Page 28 of 36 As for the source of Evil the Evil is a Problem of Philosophy and Theology since ages. There are conundrums ,paradoxes and dilemmas in regard to evel. Say Ethyphro’s connundrumm or Epicurious Dilemma. As God is the Absolute Creator the Omnificent ,, the Question is who created the Evil. Let Evil is Not Created by God. There are Three possible ways to look at the Evil if it is not Created by God. 1] It came in existence with out any creator what so ever. This means that atleast Evil has no God. A partial Atheism. If Evils can come in existence without God, then why not the Good? 2] Evils are Created by Beings other that Gods. If so then why it is not evil to create a Thing which Creates Evils. Is this not evil to make a Creater of Evil, or a being which can Create Evils. 3] If Evil is absence of Good then why God allowed the absence , why God not filled the absence of Good by Presence of Good. Is it not Evil to do so? Such questions may be asked continuously. But this does not mean that God is the Creator of All things, Ultimate Creator of every Contingent thing. If Evil is the absence of Good in Supposita and is not an Existential Thing then the Supposita are Existential and in this meaning God is the Creator. Actually what Islam says is undisputed in all three Abrahamic Religion. Further there is a question whether all evels are just the absence of Good or there are Existential Evils. ANTI ISLAMIC OBJECTION MAKER SAYS Listen Christian, here’s the main point: this “Chrislam” idea (the idea of the god of Islam being the same as the God of the Bible), is this generation’s most stupid invention and will cause many to find the wide Page 28 of 36
Page 29 of 36 gate and the broad way that leads to destruction, and the churches that are falling for this load of bull are proving that there are many which go in there (see Matthew 7:14) and they are in fact leading them there! ANSWER:= To our Christian Brethren it may be requested that one must not trust this false allegation. This is based on the claim that an Unincarnable God and an Uni-Uinity God or An Absolute Unicity God is Unknowable and God of NT is Knowable, hence they cannot be one and the same. But this has been refuted clearly. As the learned Anti Islamic Objection Maker has used the words like Stupid invention, such words must not be responded by equal words. It is claimed such a thing may lead to destruction etc. these are just false claims. Once the alleged proofs on which such claims are based are proved to be invalid and incorrect, it is not necessary to respond each and every claim individually. In Nutshell All these allegations are false. Once again it is tried to Misuse Matt7:14. ANTI ISLAMIC OBJECTION MAKER SAYS The Bible proves to us that the God of the Bible is knowable and that He wants to be known and loved. The god of Islam is capricious and prefers to determine his followers’ fate from their beginning and to hide his nature from them. ANSWER:= The God of Tanakh of Judaism is Knowable without any dogma of Incarnation. From the first book of Tanakh to the last book of Tanakh the dogma of Incarnation does not exist. It does not exist in Judaism. One may ask a Jewish Rabbi about the Dogma of Incarnation and its Existence in Judaism, himself or herself. Once again the basic thing which is the substratum of the allegation is that Islam does not recognize The Dogma of Incarnation. This substratum in these allegations is discussed above in detail and it is sufficient to say see above. Page 29 of 36
David W. Montgomery presents a rich ethnographic study on the practice and meaning of Islamic life in Kyrgyzstan. As he shows, becoming and being a Muslim are based on knowledge acquired from the surrounding environment, enabled through the practice of doing. Through these acts, Islam is imbued in both the individual and the community. To Montgomery, religious practice and lived experience combine to create an ideological space that is shaped by events, opportunities, and potentialities that form the context from which knowing emerges. This acquired knowledge further frames social navigation and political negotiation. Through his years of on-the-ground research, Montgomery assembles both an anthropology of knowledge and an anthropology of Islam, demonstrating how individuals make sense of and draw meanings from their environments. He reveals subtle individual interpretations of the religion and how people seek to define themselves and their lives as “good�? within their communities and under Islam. Based on numerous in-depth interviews, bolstered by extensive survey and data collection, Montgomery offers the most thorough English-language study to date of Islam in post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan. His work provides a broad view into the cognitive processes of Central Asian populations that will serve students, researchers, and policymakers alike.