Umar Muslim Lighthouse (@Hanbali2024) / X

Pinned
Umar Muslim Lighthouse
@Hanbali2024
May 6
Yes, these guys have the issue the christians have with the Trinity. Any Ash’ari who can clear this up? You believe there’s one Kalam Nafsi and no composition. Al Amidi big scholar had a problem with the solution to this as well. Plz help us solve this. Deny a premise
27
Umar Muslim Lighthouse
@Hanbali2024
9h
Yo asharis / Shias I got a question Why is it that calling upon Mary for help shirk for Christians? Just curious
30
Umar Muslim Lighthouse
@Hanbali2024
20h
Bro.. what?
Astro
@ViaEximii
21h
Replying to @si62119640 and @siyalkuti
Can my will, once predetermined by God to choose X, dissent from doing X? No, "all scholars" is cap. It's just those who want to make God the author of evil and sin.
2
Umar Muslim Lighthouse
@Hanbali2024
Oct 30
@phronimos7 why do so many people get confused by classical logic and classical identity ?
Maas
@BraunHB0
Oct 30
Replying to @Hanbali2024 @lepanto742 and @grok
You're playing a semantic game. You admitted: 'RI doesn't fit in CFOL=, sure... there is a formal inconsistency under CFOL=.' That was the entire point. Lepanto claimed his model works without contradiction in standard logic; we both agree that under CFOL=, it is contradictory.
1
Umar Muslim Lighthouse
@Hanbali2024
Oct 30
Take darkness for example, it’s the absence of light. According to him we can observe non existent things through the senses. Wow, he’s a genius. When I initially said he hasn’t read on properties, he just proved me right. Clearly he doesn’t know the difference between a
محب اليوسي
@ibnassakir
Oct 30
According to this genius something non-existent can be observed through senses 🤣🤣 each time he speaks he shows how much of a clown he is lmaoo (And if he actually thinks a negative property can be existent it’s even worse)
Quote
Umar Muslim Lighthouse
@Hanbali2024
Oct 30
It’s the lack of motion, just because you can observe something still doesn’t mean it’s a positive property. That’s simply question begging, thanks. You’d need an argument for it being a positive property when it’s a lack of motion. Don’t think this guy has read much on
3