Flexible Debate Policy
We at ExamineTheTruth.com are committed to providing the most fair and balanced discussions and debates on Islam. Our goal is to get to the truth and we will make every effort in doing so. Few have voiced the concern that sometimes debates or discussions may not be fair due the format, rules, and other related issues. We respect the fact that different people have different needs regarding how they would like a fair debate to be conducted. That is why we offer to "
donít want to be in a position where I have to juggle 7 or 8 different
objections and only have the time to address 3 of them!"
We agree this can be a problem. This takes away from the quality of the discussion. Therefore, we would offer to debate very narrow well-defined topics and make sure no other issues are raised in the discussion. Even if this would entail discussing 1 or 2 verses alone per night, we will meet that request.
simply need extra time to give a back ground of Bible, then I
will be able to respond to the refutations, if the audience donít
have the background, then they will not understand what I am saying.."
This was the concern of Dr. Hans Bayer from Covenant Seminary regarding a debate on the credibility of the Bible. There is no "absolute rule" which states both speakers must have the same amount of time, therefore, we designed a format for the debate which would give Dr. Bayer more time to speak because he needed to give some background information.
have not memorized the entire encyclopedia of Biblical apologetics, therefore,
I do not want to be confronted with a topic which I am not able to respond to only
because I have not had adequete time to prepare for it."
In almost all debates and dialogues, we clearly state before hand what the issues are going to be discussed. We also make it clear that no other issues will be raised in the debate other than what has been submitted prior before hand. That way they will both speakers will be able to properly prepare.
have been reading up a bit on you on various websites - mostly yours. And now I
†now that what they report is true. First you threaten professional destruction for those
†"cowards" unwilling to play ball with you, then if they accept you debase them by calling
them humiliated, liars, etc. until finally, when they tire of these antics you report that you
have utterly defeated them."
understand how this would be a concern. But, not everyone gets this "royal
treatment". This is reserved only for "Islam bashers" and
those who spread hate against Muslims. That is why our website has been split
in half. For decent people who do not curse Islam, and spew hatred, but rather
raise challenging scholarly questions and objections, they are placed in one
area of our website, and we have nothing disparraging
to say about them, even though we may strongly disagree with their conclusions.
Take for example, Denis Giron, Richard Carrier. These
are Atheists who critique Islam, but I have no "attacks" against
them. Another example, is Dr. Has Bayer, whom I
debated. I consider him a friend, and we even invited him and his family to our
"I donít want people to know my identity for my securityÖ"
Debates can be done completely anonymously on www.paltalk.com.
This by no means is an exhaustive list. The bottom line, is that we will work to meet any reasonable concern or request of our opponents. Not only that but we have also pledged to make all our views open for cross-examination, and we are willing to pay the air fare, hotel, and meal expenses of all our critics to come and challenge our views if they feel we are in error. It just doesnít get any better than this.