Dk vs Muslim4Life (Round II)

This is the second exchange (here is part I) I had with my friend Muslim4Life. Or was it him? I noticed the unique typing style of Muslim4Life had changed, hence I thought he was copying and pasting. But then I realized he had brought a friend in for back up, since this wasn't just longer sentences (what appears to be copying and pasting) but all the shorter responses aswell. In addition M4L has never typed, argued or reasoned like this before. While his friend's responses were slightly more robust and sophisticated, the friend ultimately could not defend an apophatic theology very well. Note Christianity does not necessarily reject this sort of theology (other than if someone implies an exclusion of the Godhead), but many western Christians think this form of theology is untenable, and I present just a tiny few objections to this kind of "divine unity".

M4L's Friend Debates Me

muslim4life: take tht away from me i didnt mean like a pen table
muslim4life: or apple
muslim4life:  an apple is 1 but it is built up of parts whole Allah is 1 and not built up of parts also an apple is potentially more than one while we say there can't be more than one Allah. As for how He is one this question cannot be answered since we understand how things are through other things and since there's nothing like Allah we can't know how Allah is one but we can know how Allah isn't. Now it should be noted there's a difference between knowing a thing and knowing how a thing is, one can know something works but that doesn't mean one knows how it works.
Dk-man7: If we can't know how his oneness exists, then we can not make definitive positions about what it "is" and what it is "not". That leaves you with agnosticism on things like Trintiarianism, Modalism, etc.
Dk-man7: Because these are merely concepts of "how" God is one
muslim4life: no because
muslim4life: Thats a fallacy, as not knowing how a thing is doesn't negate knowledge about how that thing isn't, one might not know how planes fly but that doesn't mean he can't say with absolute certainty that the plane can't fly
muslim4life: destroyed
muslim4life: come to tawheed reject the trinity
Dk-man7: let me correct all your errors. Firstly in your analogy, we know that the plane flys but we don't know how. That would be saying we know Allah is one but we don't know how. So how is that analogy mean't to show that "not knowing a thing doesn't negatte knowledge about HOW THAT THING IS NOT". Obviously your analogy fails because no one is negating a plane can fly.
Dk-man7: But lets test the fundamental assumption in and of itself
Dk-man7: Forget the analogy since it's flawed
Dk-man7: Lets look at the propposition: "as not knowing how a thing is doesn't negate knowledge about how that thing isn't"
Dk-man7: If I know that a plane has wings and can fly, then as per your statement, I know that it cannot not have wings and not fly. But other than that I cannot know.
Dk-man7: That would actually be a proper analogy
Dk-man7: And to put it in theological terms.
Dk-man7: If I know that God is one, then the only thing I can know is that he is not, not one.
Dk-man7: That still leaves me agnosticism on "how" he is one.
muslim4life: we know these body builders are strong who can life lets say 800 kg we dont know how  tht doesnt negate the knowledge tht he is not strong ?
muslim4life: who can LIFT
muslim4life: we know God is 1 but dont know how tht doesnt negate he is 1
Dk-man7: How does that address my point? You have to be agnostic on models that explain 'how' God is one.
Dk-man7: You cannot definitively say one model is valid and another is not
Dk-man7: Which means you cannot reject the Trinity for assurity
muslim4life: How does that address my point? You have to be agnostic on models that explain 'how' God is one.
We've not spoken about how God is one we've spoken about how God isn't one there's a difference
Dk-man7: How do you know in what sense God isn't one, if you don't know "how" his oneness exists?
Dk-man7: I just pointed out your analogies don't show this, since they only show we can know something is one, without knowing how it is one.
Dk-man7: They don't show that we can reject models of the man's strength, or ability to weight lift etc
Dk-man7: If I know that a plane has wings and can fly, then as per your statement, I know that the plane cannot not have wings and not fly, as that is the nature of the plane by definition. But other knowing what it is and cannot be by definiition, I don't know how it flys, it's operations or mechanics..
muslim4life: If Allah is one it is necessary that there be nothing like Him for had there been something like Him He would no longer be one. So from this we learn that in reality there is nothing that is one except Allah, for every created thing has something similar to it and therefore isn't really one except metaphorically. And in this is a refutation to those who say god is 3 but one for had god had 3 parts than there would be 3 sharing one essence (so they're similar) leading to multiplicity which is the opposite to oneness  it would be like saying " Allah Has both no begining and has a begining "
Dk-man7: Ah but now you are explaining "how" Allah is one. Contradiction. You are saying he is one without multiplicity. That is a "how" statement.
Dk-man7: Further more if Allah is one without multiplicity, then he literally the 1, Allah is an abstract number, since he cannot be composed of parts that make him a person possessing multiple traits and characteristics.
Dk-man7: Now if Allah does not possess either multiple relations, properties or attributes since he is just an abstract number, then your God is not a creator, and not worthy of worship.
muslim4life: When have we said how Allah is one saying Allah being one means that he doesn't resemble creation is a negation of how he isn't one for being not like the creation is a negation of being like the creation
muslim4life: Firstly numbers are abstract representations of reality. Secondly you have wrongly assumed that God must be like the creation in order to be the creator, while we affirm what we know is necessary for God in order that He is god such as being one without trying to imagine Him
muslim4life: In reality your god is a projection of your imagination and not one of reality
muslim4life: uv made Allah like the creation and u refuse to accept tht Allah isnt like the creation thts because of your arroganc lol
Dk-man7: Hang on I'll correct all your errors, patience.
Dk-man7: Firstly if Allah's oneness is negation of "creations oneness" then you have implictly affirmed the Trinity. Because there is no being in creation that exists as three persons in one being, that is purely unique the the creator, which means this is a potentical model for "how" God's oneness exists. Secondly and more importantly, if Allah's oneness has it's own definition then define it. And after that explain "how" you don't know what his oneness is.
Dk-man7: As for your next claims. yes "one" is an abstract number, I just said that. Secondly I didn't say God "must" be like creation in order to be the creator, I said that if God does not have a multiplicity of relations, properties and attributes, then God is merely an abstract number (this goes "beyond" creation, even Plato made such observations about eternity).
Dk-man7: But obviously because you don't know what God's oneness is, you keep changing the definition. Now is God's oneness unknown to us, or as you said is it oneness without multiplicity, or is it oneness that cannot be created oneness. or is it a numerical oneness?
Dk-man7: And finally, if Allah's oneness is unlike the creation in any sense (meaning it does not have distinctions, properties etc), then how is God able to the creator of an indifferent substance to himself (namely the creation) if he is absolutely and purely without distinction? In fact distinction would be a logical impossibility under this view of Allah's oneness.
muslim4life: Firstly if Allah's oneness is negation of "creations oneness" then you have implictly affirmed the Trinity. Because there is no being in creation that exists as three persons in one being, that is purely unique the the creator, which means this is a potentical model for "how" God's oneness exists. Secondly and more importantly, if Allah's oneness has it's own definition then define it. And after that explain "how" you don't know what his oneness is.
I think obviously haven't looked at an atom that is one yet consists of 3 distinct parts, just like your god is one yet consists of 3 distinct parts. As for His oneness we've already clearly articulated our position on it so reread what we've said if you are indeed sincere in your search for truth.
Dk-man7: Ah but that analogy won't suffice, as an atom is made up of eletrons, protons and neutrons which are all forces, and they do not fully exhaust the category of the atom.
Dk-man7: Where as the Trinity is not a "force" and each person fully exhausts what God is.
Dk-man7: I already responded to your relentless contradictory definitions of your god's oneness, read the above.
muslim4life:  As for your next claims. yes "one" is an abstract number, I just said that. Secondly I didn't say God "must" be like creation in order to be the creator, I said that if God does not have a multiplicity of relations, properties and attributes, then God is merely an abstract number (this goes "beyond" creation, even Plato made such observations about eternity).
i haven't negated Allah being the creator of any other attribute rather we have just expounded on His oneness and explained that it cannot be comprehended. I see that you don't really want to learn rather you want to push a god that conforms to your view tho you openly admit that your view is but a possibility.
muslim4life: nd finally, if Allah's oneness is unlike the creation in any sense (meaning it does not have distinctions, properties etc), then how is God able to the creator of an indifferent substance to himself (namely the creation) if he is absolutely and purely without distinction? In fact distinction would be a logical impossibility under this view of Allah's oneness.
From where did you originate this rule that God must bare similarity to the creation in order to create
Dk-man7: Umm no I didn't say it's a "possibility" for me, I said it's a "possibility" if you we assume like you do that we don't know "how" God's oneness exists. The only thing we do know is that it "must" exist in some sense unlike the creation, the Trinity fits that criterion.
muslim4life: but that analogy won't suffice, as an atom is made up of eletrons, protons and neutrons which are all forces, and they do not fully exhaust the category of the atom.
Dk-man7: Where as the Trinity is not a "force" and each person fully exhausts what God is.
This is like saying that jesus occupied a body therfore doesn't fully exhaust the god head
Dk-man7: Last point made no sense. Lets go back to the basics.
muslim4life: Umm no I didn't say it's a "possibility" for me, I said it's a "possibility" if you we assume like you do that we don't know "how" God's oneness exists. The only thing we do know is that it "must" exist in some sense unlike the creation, the Trinity fits that criterion.
The Trinity fits no where as the Trinity likens god to creation which is the opposite to oneness
Dk-man7: An eletron is a PART of an atom. A neutron is a PART of an atom.
Dk-man7: The Father is FULLY God. The Son is FULLY God.
Dk-man7: Again this is not a comparative analogy to show that some kind of Trinity exists within the creation.
Dk-man7: The Trinity fits no where as the Trinity likens god to creation which is the opposite to oneness <<< that's purely false as i've just shown no creature/creation exists as a truine being.
muslim4life: ok
muslim4life: end it ther
Dk-man7: i haven't negated Allah being the creator of any other attribute rather we have just expounded on His oneness <<< how can you expound on his oneness when you can't explain how it exists? what are you talking about?  >>>>> that it cannot be comprehended<<<< if it can't be comprehended how do you know it excludes a being that exists like creation? contradiction again!
Dk-man7: From where did you originate this rule that God must bare similarity to the creation in order to create <<<< easy "creator" is not "creation" hence it implies distinction must exist, but your saying Allah's oneness excludes any distinction as per his "complete unlikeness of creation". Hence it's a contradictory claim.