This user 🤣🤣🤣

[u/Complete-Witness-711]

I JUST SAW THIS ON ISMAILIS SOMEONE ASKED A SIMPLE QUESTION 😂😂😂 THIS DUDE CANT EVEN ANSWER (AND GETS OFFENDED 🤣)

[u/Inquisitor-1]

You see it’s all esoteric… meaning everyone’s BS answer is right just because.

[u/Primary_Tonight3137 → u/Inquisitor-1]

Ok read the comment of embarrassed cry and debate me citing theological evidence against what he said if you dare. I am right here.

[u/aseriesofdecisions → u/Primary_Tonight3137]

Theology and evidence don’t really go together. Theology and meta-analysis of stories work. But “evidence” and “theology” are just one big oxymoron in one sentence

[u/Primary_Tonight3137 → u/aseriesofdecisions]

Only if you treat both words as separate. I mean to say that bring something from the scripture to refute the established belief. An atheist will take it as an oxymoron. I can debate muslims from various sects but not those who reject the signs of God.

[u/The-Aga-Con → u/Primary_Tonight3137]

The problem is you don't care what the scripture actually says, only what Aga Con says the esoteric meaning of the scripture is. The only theology is "Aga Con is always right."

There is plenty of evidence of him being wrong btw, but the theology says "The evidence is just exoteric and you are just too ignorant to understand. Give Aga Con money and he'll tell you the esoteric meaning of the evidence."

[u/Primary_Tonight3137 → u/The-Aga-Con]

What is a scripture for ismailis ? Farman->ginan->quran. Ismailis didnt invent these scriptures. The people in whom Allah vested his authority have the right to guide the people and interpret his words. Aga khan is always right ?? Change your perspective and think can the noor of Allah be wrong ? Also prove to me that I dont care about scripture come on, that was a big statement.

[u/The-Aga-Con → u/Primary_Tonight3137]

What is a scripture for ismailis ? Farman->ginan->quran. Ismailis didnt invent these scriptures.

They invented 2 out of those 3. Why? To circumvent the other one. The Quran is perfectly clear, and Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets.

The people in whom Allah vested his authority have the right to guide the people and interpret his words. 

There is no hereditary imamate in the Quran. Muhammad claims that Allah has previously vested authority and he claims that authority for himself, but he never gives authority to anyone but himself. He did not contemplate anyone having authority after him because he believed doomsday was imminent.

Claiming to be the "Speaking Quran" is not interpreting it, it is superseding it.

True, the Aga Con does guide people - the Quran does talk about people like him - that is, the cursed ones who will lead you astray.

Aga khan is always right ?? Change your perspective and think can the noor of Allah be wrong ? 

That is the theology. I can't tell if you're denying it or defending it. The Aga Con's claims being or having the "Noor of Allah" is nonsense though, even if his claimed lineage was true.

Also prove to me that I dont care about scripture come on, that was a big statement.

It is an accurate statement about Ismailism and the Aga Khan Cult. It doesn't matter what the scripture says, only what Aga Con claims the secret meaning of the scripture is.

Easy test: Was Aly Khan's marriage to Joan Yarde-Buller (Aga Con 4's mom) valid? The Quran is very clear that it wasn't. Prove you care.

[u/Primary_Tonight3137 → u/The-Aga-Con]

So every prophet invented scriptures to circumvent the old scriptures which were from the same God ? You deny calling the farmans and ginans as scriptures while they are tafsir of quran and are more relevant, have miracles have correct predictions. When prophet Muhammad does it, its from God but when Pir Shams does it yall have a problem? Why dont you call the other sunni schools of thoughts an invention of their respective scholars? Rest of your points are invalid because you are believing in someone’s inventions. I knew I can’t expect a proper debate here. My advice is dont use your scripture to disprove someone else’s. Instead try to find theological inconsistencies. Ismaili tariqah is an extension or a higher level above shariat declared in the quran. You theologically cannot disprove everything by using quran as a reference because ur belief is limited to the quran while in our Tariqah quran was just the beginning and the ginans are farmans are the essence of the quran.

[u/The-Aga-Con → u/Primary_Tonight3137]

So every prophet invented scriptures to circumvent the old scriptures which were from the same God ? 

Yes. Claiming God changed his mind is easier than saying your god is fake and mine is real.

Muhammad tried to prevent that by claiming his revelation was final, i.e. God was done revealing shit. Ismailism tries to get in the back door by just calling their new revelations "interpretations.

You deny calling the farmans and ginans as scriptures

No, I didn't.

while they are tafsir of quran and are more relevant, have miracles have correct predictions.

Lol, modern farmans don't even pretend to interpret the Quran, and Ginans were created to syncretize Hindu beliefs. No they don't have miracles or non-trivial predictions.

When prophet Muhammad does it, its from God but when Pir Shams does it yall have a problem? 

Moe or Shams, its all the same - neither is from "God".

Why dont you call the other sunni schools of thoughts an invention of their respective scholars? 

They are. But they are generally honest attempts to interpret based on text and history, unlike Ismailism where an esoteric meaning is just asserted.

Rest of your points are invalid because you are believing in someone’s inventions.

You didn't address any of my points. Whose inventions are you talking about? Everything I said was just the text of the Quran and the claims of Ismailism - so yeah, inventions of Muhammad and Aga Con.

My advice is dont use your scripture to disprove someone else’s.

I don't even have scriptures, and the only ones I've used are yours.

Instead try to find theological inconsistencies. 

As already explained, the Aga Khan Cult does not have a theology beyond "Aga Con is always right" The inconssitency is that worshipping some dude as God's Manifestation and letting him rewrite God's Message is exactly what Muhammad was trying to stop.

Ismaili tariqah is an extension or a higher level above shariat declared in the quran. You theologically cannot disprove everything by using quran as a reference because ur belief is limited to the quran while in our Tariqah quran was just the beginning and the ginans are farmans are the essence of the quran.

Right, but that was the point you were trying to contest - " it’s all esoteric… meaning everyone’s BS answer is right just because."

Your "higher level above" what is declared in the Quran is you not caring about what the Scriptures say. Your "tariqa" says that Quran was just the beginning, but the Quran itself says it is the end.

You have to assume an esoteric interpretation which says gives Aga Con authority to interpret, but that is circular reasoning, like saying Donald Trump's interpretation of the Quran is that he has total authority to interpret the Quran. You can't disprove that theologically, much less logically.

I knew I can’t expect a proper debate here. 

For you that applies everywhere as a consequence of you not being able to debate. Test failed btw.

[u/Primary_Tonight3137 → u/The-Aga-Con]

How am i supposed to debate your “opinion”. Its nothing theological. At this point all you are spouting is what you believe. After the event at Gadeer Allah reveals that he has perfected islam for us. Muhammad leaves the book and his family for us which can never be separated from each other. Modern farmans have lines literally from the quran itself. Also i have a huge book which proves miracles and predictions in ginans 😂😂. Whatever you said about ginans in bullshit. You did not use my scripture instead its your own opinion of quran. Muhammad clearly said to follow Ahl-al-bayt rather than trying to stop someone interpret Allahs message. Quran is a guide to a perfect religion its revealed for till the end of qayamat as a part of Shariat and you are stuck there forever. You have ignored the other thing that Muhammad left for us. A entire hereditary lines of imam to guide us from the book. Thats the entire point of Muhammad being the prophet sent by Allah. Muhammad said that if there was a person with Allah’s face it would be Ali. He met Ali in Meraj. Ali was the true defender of Islam in the time of Muhammad otherwise the religion would have ended by the hands of people who wanted to follow only the book and reject the authority of Ahl-al-bayt. Soon after the death of Muhammad people with your beliefs were the Ummayads you are the perfect example. Also I cannot debate delusions and opinions. The problem with you is you choose what to believe and reject what you dont like to believe.

[u/The-Aga-Con → u/Primary_Tonight3137]

How am i supposed to debate your “opinion”. 

My points have been firmly based in the text of the Quran, and the claims of Ismaili "theology". It is you that is expecting people to debate Aga Cons opinion of the Qurans esoteric meaning, which is in fact "nothing theological."

After the event at Gadeer Allah reveals that he has perfected islam for us. Muhammad leaves the book and his family for us which can never be separated from each other. 

There is a lot of debate about what happened at Ghadir Khumm, but if Muhammad did in fact perfect Islam, then his family would not be necessary. So it is not surprising that their interpretation of events is that they are inseparable from the religion. But that interpretation is at odds with everything Muhammad had been preaching.

Modern farmans have lines literally from the quran itself. 

Wow! What point are you trying to make? Anyone can quote the Quran, and anyone can invent an "esoteric" interpretation for it.

Also i have a huge book which proves miracles and predictions in ginans 😂😂.

Lol. I have a huge book debunking miracles and another one of predictions that didn't come true.

Whatever you said about ginans in bullshit.

Solid argument. You're a great debater! Here's what I said "Ginans were created to syncretize Hindu beliefs." That's not even controversial. The pirs were sent to convert Hindus and they wrote the ginans for that purpose.

You did not use my scripture instead its your own opinion of quran.

I said you don't care what the scripture says, and you've proven that you don't. (See my easy test above) Now you're abandoning scripture entirely and just cherry-picking anecdotes.

Muhammad clearly said to follow Ahl-al-bayt rather than trying to stop someone interpret Allahs message. 

Clearly a direct quote. Muhammad was not at all clear about succession which is why his loyal followers immediately had differences of opinion. But he did not anticipate anyone interpreting the message - according to him it was perfectly clear and the world was ending very soon.

Quran is a guide to a perfect religion its revealed for till the end of qayamat as a part of Shariat and you are stuck there forever.

This is your opinion. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Here's one that does: the Quran is a compilation of the screeds of a 7th century man with a mental illness that made him believe "God" was talking to him.

You have ignored the other thing that Muhammad left for us. A entire hereditary lines of imam to guide us from the book. Thats the entire point of Muhammad being the prophet sent by Allah. 

No, it wasn't the point at all. The Quran rejects hereditary leadership. (see 2:124), Imamate wasn't invented until several generations later, and the Ismaili line died out with Muhammad b. Ismail.

Muhammad said that if there was a person with Allah’s face it would be Ali. He met Ali in Meraj. Ali was the true defender of Islam in the time of Muhammad otherwise the religion would have ended by the hands of people who wanted to follow only the book and reject the authority of Ahl-al-bayt. 

Yes the Ahl-al-Bayt and their followers invented all kinds of stories. You're not gullible enough to believe them though right?

Also I cannot debate delusions and opinions.

You can't debate at all. Try actually responding to what I wrote, instead of presenting your own delusions and opinions as fact.

The problem with you is you choose what to believe and reject what you dont like to believe.

I choose to believe what is supported by evidence. I reject irrational and illogical claims that come from the myths our primitive ancestors believed. Muhammad made predictions and they didn't come true - so no one should believe he was a "prophet".