HomeCultureThe Apotheosis of Truth by Idriss El Khatib: "I wanted to demonstrate that...

The Apotheosis of Truth by Idriss El Khatib: “I wanted to demonstrate that there is no Divinity but Allah alone without partner”

Idriss El Khatib has just published his second book, “The Apotheosis of Truth” where he approaches the theme of theological philosophy through a coherent demonstration of the Oneness of God. The Moroccan author granted an interview to MoroccoLatestNews in order to better understand the work.

MoroccoLatestNews: Tell us about your latest publication, “Apotheosis of Truth” and why did you choose this title?

Idriss El Khatib: This book discusses God whose name is Allah starting from philosophical premises and ending up with theological conclusions. This title means that the Truth becomes God: otherwise God is the truth and the Truth is God.

H: What is the genesis and your approach to writing this book?

IEK: This book has had several lives and several previous editions, its conception was born out of a philosophical doubt and a spiritual upheaval following which I called and prayed to Allah for proof in order to strengthen my faith again. Allah’s answer is this book.

H: What is the purpose of this book and what does it represent for you?

IEK: The aim of the book is first of all to provide answers to my own questions and it
represents for me a bond between Allah and me.

H: What did you want to dismantle in this book?

IEK: Mainly, I wanted to demonstrate that there is no God but Allah alone without partner, Allah is unique and one.

H: From the preamble, you express your desire to seek the truth. Did you find it? And what is it for you?

IEK: As far as I am concerned the truth I have found it is Allah the truth is one and only, from this truth all true teachings flow and I seek knowledge.

H: How do you differentiate between truth and reality?

IEK: Truth is one, uncreated, absolute, immutable, eternal and invisible while reality is multiple, created, relative, changeable, temporary and visible.

H: What is your relationship to religion?

IEK: I consider that religion belongs to the intimate and everyone has their own path. But any religion that opposes absolute monotheism (single and one God) stands on nothing.

H: A large part of your work is interested in chance which would explain, according to some, that there is no God. Can you explain this assumption to us?

IEK: The process of demonstration poses three mutually exclusive and exhaustive propositions in relation to the idea of ​​God. Either there is no God, or there is only one God or there are several Gods whatever the number. I treat two cases that I refute and necessarily the last is the truth. When it comes to studying the proposition there is no god (no creator) there are two possible alternatives: either the universe is uncreated or chance is the agent from which reality comes. The option of an uncreated universe is refuted from the introduction where I separate the idea of ​​truth from that of reality. So there are only two contradictory propositions left: chance without conscience or the creator who has a conscience (since by definition he creates) by invalidating a proposition the other is de facto true. It is a reductio ad absurdum in the form of a positive apagogy. So there is no false dilemma.

H: Does the Meaning of History, which you describe, explain the existence of God?

IEK: The Meaning of History chapter describes history in terms of prophecy since Abraham
to the seal of the Prophets. There is a teleological aspect that I put forward. The Unit of

H: You also ask yourself the question: “Does God have at least one partner?” »… Do you have proof that God exists?

IEK: Remember that no book has unanimous support. This being said, as I said there are three propositions in relation to the idea of ​​God. Once the one that says there is no God has been refuted, the only possible conclusion is that there is at least one God. In order to be rigorous, one must ask oneself about the possibility that God has at least one partner. Once the proposition of the possible associate to God has been refuted (in two steps: first one demonstrates that God is unique and then one demonstrates that God is one) the natural and necessary conclusion is to declare that he is not There is no Divinity but God one and only, this of course refutes the trinity, moreover.

This proof is therefore apodictic and its form is a proof by the absurd. So between God is me I claim that the Proof of God exists and that it is of biblical simplicity. It follows from this a right of proof where I declare that the official name of God is Allah apart from any other invented name like Zeus, Shiva, Chance etc. This right derives from the fact that the burden of the Proof of God rests with Allah and therefore all proof of Allah descends on the writer.

So this Proof of Allah was inspired by Allah and my status with Allah is known and remains to be officially recognized. This legitimacy to which I claim derives from the right of the Proof of Allah. Who is more legitimate than the one who brings proof? There is no proof greater than that of Allah. Without valid refutation of the proof no possibility of denying the status of the author in all good faith A good hearer hi. The proof of Allah is Moroccan and Allah honors this country through this sign. Provided that we are grateful to Him and to him on whom the proof descended.

Of course, all this disappears if one positively refutes the demonstration in which case, I should admit that my heart is carried away, if and only if I do not manage to surpass any alleged refutation with a better content, Allah is the best support. Of course, the rebuttal must be valid and in good faith, I am not interested in those who refuse without reason, or sweep the content out of hand out of ostentation.

There is no God but Allah alone without partner, and He has the power to name: Allah is the Living who does not die. If one recognizes Allah as the Divinity, the One who holds the Sovereignty of the Heavens and the Earth, and that one recognizes in all good faith the Proof of Allah, then this implies not denying the one who brings the Proof of ‘Allah and recognize him as a legitimate and official Representative.

All this, subject to the said Proof of Allah being valid. And I insist, the validated proof, it implies that Allah has blessed Morocco by the emergence of His Proof in this country. This blessing is not far from an election which must be sealed by an alliance, that is what I think in all transparency. And I insist that this only has value if and only if we validate the Proof of Allah. It may sound mind-boggling, but Allah is Generous. Allah will recognize His own because they recognize Him at his fair value. Whoever is grateful is grateful for himself except as for the ungrateful that he knows that Allah is Rich beyond need, that He is self-sufficient and He is Glorious, He is above of what is associated with Him.




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here