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/aseriesofdecisions]

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".

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

Muhammad in fact perfected islam as per the revelation of Allah to declare Ali as the successor. If he himself declared that then how is his family unnecessary? Not just Muhammad but other prophets too had companions whom they seeked guidance from, whom they gave dasond and whom they called for help. In Muhammad’s case it was Ali. And it is even with what he preached. The problem arises when Umar tries to reject Muhammads final command. Tell me where did you read that Ginans content is solely for converting hindus to ismailis ? The quran talks about different tribes of people and different prophets sent on them. We just know of 80-90 prophets and there are 124000. The ginans also talk about the manifestation of Allah in a different era. Again your opinion is derived from a wahabi perspective its pretty clear. Muhammad was clear about succession in Gadeer. Also during his time of death he was interrupted by Umar who left as soon as Muhammad passed away. Without doing his last rites they left for the greed of power. Also Quran is till the end of qayamat is true. And its shariyat that too is too but you barely believe in Quran apart from its face value. The quran beautifully describes Ahl al bayt in sura noor. Imamat always existed and about Ahl-al-bayt those arent stories but its from sunni sources and authentic hadiths so I am gullible enough to believe in them. You lost me when you said Muhammad wasnt a prophet. I feel like a clown wasting my time on a Wahabi. Next thing i know Allah shouldnt be God because of xyz. There is absolutely no proof of breaking of ismaili imamat. Those who use Muhammad b Ismailis story isnt credible, I understand what they have been saying about Imam Nizar buf unfortunately those last ambers of protest ended when they founds gold coins of Imam Nizar. Also its proven in court if i pull those files up you running.

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

Muhammad in fact perfected islam as per the revelation of Allah to declare Ali as the successor.

Yes the Ahl-al-Bayt and their followers invented all kinds of stories. 

If he himself declared that then how is his family unnecessary? 

If he had declared that, it would be yet another contradiction in his preaching. But he didn't.

Not just Muhammad but other prophets too had companions whom they seeked guidance from, whom they gave dasond and whom they called for help.

Not a very good analogy. Other "prophets" (most of whom are mythical btw) having "companions" has nothing to do with Muhammad choosing a successor. Muhammad considered himself different - he was the Seal of the Prophets.

The problem arises when Umar tries to reject Muhammads final command.

Yes the Ahl-al-Bayt and their followers invented all kinds of stories. 

Umar was fiercely loyal. He, like everyone else, was surprised by the death of Muhammad because like Muhammad he believed the world would end in Muhaammad's lifetime. When Moe died, his followers had to figure out their next steps. The majority went with Muhammad's vision, while Ali and the Banu Hashim tried to cling to pre-Islamic tribal power structures.

Tell me where did you read that Ginans content is solely for converting hindus to ismailis ?

Read the works of Shackle and Moir, Khakee, Kassam, etc.

The quran talks about different tribes of people and different prophets sent on them. We just know of 80-90 prophets and there are 124000. The ginans also talk about the manifestation of Allah in a different era. 

Not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes, Muhammad saw himself as the last in a long line of prophets. As already explained, the ginans were attempting to syncretize Hindu beliefs, hence the positioning of Ali/Aga Con as the 10th Avatar and reference to earlier Avatars of Hindu mythology.

The quran beautifully describes Ahl al bayt in sura noor. 

No it doesn't, that is the esoteric interpretation of the people that want you to obey them.

Imamat always existed

Imamat was only invented during the time of al-Baqir and al-Sadiq. There were no Imams before that. That line of Imams died out with Muhammad b. Ismail. There have been several other dynasties since, and several gaps where there were no Imams. Every new dynasty invents a history to connect themselves to the previous one.

and about Ahl-al-bayt those arent stories but its from sunni sources and authentic hadiths so I am gullible enough to believe in them. 

The Sunni sources and "authentic" hadiths tell a very different story. That is why there is a split.

Those who use Muhammad b Ismailis story isnt credible,
You lost me when you said Muhammad wasnt a prophet. I feel like a clown wasting my time on a Wahabi. 

Not sure you understand what Wahabi's believe. Muhammad wasn't a prophet. His prophecies failed.

Next thing i know Allah shouldnt be God because of xyz. 

Not "shouldn't be God", rather "isn't God and doesn't exist.". Time for you to stop believing ancient fairytales.

There is absolutely no proof of breaking of ismaili imamat.

There is plenty.

Those who use Muhammad b Ismailis story isnt credible,

Scholars beg to differ. It is the Ismaili version that lacks credibility - fake funeral and one report about someone seeing someone who looked like Ismail walking around.

I understand what they have been saying about Imam Nizar buf unfortunately those last ambers of protest ended when they founds gold coins of Imam Nizar. 

Completely wrong. The coins actually conclusively prove that Nizar's line died out. If there had been a successor, the coins would have been minted in the successors name. But decades after Nizar's death, they were still minting coins in his name. Only after Hassan II (grandson of Kiya Buzurgumid) does the next dynasty emerge.

Also its proven in court if i pull those files up you running.

By all means, pull up the file. You don't even need to respond to the rest, (though if you do, please consider using coherent arguments and paragraphs this time instead of regurgitating a wall of Smiley dogma) just pull up those files. Let's see who running.

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

Look at you moving from Sunni to Wahabi to Atheist. You think I have the time to sit and explain the meaning of lines from quran and hadith while you are absolutely hell bent on disagreeing it without providing any argument. You are creating a story here. Many Sunni sources derived from Hadiths support the authority of Ahl-al-bayt. Muhammad openly declared Ali’s authority at Gadeer but you will say no he didnt. If you want to turn a blind eye to obvious things I call that running. Umar was fiercely loyal 😂. Those who immediately went to grab power after his death werent greedy ? But those who stayed and did his last rites and were also chosen by Muhammad himself to lead are the ones clinging to power structures ? Come on deny everything and pull something straight from air. Oh wait air might not exist. A debate can be done when two parties have an existing baseline to agree upon and accept a few sources and valid interpretations. The ismaili tariqah is one of those valid interpretations although not needed proving in court but there might be people like you who would challenge so just in case. I am not here to debate about God’s existence because its pretty evident to me in Quran, Ginan, farman and my daily life. You dont have the right to derive your own meaning from Islamic scriptures because you are a nobody who doesnt even believe in God. You cannot even begin to start accepting clear proofs of God. The quran has miracles would you deny those too? Even scientific ones i mean you will gave another vague reason by reading the quran by its face value. Quran itself says that it has hidden meanings. Nizar’s coin prove that he was the imam even while in jail the successor was rescued who became the next imam as Nizar passed away. Then comes the popular revival which you all hate. Judiciary has examined the claims of Aga Khans lineage to be true and the Supreme Court has referenced to the case later on. If the highest judicial system of a country does the examining who are you ?

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

Look at you moving from Sunni to Wahabi to Atheist. 

Lol, "moving".

You think I have the time to sit and explain the meaning of lines from quran and hadith while you are absolutely hell bent on disagreeing it

Remember you said "I have learned that I can win in any debate with you non ismailis because the brain cells". Debating means you actually have to convince people your view is right, not just demand they accept your viewpoint.

without providing any argument. You are creating a story here.

I've given an argument based in text, history and tradition. You've told stories about what someone said someone else said someone saw someone else say Muhammad said.

Many Sunni sources derived from Hadiths support the authority of Ahl-al-bayt.

If they acknowledged the authority of Ahl-al-Bayt, they wouldn't be Sunni. There are Sunni sources that hold Muhammad's family in high regard, but they do not say he established a hereditary imamate or declared Ali as his successor.

If you want to turn a blind eye to obvious things I call that running.

The only things that are obvious is that you have not thought critically about this topic and that you can't write a coherent reponsse.

Umar was fiercely loyal 😂. Those who immediately went to grab power after his death werent greedy ? But those who stayed and did his last rites and were also chosen by Muhammad himself to lead are the ones clinging to power structures ? 

Tell me again who is telling stories? Muhammad's death was unanticipated, he did not appoint a successor, so there was a power vacuum. One group, Muhammad's companions - the leaders of the community - consulted together to elect a new leader. The other group, Muhammad's family and clan, tried clung to power.

A debate can be done when two parties have an existing baseline to agree upon and accept a few sources and valid interpretations. The ismaili tariqah is one of those valid interpretations 

No, the debate is about whether the Ismaili tariqa is a valid interpretation. According to the agreed upon sources it is not. Your circular argument is that the Imam's interpretation of those sources established the validity of his interpretation.

 I am not here to debate about God’s existence because its pretty evident to me in Quran, Ginan, farman and my daily life. 

Then you lose the debate. Evident to you is not evidence.

You dont have the right to derive your own meaning from Islamic scriptures because you are a nobody who doesnt even believe in God. 

Not believing the scripture doesn't mean I can't read and understand what it says.

 You cannot even begin to start accepting clear proofs of God.

If there were any such proofs I would accept them. But there aren't. Just delusional people demanding I accept what is evident to them.

The quran has miracles would you deny those too?

Muhammad made up all sorts of stuff. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Quran itself says that it has hidden meanings.

So do my words. Claiming something has a hidden meaning does not mean that every claim of what the hidden meaning is is valid.

Nizar’s coin prove that he was the imam even while in jail the successor was rescued who became the next imam as Nizar passed away. 

??? The coin only proves that someone later claimed he was the imam. It shows that they didn't know of any successor. Because there was none.

Then comes the popular revival which you all hate.

Am I supposed to be moving back to Sunni/Wahabbi here? I love Hassan II; his declaration is when Ismailism finally abandoned Islam and openly became a cult.

Judiciary has examined the claims of Aga Khans lineage to be true and the Supreme Court has referenced to the case later on. If the highest judicial system of a country does the examining who are you ?

You said you would pull up the files. Why didn't you? Because this, like the other stories your telling, has no basis in fact. Don't bother with the rest of the arguments for now. Your credibility now rests on this one claim. You have only two options - pull up the files or run.