Could Allah have a son or decide to incarnate into a human and enter into the world if he wanted? >No.

Could Allah have a son or decide to incarnate into a human and enter into the world if he wanted?
>No.
Then he's not omnipotent.
>Yes.
Then do Muslims b***h so much about Christianity?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Muslims accept that he could do so, he just didn't.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Wrong even Allah said he can't have a son without a wife

      >[He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.

      It is simply beyond his ability

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        That sounds like a semantic game where a "son" is defined as necessarily having two distinct parents. I suppose in this situation they would insist upon "clone".

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >where a "son" is defined as necessarily having two distinct parents.
          That's what the text is saying.
          According to the Quran itself Allah can't have children unless he has a partner.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Quran also gives another reason: he's too glorious to have a son.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >h-heh i-i could t-totally have a s-son if I wanted guys, r-really!
            >I j-just....ummm...i-it's beneath me, o-okay! I'm too glorious for that!
            >........y-yeah, yeah that sounded convincing, they'll eat that up for sure.....

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yes it is convincing. He's the sole focus of worship as he should be or he's not. Cope and seethe.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes it is convincing.
            Nah, I'm calling his bluff, he's just bullshitting us.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Mary is used as the vessel in both Christianity and Islam. Whether she contributes to his genetic makeup is unclear in both, but there's no apparent reason why one would constitute a valid relation and the other doesn't. "God the Son" at least does not have two parents at the theological level, where he is somehow co-eternal with and self-generated from God the Father. Thus "God the Son" is not actually a son by this definition, and it's not the point being disputed.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Also: God could simply declare a partner as a formality if this is really so important.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Mary is used as the vessel in both Christianity and Islam. Whether she contributes to his genetic makeup is unclear in both,
            No it isn't. In Christianity Mary is very much Jesus' biological mother.
            >Thus "God the Son" is not actually a son by this definition, and it's not the point being disputed.
            You mean the definition that you just made up and that Christianity obvioulsy doesn't hold?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >In Christianity Mary is very much Jesus' biological mother.
            Insofar as he came out of her pussy, but that genetic inheritance even exists wasn't even known yet. Most cultures, including the Hellenistic world at this time I believe, didn't think of women as anything other than incubators, and only males held "seed". So I would not be confident that Christianity postulates Jesus having any inherent connection to Mary after birth, as in, does he look like her and share personality traits and so on.
            >You mean the definition that you just made up and that Christianity obvioulsy doesn't hold?
            It is the definition used by the previously discussed Muslim apologetics. Their argument is not satisfactorily targeting the actual situation in Christianity.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Insofar as he came out of her pussy, but that genetic inheritance even exists wasn't even known yet.
            No, it's very much doctrine that she is Jesus' actual mother, which is why she is the Theotokos.
            >Most cultures, including the Hellenistic world at this time I believe, didn't think of women as anything other than incubators, and only males held "seed".
            And? Christianity does not affirm the Hellenistic worldview.
            >So I would not be confident that Christianity postulates Jesus having any inherent connection to Mary after birth, as in, does he look like her and share personality traits and so on.
            Look up the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that is the actual doctrine.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            "Actual mother" is meaningless by default, Jesus himself would also assert Yahweh is your "actual father".
            >And? Christianity does not affirm the Hellenistic worldview.
            Christianity was created and defined in a Hellenistic context such that it is relevant for determining the views of its original creators.
            >Look up the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that is the actual doctrine.
            Now what about Protestants? If they hold a different view, the matter cannot be said to be "clear" across Christianity.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus isn’t even the biological son of God anyway. The bible is nothing but overt that he is descended from David through Joseph. The most reasonable explanation is that God essentially had Joseph impregnate Mary without sex and imbued the child with divinity.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      this is not the belief of Ahl us Sunnah bro, read this

      https://darpdfs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Sharh-Al-Aqidah-At-Tahawiyyah-Commentary-on-the-Creed-of-At-Tahawi-Imam-Ibn-Abi-Al-Izz.pdf

  2. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Notice how the crusader is brown too.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's the tan for being in the Holy Land.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's a lot of tan.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          Ever been to the Levant? It's hot as all frick.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Ever been to the Levant
            Nah, I don't like the sight of Black folk and the ugly sound of their tongue.

  3. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Can God not exist?

    Answer this

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      He could.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        There is a possible reality where God could not exist?

  4. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    God having a literal son, or there being literally multiple gods, is an absurdity, such a thing does not exist to begin with, if you say God is not omnipotent because of that you will immediately have a nice day in the face, because i can ask
    >Can God not exist? Can God sin?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      A god certainly must be capable both of duplication and suicide. Whether he can "sin" is incomputable if "sin" is defined as "transgression of his will". He could change his will and go against his previous expressions of it, as he does many times in the accounts of every Abrahamic religion.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >God having a literal son, or there being literally multiple gods, is an absurdity,
      Why? You're just making a claim, prove it.
      >such a thing does not exist to begin with,
      Ok, prove it.
      >Can God not exist?
      Yes.
      >Can God sin?
      Yes.

      There is a possible reality where God could not exist?

      Yes.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        im not him but it is true that God is ONE. "hear O' Israel; the Lord our God, the Lord is one" so saying he has partners is very unorthodox to the idea of God being one.

        I think it's also worth mentioning that many greek and roman Gods had children, and such. The point of the God of Abraham was that he believed in ONE God. ONE creator of everything.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >im not him but it is true that God is ONE.
          Why?
          >"hear O' Israel; the Lord our God, the Lord is one" so saying he has partners is very unorthodox to the idea of God being one.
          I'm not an Abrahamic, so these words mean nothing to me. I just dont' understand why Muslims insist on absolute unitarianism and predent as if any other conceptualization of God is absurd.
          >I think it's also worth mentioning that many greek and roman Gods had children, and such.
          Ok, so why can't Allah do something that even pagan gods can do? Why is he such a b***h about it? Why can't he get it up? Is he an incel or something?
          >The point of the God of Abraham was that he believed in ONE God. ONE creator of everything.
          See second point above.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I'm not an Abrahamic
            wait, so youre not christian? You do know that Christianity is a abrahamic religion, right?
            >I just dont' understand why Muslims insist on absolute unitarianism
            As Christians we profess one God, dude. Obviously we believe God to be trinity; Father, son, and Holy Spirit. But they are one God. anything else is heresy, polytheist, and pagan.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >they are one God
            >one God
            >they are
            Hell is hungry, pagan.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Muhammed is in hell under the foot of Christ

            your prophet is a pedophile, a warlord, and his God is not Allah, it is Christ. you filthy black stone worshipping pagan who follows the traditions of men rather than the creator who is blessed forever and ever! Amen.

            when are you going to ditch these ideas of your pedo prophet and come to Christ who loves you? He is waiting.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            No reality can exist without a creator.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Youre not even a christian, stop larping all the time

  5. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ultramoronic argument, his very nature contradicts the nature of Physicality. Physical things by nature are finite and have defined dimensions and properties. God is infinite. If He were to "Incarnate" into physicality it would cease to be God, as God is infinite and his essence contradicts that of any physical thing. It is like asking if God could turn an orange to an apple, It would be an apple but it ceases to be an orange. Both cannot logically coexist in one form.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Dont say God is infinite because from that you can deduct that he would also be us

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      So he can't, therefore he's not omnipotent.

      He could, but there’s no reason to and Christianity preaches falsehoods.
      >I can’t not torture you forever unless I have a son who is also me and you decide to kill him

      >He could
      Then why do you keep b***hing about Christianity when in fact Christianity doesn't teach anything that God couldn't be capable of doing, according to you?

  6. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    He could, but there’s no reason to and Christianity preaches falsehoods.
    >I can’t not torture you forever unless I have a son who is also me and you decide to kill him

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *