The Architect of Delusion: A Deconstruction of Gnostic Nihilism in APROL

Posted on
Back

Article By: Miguel Hayworth – UK Apologetics Library
Date: May 13, 2026
Subject: Refuting “Door Number Twenty-Two: Karma and the Proof of God”
Classification: Gnostic Nihilism / Psychological Manipulation / Moral Inversion

Overview: The Methodology of Spiritual Erasure

In “Door Number Twenty-Two” of The Goal of the Wise, Abdullah Hashem employs a sophisticated strategy of Spiritual Erasure. By pivoting between pagan concepts like Karma and the aggressive skepticism of New Atheism, he seeks to dismantle the follower’s confidence in traditional Scripture and natural reason. The objective is to leave the seeker in a state of total intellectual isolation, where the only remaining “truth” is the word of the “Living Guide.”

I. The Pagan Import: The Myth of Biblical Karma

The APROL Text: “Door Number Twenty-Two: Karma. ‘As you do shall be done to you.’” (Page 266)

The Scholarly Refutation: The introduction of the term “Karma” into an ostensibly Abrahamic context is a significant linguistic and theological category error. There is no such thing as Karma in the Bible.

  • Pagan Importation vs. The Gospel: Karma is a blind, impersonal, mechanical law of cosmic debt associated with reincarnation. Conversely, the Bible teaches Grace the personal, unmerited favor of God that breaks the cycle of what we deserve.
  • The Rejection of the Cross: While the Bible mentions “sowing and reaping” (Galatians 6:7), this occurs within a framework of Divine Redemption. Under Karma, every debt must be paid by the individual. By teaching “Karma,” Hashem removes the necessity of Christ’s sacrifice, which paid the debt we could not, and places the burden of salvation back onto the individual’s performance and loyalty to the Imam.

II. The Dialectical Trap: The Use of Hypothetical Negation

The APROL Text: Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan… said, “…if this religion turned out to be false, what would your response be?” I said, “I would be a Christian.”… The Imam… said, “And what is the difference between Christianity and the current form of Islam? It is a religion that consists of lies upon lies… The true word in the response of the believer is atheism… Isn’t atheism in this case the truth if all religions are a lie…?” (Page 266)

The Scholarly Refutation: Hashem employs a classic dialectic trap designed to induce spiritual vertigo. By dismissing all other faiths as “lies upon lies,” he strips the follower of any “safety net” or alternative theological foundation.

  • The Nihilistic Pivot: By asserting that “atheism is the truth” if his movement fails, Hashem utilizes a high-control tactic known as Totalistic Identity. He forces a binary choice: either his specific Gnosis is the absolute truth, or the universe is a godless void.
  • The Erasure of History: The sweeping dismissal of Christianity and Islam ignores the historical, archaeological, and textual evidence supporting the Abrahamic faiths. This subverts the character of God, whose truth is established in the heavens and not dependent on a single “Living Guide” (Psalm 119:89).

III. The Systematic Dismantling of Natural Theology

The APROL Text: I said, “There must be a Creator… No one passes by an old, abandoned building and says: ‘This building came into existence spontaneously.’” The Imam… said, “Prove to me that the Creator exists… do not depend on anything I said previously.” I said, “The existence of things is proof enough…” The Imam… said, “That is not proof.” I said… “Well then there is no proof.” (Page 266)

The Scholarly Refutation: In this dialogue, Hashem intentionally dismantles the Teleological Argument (the argument from design). This is a calculated power play to make the follower feel intellectually bankrupt.

  • The Deconstruction of Reason: By flatly stating “That is not proof” regarding Paley’s “Watchmaker” analogy, Hashem strips the follower of their natural human reason.
  • The Creation of Intellectual Dependency: When the follower finally despairs and says, “Well then there is no proof,” the goal of the manipulator is achieved. The follower is reduced to a state of tabula rasa (blank slate), ready to accept whatever subjective “proof” (dreams or mystical experiences) the Imam later provides.
  • Biblical Counter-Point: The Bible explicitly contradicts the Imam. Romans 1:20 states that God’s power and divine nature are clearly seen and understood through what has been made, so that people are “without excuse.”

IV. The Statistical Bait-and-Switch: Misusing Academic Authority

The inclusion of academic citations like The Oxford Handbook of Atheism is a strategic move to lend scholarly legitimacy to Hashem’s arguments. However, a deep dive into the source material reveals a significant intellectual bait-and-switch.

The APROL Text: Citing “A World of Atheism: Global Demographics” from The Oxford Handbook of Atheism (Keysar & Navarro-Rivera) to claim 450–500 million atheists (7% of the population).

The Polemic Refutation: Hashem uses these statistics not to participate in an academic dialogue, but to create a “statistical shroud” for psychological destabilization.

  • The Decontextualization of Numbers: Keysar and Navarro-Rivera emphasize that counting atheists is difficult because definitions vary. Hashem presents this figure as a monolithic group of “unbelievers” looking for his specific Imamate. In reality, the authors state this 7% includes a massive spectrum—from “passive secularists” in Europe to those moving away from all high-control religious authority.
  • The “China” Erasure: The Handbook notes the vast majority of that 7% reside in China (approx. 200 million) due to state-sponsored or cultural defaults. Hashem strips the data of its geographic reality to make it look like a universal crisis of faith that only he can answer.

V. Scholarly Malpractice: Using Science to Bury Faith

The APROL Text: “They resort to science… evolution… point out errors… no empirical evidence of a Noahic Flood, a Mosaic Exodus, or a Jesuit Resurrection… religion is ‘the opium of the masses’…”

The Scholarly Refutation: Hashem uses academic prestige as a weapon to destabilize trust in traditional scriptures. This is a clear case of Scholarly Malpractice.

  • The “Opium” Fallacy: By quoting Marx, Hashem employs projection. He uses the critique of religious control to destroy the follower’s current faith, only to replace it with a system (APROL) that demands far more rigid psychological submission.
  • The Academic Inversion: A true academic work would present the atheist critique alongside the theological defense. Hashem gives the atheist the “win” on every point to signal to the follower that the Bible is unreliable.

VI. The Infinitum Trap: The “Who Created God” Fallacy

The APROL Text: The Imam… said, “Because if you told me that creation… were created by a Creator, I will ask to see that Creator, and who created Him…” I said, “Osho said before… if God can be there without being created… then existence can be there without being created.” (Page 267)

The Scholarly Refutation: Abdullah Hashem employs the classic “Infinite Regress” argument, popularized by New Atheists and, tellingly, the cult leader Osho.

  • The Osho Connection: By quoting Osho a leader notorious for creating a high-control group and promoting radical ego-destruction Hashem signals his departure from traditional monotheism.
  • The Category Error: Hashem treats the Creator as a “thing” within the universe that requires a cause. However, Biblical Orthodoxy defines God as the Uncaused Cause. By attacking the “uncreated” nature of God, Hashem seeks to bring God down to a human level, making room for himself to step into the vacuum.

VII. The Blasphemy of a “Fallible” God

The APROL Text: The Imam… said, “We are talking about an intelligent Creator, correct?” I said, “Yes.” The Imam… said, “That is not correct, the Creator who is present makes mistakes… If I place some food somewhere and it rots… whom will you attribute this to?” I said, “God?” (Page 267)

The Scholarly Refutation: This is the pinnacle of Gnostic Moral Inversion. Hashem argues that because decay exists, the Creator must be fallible and prone to “mistakes.”

  • The Denial of the Fall: Hashem ignores the Biblical reality of the Fall of Man and the subsequent curse on creation (Genesis 3). Rot and decay are not “divine mistakes”; they are consequences of sin.
  • The Character Assassination of the Divine: By labeling God as “fallible,” Hashem destroys the follower’s trust in the Almighty. If God makes mistakes, His Word cannot be trusted. This creates a psychological “need” for a “Living Guide” to explain away these perceived errors.

VIII. The Erasure of Human Dignity: Cattle vs. Consciousness

The APROL Text: The Imam… said, “Human beings are the ones who decided that what they have is intelligence… Let the cattle testify to it and I shall admit that you have won. Let a horse come and say human beings are intelligent… or even let the devil testify.” I said, “I give up. There is no proof then, right?” (Page 267)

The Scholarly Refutation: This is a sophisticated form of Psychological Gaslighting used to break the follower’s self-worth and trust in their own senses.

  • The Devaluation of the Imago Dei: The Bible teaches that humans are made in the Image of God (Imago Dei). Hashem mocks this by demanding that “cattle” or “the devil” testify to human intelligence.
  • The “I Give Up” Moment: The follower’s response “I give up” is the exact result of cultic indoctrination. When a leader convinces a follower that their own reason is “incompetent testimony,” the follower becomes a vessel for the leader’s will.

IX. The “Authorless Book” Fallacy: Nature as a Random Accident

The APROL Text: I said, “Every book has an author…” The Imam… said, “But there is [a book written by itself], son… Air and nature, they have written and carved sentences… appearing in nature.” (Page 267)

The Scholarly Refutation: Hashem argues that if patterns appear randomly in nature, then nature is a book that “wrote itself.”

  • The Intellectual Bait-and-Switch: He takes the concept of Pareidolia (seeing patterns where none exist) and uses it to dismiss Intelligent Design.
  • A Theological Void: If nature “writes itself,” then there is no Divine Lawgiver. This leads back to Gnostic Nihilism: if the world is an accident, the only authority that matters is the one currently speaking—the Imam.

Karmic Justice: The Appeal to Subjective Experience

The APROL Text: “The proof is the constant feeling that everyone has… even atheists… that there must be something that exists that we must worship… And the proof is getting judged by the same (Karma). As you judge you shall be judged.” (Page 268)

The Polemic Refutation: The Fallacy of Subjectivity

After systematically dismantling the follower’s confidence in objective reason, history, and Scripture, Abdullah Hashem finally offers his “proof.” However, this proof is not based on the character of God or the truth of His Word, but on a subjective feeling and the pagan concept of Karma.

1. The Deception of “Inner Feeling” Hashem claims that the universal urge to worship is the ultimate proof of God. While the Bible acknowledges that God has “set eternity in the hearts of men” (Ecclesiastes 3:11), it also warns that the human heart is “deceitful above all things” (Jeremiah 17:9).

  • The Trap: By centering “proof” on a feeling, Hashem makes the individual’s emotions the arbiter of truth. This is a classic tactic used by high-control groups to bypass critical thinking. If you “feel” it, it must be true—regardless of whether it contradicts established Scripture.

2. The Hijacking of “Karma” as Divine Justice Hashem explicitly links the “hidden power” of the world to the mechanism of Karma (“As you judge you shall be judged”). As previously established, Karma is not a Biblical doctrine. * The Misrepresentation: Hashem attempts to rebrand the Biblical principle of “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1) as a mechanical law of Karma.

  • The Theological Error: In the Bible, judgment is a personal act of a Sovereign God. In Hashem’s view, it is a “hidden power” or a mechanical consequence of a flawed material world. This effectively removes the need for the Cross of Christ. If we are simply trapped in a cycle of “Karmic justice,” there is no room for the Gospel of Grace, where Jesus takes the judgment we deserve upon Himself.

3. The “Hidden Power” vs. The Revealed God Hashem refers to God as a “hidden power which is controlling and ruling this world.” This reflects a Gnostic view where God is distant, mysterious, and only accessible through the “light” shed by the Imam.

The Biblical Truth: God is not a “hidden power” to be found through a feeling; He is the Revealed Word. He has spoken through the Prophets and ultimately through His Son, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1-2).

Divine Justice: Innate Nature vs. Gnostic Manipulation

The APROL Text: “God created the human being with a just nature… every human being has an inclination towards justice within them… Is there a link between this innate yearning and the existence of an Absolute Judge…?”

The Polemic Refutation: The Moral Bait-and-Switch

Hashem appeals to the human “yearning for justice” to establish a bridge to his doctrine of Karma. While it is true that God implanted a conscience within man (Romans 2:15), Hashem uses this noble inclination to lead the reader toward a system of mechanical retribution rather than Divine Mercy.

1. The Internal Witness vs. The External Judge The Bible teaches that our “just nature” is actually a broken compass. While we desire justice for others, we rarely apply the same standard to ourselves. This is why we need a Saviour, not just a “Balance.” Hashem frames justice as a “balance carried out throughout creation,” which is a Gnostic/Naturalistic view that removes the personal, judicial intervention of a Holy God who forgives sins.

X. The Exegetical Hijacking: Chapter 12 (Yusuf), Verse 26

In The Goal of the Wise, Abdullah Hashem frequently cites the story of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph) to justify his “Karmic” logic or the authority of his “witnesses.”

The Quranic Verse: “He [Yusuf] said, ‘It was she who sought to seduce me.’ And a witness from her family testified. ‘If his shirt is torn from the front, then she has told the truth, and he is of the liars.’” (Surah Yusuf 12:26)

Exposing the Misinterpretation

Hashem utilizes this verse to bolster his previous claim that “a witness witnessed for themselves” and to validate the idea of “tangible/karmic” evidence in the physical world. However, his application fails on several scholarly and theological levels:

3. The “Self-Witness” Paradox: Hashem previously mocked the follower by saying “a witness witnessed for themselves” is incompetent testimony. Yet, he cites a story where Yusuf’s innocence is proven through a witness. If Hashem’s logic were consistent, Yusuf’s own claim of innocence would be “incompetent.” Hashem uses the scripture only when it serves to silence the follower, but ignores the scripture’s own reliance on human logic and forensic truth.

1. Contextual Distortion: In the Quranic account, the “witness” is a third party (a relative of the woman) providing a logical, forensic observation to solve a dispute. Hashem, however, uses the concept of “witnessing” to dismantle human reason, telling his follower that their own intelligence is an “incompetent testimony.” He uses the verse to suggest we cannot trust ourselves, whereas the verse itself shows the use of objective logic and reason to find the truth.

2. The Shift from Law to Karma: The verse in Surah Yusuf describes a moment of legal exoneration based on evidence. Hashem twists the concept of “testimony” into his “Karmic Justice” loop. By doing so, he replaces the historical context of a Prophet’s integrity with a mystical law where “as you judge, you shall be judged.”

By refuting the use of Surah Yusuf 12:26, we see that Hashem isn’t interested in the actual narrative of the Prophets. He is interested in the psychological leverage that sacred text provides. He misuses the Quran to validate a Gnostic system where the “Absolute Judge” is replaced by a mechanical “Balance,” and where human reason is discarded in favor of the “Imam’s” interpretation.

The Biblical response to the “yearning for justice” is not found in the cycles of Karma, but in the Justice of God satisfied at the Cross.

“To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” (Romans 3:26)

Karmic Justice: The Appeal to Subjective Experience

Having systematically dismantled the follower’s confidence in objective reason, history, and Scripture, Abdullah Hashem finally offers his “proof.” However, this proof is not based on the revealed character of God, but on a subjective emotionalism and a pagan redefinition of justice.

I. The Fallacy of Universal Worship as “Proof”

The APROL Text: “I was talking to you as a person debating you, now I shall prove it to you. The proof is the constant feeling that everyone has, from all religious backgrounds, even atheists… that there must be something that exists that we must worship.” (Page 268)

The Polemic Refutation: Hashem attempts to use the Sensus Divinitatis (the sense of the divine) as an absolute proof, but he misapplies it.

  • The Psychological Trap: While humans do have an innate inclination toward worship, a “feeling” is not an objective proof of a specific deity or a specific “Imam.” By grounding “proof” in a feeling, Hashem bypasses the need for the Word of God and centers the truth on human emotion.
  • The Counter-Argument: The existence of a hunger doesn’t prove there is a specific meal prepared by a specific chef; it only proves that food is a necessity. Similarly, the urge to worship is a sign of our need for God, but it does not validate Hashem’s particular Gnostic system.

II. The Denial of Intellectual Autonomy

The APROL Text: “Our inner nature in the heart and mind of human beings, even if a person denies that he has this feeling. This feeling is the proof that God exists.” (Page 268)

The Polemic Refutation: This is a classic high-control tactic known as gaslighting.

  • The Erasure of the Individual: By claiming a person has a feeling “even if they deny it,” Hashem invalidates the individual’s own mind and testimony. He claims to have more knowledge of the follower’s heart than the follower does themselves.
  • The Theological Error: The Bible states that while God’s existence is evident in creation (Romans 1:20), the human heart is also “deceitful above all things” (Jeremiah 17:9). A feeling is a shifting sand; it cannot be the “proof” of the Eternal God. Truth is found in the Logos (The Word), not the Pathos (The Emotion).

III. The Mechanical Inversion: Karma as “Hidden Power”

The APROL Text: “Who made this feeling… If you go anywhere, you will see this feeling is present… In the end, everyone reaches one point, and that is, there is a hidden power which is controlling and ruling this world. And the proof is getting judged by the same (Karma). As you judge you shall be judged. Do you understand, son?” (Page 268)

The Polemic Refutation: Here, the Gnostic motive is fully revealed. Hashem identifies the “Hidden Power” of the world not as a Loving Father or a Righteous Judge, but as the mechanical law of Karma.

  • The Pagan Importation: As established, there is no such thing as Karma in the Bible. By using the phrase “As you judge you shall be judged” (a distortion of Matthew 7:1), he attempts to dress a pagan, Dharmic concept in Biblical clothing.
  • The Rejection of Grace: Karma is an impersonal, blind law of cause and effect. It demands that every debt be paid by the individual. The Bible, however, teaches Grace and Redemption. If the “proof” of God is Karma, then there is no mercy, no forgiveness, and no need for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
  • The “Hidden Power”: Calling God a “hidden power” instead of a “Revealed Person” is a hallmark of Gnosticism. It suggests that God is a mystery that only the elite (the Imam) can decode. In contrast, the Bible tells us that God has been fully revealed in Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:9).

The Moral Inversion: Sin as a “Self-Created” Reality

The APROL Text: “Belief. It is belief. If you think that fornication is hallal (permissible) then it is hallal… if you find a person who truly believes inside of him that this is not forbidden… this individual would never be judged.” (Page 269)

The Scholarly Refutation: This passage represents a radical departure from Abrahamic theology, moving into a form of Moral Relativism disguised as spirituality. Abdullah Hashem (speaking as the Imam) asserts that the morality of an action is determined not by God’s immutable Law, but by the individual’s subjective belief.

  • The Abolition of Objective Law: By stating that sin is only sin if the sinner believes it is, Hashem effectively abolishes the Sovereignty of God. In Biblical and Quranic Orthodoxy, God is the Lawgiver. Sin is defined by the objective violation of Divine Decree, regardless of the sinner’s personal justification.
  • The Gnostic Narcissism: This teaching elevates the human mind above the Divine Command. It suggests that man is the measure of all things—a core tenet of occultist philosophies (“Do what thou wilt”) rather than a submissive faith.

XII. The “Vindictive Balance”: Redefining Justice as Cruelty

The APROL Text: “The killer is killed, the fornicator must have a member of his family fornicated with, as you do shall be done unto you… if the fornicator fornicates… then his daughter will fornicate or one of the members of his household.” (Page 269)

The Scholarly Refutation: This is a significant Moral Inversion. Hashem defines “Divine Justice” as a mechanical retribution that strikes innocent family members for the sins of another.

  • The Rejection of Individual Responsibility: The Bible explicitly refutes this “Karmic” family curse logic. Ezekiel 18:20 states: “The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son.” To suggest that God “authorizes” the violation of a daughter because of her father’s sin is a blasphemous assault on the character of God.
  • The Forensic Reach: Hashem’s claim that John Gotti was “murdered by cancer” as Karmic justice is a desperate attempt to force reality into a flawed theological box. Disease is a consequence of the fallen world, not a calculated “execution” by God to balance a Karmic ledger.

XIII. The Deification of Self: Every Man a “Lord”

The APROL Text: “The human being is lord over his own self. The soul is the lord of the self. Every person is his own prosecutor, defender, watcher, judge and executioner… God sets up the justice system for creation and then leaves it to them.” (Page 270)

The Scholarly Refutation: Here, Hashem discards the need for a Savior and a Day of Judgment.

  • The Erasure of the Judge: By claiming man is his own “judge and executioner,” Hashem removes the accountability to a Higher Authority. If an individual is their own judge, they can eventually justify any action. This is the “ultimate and most beautiful justice” only for the self-exalting, not the repentant.
  • Deism in Disguise: He portrays a God who “leaves” and a man who “rules.” This contradicts the Biblical reality of an active, intervening God who records deeds and executes a final, objective judgment.

XIV. The Exegetical Hijacking: Chapter 12 (Yusuf), Verse 26

In The Goal of the Wise, Abdullah Hashem cites the story of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph) to justify his “Karmic” logic or the authority of his “witnesses.”

The Quranic Verse: “He [Yusuf] said, ‘It was she who sought to seduce me.’ And a witness from her family testified. ‘If his shirt is torn from the front, then she has told the truth…’” (Surah Yusuf 12:26)

The Scholarly Refutation: Hashem utilizes this verse to bolster the idea of “tangible/karmic” evidence in the physical world, but his application fails.

  • Contextual Distortion: In the Quranic account, the “witness” is a third party providing a logical, forensic observation to solve a dispute. Hashem, however, uses the concept of “witnessing” to dismantle human reason, telling his follower that their own intelligence is an “incompetent testimony.”
  • Forensic Truth vs. Mystical Karma: The verse in Surah Yusuf describes a moment of legal exoneration based on objective evidence. Hashem twists this into a mystical “Karmic Justice” loop. He uses the scripture only when it serves to silence the follower, but ignores the scripture’s own reliance on human logic and forensic truth.

Conclusion: The Breaking of the Moral Compass

“Door 22” is a masterclass in Psychological Gaslighting. By telling the follower that “if you believe it is permissible, it is permissible,” Hashem creates a state of total moral ambiguity. By then telling the follower that their family will be destroyed by “Karma” if they fail, he creates a state of total terror. This is a control mechanism that removes Grace, Mercy, and the Objective Truth of Scripture, replacing them with a mechanical, cruel system where the individual is trapped by their own mind.

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness…” (Isaiah 5:20)