Refuting Evolution

[Muslim Scholar]

I looked through that proof, it had a bunch of premises tailored to support the conclusion he wanted

Of course I should select relevant premises

, and still it was full of non sequitur conclusions.

Like what?

Even if you accept all the premises, the 'proof' doesn't get you to Allah, just deism.

Yes, I agree on that
Although it gives much more probability to Allah
Proving Allah is another subject

If you don't accept all the premises, it doesn't even get off the ground.

but then you need to refute the premises, which is far difficult then refuting the proof itself.

---

I looked through that proof, it had a bunch or premises tailored to support the conclusion he wanted, and still it was full of non sequitur conclusions. Even if you accept all the premises, the 'proof' doesn't get you to Allah, just deism. If you don't accept all the premises, it doesn't even get off the ground.

That's the exact reason why I never use 'logical' arguments so to speak, they can never get you to your religion, the best they can do is try to show the existence of the personal abrahamic God, but even then you're left with 3 choices, not 1. So it's kind of dubious and extremely long to use logical deduction.

All 3 religions have the same God!

If it must be used the person has to go for the jugular and try to deduce why their particular holy book is the word of God.

This proof will come later.