Salafism is nowadays Mu’tazila. They both ruled Haramayn (adopted by goverment), developed out of kharijism-based theology, and ultimately no foreknowledge for God. Good thing about them is that both fiercely debated the Christians😅. If they are nowadays Mu’tazila therefore they would perish.
A problem I found with Atheists/Salafi/Wahhabis is their definition of something eternal. It's as if they can't conceptualize that some act being eternal but the effect temporal that we as creation can experience. Ibn Taymiyyah defines qidam as a collection of emergents. The Pen is not the first creation for him, only for our universe. It begs the question, can we ever traverse back to the first creation?
It is mind boggling that they can understand Allah’s (SWT) essence being above the throne and his feet being below the throne but they cannot understand how Allah (SWT) in eternal with eternal attributes and has full control over time.
Ibn Taymiyyah believed God has a known size "which he alone knows." So, they make a claim which they admittedly don't know about. It's stupid. Their speculation is fact but others' is bid'ah. 😂
Conclusion: The thing is he set up his own principles and they extended to different masail. So if one accepts one masalah that used those principles then to reject another masalah proves that Salafis don’t have creedal principles which they stand on. However, they are changing principles which is very problematic.
@@mohammedhanif6780 I already did in that video I referred you to before, it's not that difficult, "Are Asharis Jabaris?", I start from Qadr as true, you then get determinism from it, then you can either be a compatibilist or incompatibilist, the Mu'tazila/Qadariyah denies the first starting point.
Salafism is nowadays Mu’tazila. They both ruled Haramayn (adopted by goverment), developed out of kharijism-based theology, and ultimately no foreknowledge for God. Good thing about them is that both fiercely debated the Christians😅. If they are nowadays Mu’tazila therefore they would perish.
bro literally hit the bulls eye😅 🎯
A problem I found with Atheists/Salafi/Wahhabis is their definition of something eternal. It's as if they can't conceptualize that some act being eternal but the effect temporal that we as creation can experience.
Ibn Taymiyyah defines qidam as a collection of emergents. The Pen is not the first creation for him, only for our universe. It begs the question, can we ever traverse back to the first creation?
It is mind boggling that they can understand Allah’s (SWT) essence being above the throne and his feet being below the throne but they cannot understand how Allah (SWT) in eternal with eternal attributes and has full control over time.
What do you mean traverse back to the first creation?
Ibn Taymiyyah believed God has a known size "which he alone knows." So, they make a claim which they admittedly don't know about. It's stupid. Their speculation is fact but others' is bid'ah. 😂
Conclusion:
The thing is he set up his own principles and they extended to different masail. So if one accepts one masalah that used those principles then to reject another masalah proves that Salafis don’t have creedal principles which they stand on. However, they are changing principles which is very problematic.
@@ReturningRuh Good summary bro.
Too much background noise
@@vipulpatel-il9nb I know, sorry, was recording outside, I had to make the video, lest I forget or become preoccupied.
i dont believe youve defended compatibilism ever by giving arguments in its favour. surely you need to show compatibilism is true?
@@mohammedhanif6780 I already did in that video I referred you to before, it's not that difficult, "Are Asharis Jabaris?", I start from Qadr as true, you then get determinism from it, then you can either be a compatibilist or incompatibilist, the Mu'tazila/Qadariyah denies the first starting point.