on earth must be true.

You can create something out of nothing by making it in dualities of polar opposites, +1 and - 1.
Ever heard of protons and electrons, brainlet?

Memeflags talking to each other is pretty cringey.

All fields.

Correction, i never said i believed the universe is created from nothing. All im saying is, we dont have the authority to say it was created from something, just as it was created from nothing. We simply dont know, therefore both cases are just as likely

Replied to myself by accident, see post above

Trying to explain the meta physical from a pyrely physical standpoint is moot.
You should read Jung and try to truly understand the concept of faith once it interwines with quantum physics.

Right now I have to pick up my kid and then its bedtime. Then this thread will be archived. See what I mean when I say hours?

Maybe some day Ill start a high effort thread.

>Proceeds to demonstrate
What other scenarios do you see?

A. The universe was created from nothing by something
B. The universe was created from something by something (but this still leaves the question of what created the something)
C. The universe was created from nothing by nothing
D. The universe always was
E. The universe was created by something and this is proof that Allah/Jehova is the one and only god

C and D obviously cannot be, unless one claims the universe is a matrix or a dream. And even so, something must have created that matrix or the universe that dream exists in, so the claim that there exists some form of creating force still holds true (A or B).
There not any demonstrable logic supporting E, which is what OP is claiming (without proof).

Attached: the box.jpg (1497x650, 306.92K)

>there is a God, he does send prophets, and the last one was Prophet Muhammad
Wrong again, his name was Joseph Smith

Stay tuned, I will either respond or create new thread some time soon including some proofs

>therefore both cases are just as likely
But that is not relevant.

If the universe was created by something from something, then a creating force was the catalyst.
If the universe was created by nothing from somethin, then a creating force was the catalyst.
The universe can't have been created by nothing from nothing.
The universe can't always have been.

And even then, if you could somehow prove that this universe is a matrix or an illusion, all the conclusions that led you to that result are false by nature. So it's a self refuting truth.

CircularReasoning.png