Is it easy to prove Allah exists?

[Lonely]

Kindly, help me to convert to Islam by proving that Allah exists.

[Fatihah]

Response: Another dodge from the challenge. Your refusal to take the challenge and show that the challenge is possible is evidence to support the fact that it's not possible. Otherwise, you would have taken the challenge. Adding the fact that you believe Usain Bolt is God, your credibility has already been shown invalid.

->

"Response: Another dodge from the challenges of showing your flawed logic and finding a mere human who can run as fast as the man-God Usain. Your refusal to take the challenge and show that the challenge of running as fast as Usain is possible is evidence to support the fact that it's not possible for a mere human. Otherwise, you would have taken the challenge. Adding the fact that you believe Allah is God, your credibility has already been shown invalid."

Are you really a Muslim?
If not, why do you think that posting hundreds of irrelevant comments on Internet forums is worth your time?
If so, are you so far gone that you honestly can't see why your logic fails despite seeing a replica of it and seeing why it fails?

Are you so scared of putting your flawed logic "proving" that Allah is God in P1 P2 C format that you will avoid it at all costs? You know what will happen if you repeat your "logic" in a concise and structured way, don't you? Even you will be able to see how illogical and delusional it is. I'm almost 100% certain that you will never do it. More excuses and pointless taunts as you make your usual escape while being noticed by everyone are what I expect.

Are you so immature and childish that you absolutely must resort to trolling internet forums with lies, fallacies and incredibly flawed logic, making endless ridiculous claims and thinking this constitutes debate?

I can't see you not being banned within the week, as you are obviously not up to par with the standards required of the members of this forum.

Bon voyage!

-Woland

Response: Anothercof your cries for help. How sad it is, that you've reduced your argument to baseless asserions supported by nothing. You were given a challenge which validates the fact that the qur'an is from Allah, yet instead of accepting it, you run in the corner. You can repeat it as many times as you want, but the fact that you've dodged the challenge and failed to show fault in it supports the fact that the qur'an is from Allah.

[Fatihah]

Response: It is his belief that Mr. Bolt is God because he clearly stated it. His example is also not like mine as explained in post 31. And since you failed to quote where I've agreed that Bolt is God, then your own words support the fact that your logic is flawed as you failed to support it with evidence. And with your repeated trolling and speaking against the existence of Allah, it is clear that you believe the same absurdity as Woland, in which unintelligence creates intelligence but too ashamed to defend your belief. No worries. If I believed something so irrational, I would be ashamed too.

You agreed that Bolt is god when you used him as proof that the universe was created by ID. Were you lying when you made this statement?

Fatihah wrote:

Response: And once again, your own belief that Usain Bolt is God supports the fact that the universe was created by intelligent design, as Usain Bolt is an intelligent being. Thanks for the clarification.

If you do not believe Bolt is god why would he be a support your argument for creation? One way or another you are lying about something. If you believe Bolt is god you have been lying all along about being muslim. If you don't believe Bolt is god then you are lying about him being a support for your argument.

I have never spoken out against the existance of allah, but what is it that makes this particular god any better than the countless other gods out there. You can not disprove any other god exists just like you can not disprove your god of choice. Personally if I had to choose a god to worship I think I'd pick a more fun one than allah, like Bacchus.

Response: Once again, your inability to quote where I've said I believe Bolt is God only makes you look absurd, not me. Adding the fact that you're too ashamed to state your belief, you've discredted yourself from any sound logic.

[LiamOS]

Once again, your inability to quote where I've said I believe Bolt is God only makes you look absurd, not me. Adding the fact that you're too ashamed to state your belief, you've discredted yourself from any sound logic.

This would be considered an ad hominem attack, and is neither productive nor ethical in debate.

[Fatihah]

In this thread, I have not been challenged to do anything, so this post cannot be called a dodge of any challenge.

As such, I now challenge Fatihah to establish his argument in the following manner:
Premise 1:
Proof of premise.

Premise 2:
Proof of premise.

...

Premise N:
Proof of premise.

Conclusion:
Outline of how it logically follows, if necessary.


This structure is necessary as Fatihah has not outlined logically his argument, and it is, as of yet, incoherent.

Response: The challenge is for anyone who denies Allah's existence, which includes you as well. So you have dodged it. Secondly, the proof of Allah's existence is in post 2, thus your outline is not necessary nor required.

[Fatihah]

Once again, your inability to quote where I've said I believe Bolt is God only makes you look absurd, not me. Adding the fact that you're too ashamed to state your belief, you've discredted yourself from any sound logic.

This would be considered an ad hominem attack, and is neither productive nor ethical in debate.

Resonse: This would be considered trolling, as like all of your other posts, it's only directed to me and is not an argument on the subject.

[LiamOS]

The challenge is for anyone who denies Allah's existence, which includes you as well.

I do not deny that Allah exists.
I merely do not believe that he does.

Secondly, the proof of Allah's existence is in post 2, thus your outline is not necessary nor required.

The outline I requested will clear up the argument, as it is currently grossly incoherent and fallacious, as has been shown.

[LiamOS]

Once again, your inability to quote where I've said I believe Bolt is God only makes you look absurd, not me. Adding the fact that you're too ashamed to state your belief, you've discredted yourself from any sound logic.

This would be considered an ad hominem attack, and is neither productive nor ethical in debate.

Resonse: This would be considered trolling, as like all of your other posts, it's only directed to me and is not an argument on the subject.

Trolling is provoking, which I am not doing.
And of course it's only directed towards you, you were the person committing the ad hominem attack.

Given that you likely still believe I am trolling, I'd like you to clearly demonstrate how, along with your definition of trolling.

[Scotracer]

Once again, your inability to quote where I've said I believe Bolt is God only makes you look absurd, not me. Adding the fact that you're too ashamed to state your belief, you've discredted yourself from any sound logic.

This would be considered an ad hominem attack, and is neither productive nor ethical in debate.

Resonse: This would be considered trolling, as like all of your other posts, it's only directed to me and is not an argument on the subject.

And this would be considered idiocy. If it's trolling to point out your opponents logical fallacies, what exactly is the point of us being here?

[Woland]

Alright Fatihah,

Just for the fun of it, let me see if I can write down your "logic" as apparently laid down in post 2. Tell me if you agree that this is what you believe constitutes valid reasoning, or tell me where I misinterpreted your logic.

In other words, what attributes are possessed by this intelligent designer? The qur'an answers that question stating that the originator of the universe and all that exist within it is no other than Allah and provides two tests to validate the claim. And that is:

"Will they not, then, meditate upon the Qur'an? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy". (ch.4:82).

P 1: If a book isn't from God, there will be discrepancy, but if it is from God, there will be no discrepancy.
P 2: Looking for discrepancy in a book is a valid way to establish divine origin.
P 3: There is no discrepancy in the Quran.
C: Therefore the Quran is from Allah.

Do you believe that this logic is valid?
Is this your logic?
Please confirm.

"And if you are in doubt as to what we have sent down to our Servant, then produce a chapter like it, and call upon your helpers beside Allah, if you are truthful".(ch. 2:23).

P 1: Only a book from divine origin has some (conveniently undefined, of course) characteristics
P 2: These characteristics cannot be found in the works of humans nor can they be reproduced by humans, but they can be found in the Quran
C : Therefore the Quran is from God

Do you believe that this logic is valid?
Is this your logic?
Please confirm.

While you're at it, tell us exactly how you would judge whether or not something invented by humans is the equivalent of the Quran. Failure to do this exposes your argument as fallacious - setting undefined criteria but rejecting all answers "just because" is not valid reasoning.

The next is a challenge is presented for all of humanity to disprove that Muhammad performed a miracle. And what is that miracle:

"It is humanly impossible to use any speech or literature created by a person/s to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation".

This is the challenge for all of humanity. The challenge is to show that it is humanly possible to achieve such an act. And when you take the challenge and fail, you will come to learn that such an act is impossible to accomplish. However, Muhammad used the qur'an to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation. And once you discover that it's impossible to use any speech or literature created by any person/s to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation, then this would mean that the qur'an in which Muhammad used was not a creation of any person but from a higher power, a higher intelligence, a deity, and that is Allah. You disagree? Then take the challenge and prove otherwise. To even simplify it for, you won't even be able to conquer the street you live on. Again, you disagree? Then take the challenge and prove otherwise.

I really love this one.


P 1: Only someone with divine help could convince people, with speeches or literature, to do violence in self-defense and conquer other nations, and doing so is a miracle.
P 2: Muhammad inspired others, with speeches, to conquer nations in self-defense.
C: Therefore Muhammad is a true prophet.

I won't even bother with your ridiculous notion that failing to do what Muhammad did (convince a bunch of ignorant desert barbarians that Allah wants them to conquer nations, supposedly in self-defense) means that it is humanly impossible to do so.

Do you believe that this logic is valid?
Is this your logic?
Please confirm.

-Woland

[Fatihah]

The challenge is for anyone who denies Allah's existence, which includes you as well.

I do not deny that Allah exists.
I merely do not believe that he does.

Secondly, the proof of Allah's existence is in post 2, thus your outline is not necessary nor required.

The outline I requested will clear up the argument, as it is currently grossly incoherent and fallacious, as has been shown.

Response: Believing Allah doesn't exist is denying his existence. Either or, the fact that you've consistantly failed to show fault in my argument supports the fact that it's valid.