Who really is running from debating is Muhammed(P) a
Prophet?
 |
*WARNING* Please read first! Official response to Answering Islam's GAY gestures: Click Here. |
| An ExamineTheTruth.com disclaimer. | |
Sam "the
Sham" Shamoun wrote:
Answering Islam wrote:
As far as our being "cognizant of the fact that we can’t win against knowledgeable Muslims", this is simply another example of NA’s wild, and very unsubstantiated, assertions. We need to expose the gross lie that we are unwilling to debate narrow, well-defined topics, since we have been literally pleading with NA to debate us on the following well-defined, narrow topic of whether Muhammad is a genuine prophet! Here, he tries to make excuses in order to avoid admitting that he is simply afraid to debate the credibility of his prophet.
We also need to put things in perspective, since NA got his chronology mixed up. In a Paltalk chatroom NA was challenged to debate this subject sometime in June 2003, and after being pressured by people in the room, he initially agreed. The date was set for 28 June 2003 on Paltalk. NA started getting cold feet and tried to make excuses, such as asking me to send him my debate material in advance, and he would send his to me. (Talk about being desperate!) In fact, the Christians in the room were astonished at NA making such a request and clearly saw this as his way of trying to back down since he knew he couldn’t win such an exchange and had to save face somehow.
Seeing that he lost face, NA then challenged me to debate the Quranic view of the Bible, which I gladly accepted since I knew that this would be a very easy win. I was right. And unlike him, I didn’t ask him to send me his material in advance.
After our debate on the Quranic view of the Bible had taken place on July 16, 2003, I decided to reissue my initial debate proposal. From then onwards NA produced excuse after excuse such as those quoted above in order to avoid a debate on the prophethood of Muhammad.
We again would like to invite our readers to listen to the debate with NA and see for themselves who was guilty of tossing out red herrings and trying to drag the debate into a quagmire. To give you just one example, in our debate NA brought up the verse of Jeremiah 8:8 to prove that the Bible had been corrupted. By the grace of God I refuted his red herring and gross misinterpretation of the text both in our debate as well as in writing. The point of bringing this up here is to expose NA’s excuse-making for all to see. Our debate topic was defined as what the Quran says about the Bible, not what the Bible says about the Bible. Despite this, NA still brought this up and yet here he has the audacity to make the excuse that by not narrowing down the topic we will manage to introduce unrelated issues! We will provide another example of this later on. It is quite clear that NA is desperately trying to save face for losing the debate and for backing down from debating Muhammad’s credibility.
So we are going to call out his bluff.
Response:
Sam "The Sham" Shamoun a.k.a Shameless Shamoun, has
been caught in another terrible LIE. He stated:
"After our debate on the Quranic view of the Bible had taken place on July 16, 2003, I decided to reissue my initial debate proposal. From then onwards NA produced excuse after excuse such as those quoted above in order to avoid a debate on the prophethood of Muhammad"
(and he also stated else where)"BUT FIRST YOU NEED TO STICK TO YOUR INITIAL AGREEMENT AND DEBATE ME ON WHETHER MUHAMMAD WAS A PROPHET."
This is another
example of how Shameless Shamoun will TWIST the truth and out right LIE to save
face for his own cowardice! I have very clearly stated from the very beginning
that YES!! "I WOULD LOVE TO DEBATE
THE PROPHETHOOD OF MUHAMMED". I even stated it
in my challenge:
"Is
Muhammed(PBUH) a Prophet debate series:"
I have NEVER backed
down from this issue. This is an out right FABRICATION concocted by this
demented LIAR, Shameless Shamoun. But rather, the issue which we are in
disagreement is, HOW do we debate it. Notice the deception of
this Christian con artist Shameless Shamoun, he thought he could fool everyone
by confusing these 2 issues! But Shamoun should know that his tricks would NOT
work with me.
I have very clearly
laid out a rational, reasonable and fair way of debating the topic in my
challenge. Not a single Christian or Muslim
has taken exception to it, except Shameless
Shamoun! As I pointed out, there are many topics which are directly related to
this issue, so lets tackle them one at a time, and I have issued the promise,
that I am willing to debate each and everyone of the related issues. But, what
I am not willing to do, is debate them all in one night, because:
It
will not give me enough time to adequately address the topics at hand, and that
is not fair for me. Does that make sense? J
Therefore out of
fairness, we should narrow down the topic. Therefore the burning questions are:
- Are the arguments on Answering Islam really solid enough
to debate when given individual attention as I proposed?
- Are Answering Islam’s claims actually twisted truths and
wacky personal interpretations which can be very EASILY refuted when
enough time is given to focus on this particular issue as I have
proposed????
- Are they actually LIES cloaked in the guise of scholarship???
- Does Christianity even have ONE SINLGE SOLID ARGUMENT
AGAINST ISLAM????????
Notice if any of the
above questions are NOT true, then Answering Islam will be more than happy to
entertain my request. If they REFUSE to do so, then that means that they are
hiding something. And that the above questions are indeed true!!!! This is the
honest conclusion that any fair minded person will come to, doesn’t matter if
they are Christians or Muslims. Let us now see what Shameless Shamoun had to
say about this request:
As far as our being "cognizant of the fact that we can’t win against knowledgeable Muslims", this is simply another example of NA’s wild, and very unsubstantiated, assertions. We need to expose the gross lie that we are unwilling to debate narrow, well-defined topics, since we have been literally pleading with NA to debate us on the following well-defined, narrow topic of whether Muhammad is a genuine prophet! Here, he tries to make excuses in order to avoid admitting that he is simply afraid to debate the credibility of his prophet.
Response:
The problem here, is
that Shamoun thinks that others are as stupid as he is. So the topic:
"Is Muhammed(P) a Prophet?"
has been narrowed
down to:
"Is Muhammad a genuine prophet?"
lol.
ExamineTheTruth.com has scored a catastrophic success!! We have proved all 4 questions listed above are indeed true.
The reason why Answering Islam is SCARED TO DEATH to narrow down the topic is
because they don’t have a single valid argument against Islam. They don’t have
any rational objection to Islam. If they did have a rational, solid argument,
then they would bring this matter to the spot light of debate and challenge
anyone to disprove their claim. But they do not. Because they can not,
rendering the poor defeated Shameless Shamoun to barking like a dog at Muslims!
Rather, their only hope chance is to dump a huge pile of hundreds of
"shocking" riddles on the Muslim lap and leave it to him to decode
each riddle, which he will never be able to do in time. That is their only
salvation.
In conclusion, to this
one point… this is all ExamineTheTruth.com has set out to prove, and we have
done so, without "firing a shot". The mere fact that they can not
debate specific items on their website proves that they don’t have a valid
argument against Islam.
Answering Islam is
desperately trying to avoid focus on a particular issue in a debate, because
they can not defend their claims!
ExamineTheTruth.com
on the other hand has clearly agreed to allow focus on any particular argument
against Islam, let me repeat ANY ARGUMENT, in a debate, while, Answering Islam
has REFUSED. So who is running like cowards? This is proof, that their website
can be EASILY refuted.
Shameless Shamoun
wrote:
We also need to put things in perspective, since NA got his chronology mixed up. In a Paltalk chatroom NA was challenged to debate this subject sometime in June 2003, and after being pressured by people in the room, he initially agreed. The date was set for 28 June 2003 on Paltalk. NA started getting cold feet and tried to make excuses, such as asking me to send him my debate material in advance, and he would send his to me. (Talk about being desperate!) In fact, the Christians in the room were astonished at NA making such a request and clearly saw this as his way of trying to back down since he knew he couldn’t win such an exchange and had to save face somehow.
Response:
Shameless Shamoun is
lying. Show me the proof for what you are saying if you are truthful. What I
asked was to narrow down the issue.
Shameless Shamoun
wrote:
After our debate on the Quranic view of the Bible had taken place on July 16, 2003, I decided to reissue my initial debate proposal. From then onwards NA produced excuse after excuse such as those quoted above in order to avoid a debate on the prophethood of Muhammad.
Response:
LIES.LIES.LIES. where
is your proof?????? again, I always agreed to debate it, but the WAY of
how Shameless Shamoun is dictating to debate it, I declined, because it is not
fair, and it is wrong to let this demented liar to get away with it. But in all
honestly, even in those conditions, it would be a very easy win for me as I
would humiliate Shamoun and expose his pathological lying, JUST LIKE I DID IN
THE FIRST DEBATE, but the question is, "why?" I have already achieved
my objective, which is, that I proved:
"they can not
debate specific items on their website proves that they don’t have a valid
argument against Islam."
Shameless Shamoun
wrote:
NA brought up the verse of Jeremiah 8:8 to prove that the Bible had been corrupted. By the grace of God I refuted his red herring and gross misinterpretation of the text both in our debate as well as in writing. The point of bringing this up here is to expose NA’s excuse-making for all to see. Our debate topic was defined as what the Quran says about the Bible, not what the Bible says about the Bible
Response:
More lies. I
specifically told Shameless Shamoun very clearly before hand that I was going
to discuss Jeremiah 8:8 and he retorted the same old "tough talk".
Therefore, Shamoun was pre warned. This is very relevant to the topic, because
I proved that the Quran is agreeing with the Bible itself that it is corrupted.
Jeremiah 8:8 was a MAJOR source of embarrassment for Shameless Shamoun in the
debate.
Shameless Shamoun
wrote:
I AM WILLING, READY AND ABLE TO DEBATE AND REFUTE YOU ON YOUR PROPOSED SUBJECT:
2. THE PRESERVATION OF THE QURAN.
as well as this one:
3. THE QURAN AND SCIENCE.
In fact, we have already begun exposing your misinformation on what the Quran truly says about science (see NA & Science).
I AM ALSO WILLING TO DEBATE AND REFUTE YOUR ANALYSIS OF ANY ONE OF MY WRITINGS, AND EXPOSE THE LIE THAT I BACKED DOWN FROM YOUR SO-CALLED CHALLENGE.
As readers of our site know, I have never backed down, by God’s grace, from any response to my material. A reader can easily check this for himself by going here:
The reader is invited to click on any one of the links and see for himself (or herself) whether we are afraid to have others critique our materials.
BUT FIRST YOU NEED TO STICK TO YOUR INITIAL AGREEMENT AND DEBATE ME ON WHETHER MUHAMMAD WAS A PROPHET.
Since NA wants us to narrow it down, here it is:
1. IS MUHAMMAD A TRUE PROPHET OF THE TRUE GOD, OR WAS HE A MAN POSSESSED?
It should be quite easy for any Muslim to produce material defending their belief that Muhammad was God’s true prophet. Unless of course, they realize that they really don’t have any arguments in defense of his prophethood, which we believe is the case with NA.
Response:
Do not be fooled by
this Shamounian HOAX! He is lying to you. this shameless coward Shameless
Shamoun has no intention of allowing anyone to pick up his writings and debate
it. If he did, he would have done so without any strings attached. The
form of deception which Shameless Shamoun is employing is known as non sequitur:
Non sequitur
A non sequitur is an argument where the conclusion is drawn from premises which aren't logically connected with it. For example:
"Since Egyptians did so much excavation to construct the pyramids, they were well versed in paleontology."
(Non sequiturs are an important ingredient in a lot of humor. They're still fallacies, though.)
Therefore, these 2
issues are completely unrelated:
"allowing people to challenge his writing in a debate"
"but first debate on MUHAMMAD WAS A PROPHET"
there simply is no
relation between the two issues! But to repeat, I have always agreed to debate
on "If Muhammed(P) is a Prophet?". But the WAY which Shameless
Shamoun put forth is what I sharply disagree with it. It is HOW we debate it
which is the point of disagreement. Answering Islam added a "Shamounian
twist" by trying to confuse the 2 issues. Shameless Shamoun, has NEVER in
his life allowed any Muslim to browse through his pathetic articles and select
one for a open debate, NEVER! Shameless Shamoun knows that I will never allow a
shameless demented liar like himself to get away with a single trick,
therefore, he only allows his " shameless writings" to be open for
debate on a precondition, which he knows will not be accepted before
hand! Therefore, he does not have to worry. Pretty slick hey? But if Shameless
Shamoun was really confident of his false writings, then he would do the
following as I stated in my challenge:
Go ahead, why don't you open up your vault, and let me in. I mean of course, let me go skim throuh website, and let me pick one of your worthless papers and let's debate it. What's wrong? Are you scared? :) I on the other hand, would gladly welcome this same inivitation on my website, www.ExamineTheTruth.com ! That's the difference
Need I say anymore? Now
you know how he earned the name: Sam "The Sham" Shamoun.
Click to go
back
Bogus
website Answering-Islam.org DEBUNKED
Lies against Islam