u running away again with my question...sam shanon have done research on Bible.....having answering islam and his face book updated ...i found is reliable...
now, forget about sam shanon...we have countless scholar /reader and also pastor....but zakir failed and lost...plus auta...just like u and muslims..they use taqiya to defend islam....that is the fact..
here another video....for muslims ponder ....meaning dont attack other faith...others wise your faith will counter attacked very severely
Truth.8 replied at 3-5-2016 09:06 PM
u running away again with my question...sam shanon have done research on Bible.....having answering islam and his face book updated ...i found is reliable...
now, forget about sam shanon...we have countless scholar /reader and also pastor....but zakir failed and lost...plus auta...just like u and muslims..they use taqiya to defend islam....that is the fact..
here another video....for muslims ponder ....meaning dont attack other faith...others wise your faith will counter attacked very severely
Can you point out to where I ran away from your question? Lemme see , to you Sam Shamoun is a scholar is because
- his so called research of the bibe
- having a website 'answering islam' being updated regularly
- having a facebook account being updated regularly
Wow! So this is his so called academic credentials from your perspective. Do you understand what academic credentials mean?
Lets compare the credentials of Prof Bart Ehrman whom I always refer to :
** Awards
- Religious Liberty Award, American Humanist Association, 2011
- Fellow, National Humanities Center, 2009-10
- John William Pope Center Spirit of Inquiry Teaching Award, UNC Chapel Hill, 2008
- Bowman and Gordon Gray Professorship (Awarded for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching), 1998-2001
- Undergraduate Students’ Teaching Award, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1993
He is also the author of several books. BTW , the info I copy pasted is public information.
Can you now compare your version of a scholar against a 'fit and proper' scholar? Can you now explain to me just where I ran from your question. It appears as if you are the one trying to run.
If you say Dr Naik and I auta , ok .... point out specifically where is the auta. Simple as that but until now you are just too scared to engage in any form of argument except copy paste and giving videos. Are you not able to think for yourself?
Ravi Shanker in the video did not attack anything. He merely played passive when Dr Naik criticised the Hindu Scriptures.
Is there a problem when we muslims criticise Christianity? If you look back at the threads years ago , you are the one who is constantly 'attacking' Islam , Quran and Prophet Muhammad(saw). I don't have any issues when you so call attack my faith because in the end you appear shaken then run away. Too bad for you as you cannot respond to any of the points raised.
You keep on avoiding and running away from the points I raised.
- Sam Shamoun is not a scholar , as far as I know he is a school dropout. However you claim he is a scholar. Can you back up your claim?
- Why is that when muslims criticse the Bible and Christianity you keep on insisting references to scholars (BTW pastors are not scholars). However you are ok with your polemics against Islam and Quran with references to 'answering islam' and 'faith freedom'. Since when are these entities scholars?
- Why do you brush aside works by real scholars like Prof Bart Ehrman , Prof Geza Vermes , Prof Dale Tuggy (to name a few) that points out the errancy of the bible and the nature of Jesus (works which I reference to)?
Lets see how many post do you need to answer the questions. You are scared to answer?
Men with faith do not judge other faith....if you see christian -hindu-sikh-buddhism...they live very hormony amoung others...compare to muslims...
in apperances you muslims look religious but it consider like bomb....
just look at islam world...they could not get along........
I do respect all faith...i can step foot in buddhism temple-hindu -church and all...as I belived it is GOD energy that pour out in this world....
Here another video ...enjoyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy watchingggggggggggg
Truth.8 replied at 4-5-2016 10:35 AM
Men with faith do not judge other faith....if you see christian -hindu-sikh-buddhism...they live very hormony amoung others...compare to muslims...
in apperances you muslims look religious but it consider like bomb....
just look at islam world...they could not get along........
I do respect all faith...i can step foot in buddhism temple-hindu -church and all...as I belived it is GOD energy that pour out in this world....
Here another video ...enjoyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy watchingggggggggggg
Ha ha , why don't you look back at the earlier posts and see for yourself that you were the one actively 'attacking' Islam. Mind you using articles from answering islam and faithfreedom as these are considered ... hmmm .... scholarly by you. Now you cannot answer points raised by us muslims you think by acting passive would be an exit path for you. Too bad , you started it and now you are not in control.
Very naive of you. It is the Christian world that divided the conquered muslim world with the Sykes Picot agreement. Now its the Christian world who are greedy for the oil / natural resources are the ones putting the region in chaos. I always mantain that the folks in mid east should be allowed to vote in the upcoming US election as they would then have a choice to choose who is going to screw them next as currently they don't have any choice.
Seven times more people have died in Christian wars: 113.8 million compared to the 16.4 million who died in Muslim wars.
Christians have killed eight times more people in democides than Muslims: 76.5 million compared to 9.3 million. Almost the same rate as for war.
Err , have you viewed the video? If yes , you wouldn't be saying what you are saying.
You keep on avoiding and running away from the points I raised.
- Sam Shamoun is not a scholar , as far as I know he is a school dropout. However you claim he is a scholar. Can you back up your claim?
- Why is that when muslims criticse the Bible and Christianity you keep on insisting references to scholars (BTW pastors are not scholars). However you are ok with your polemics against Islam and Quran with references to 'answering islam' and 'faith freedom'. Since when are these entities scholars?
- Why do you brush aside works by real scholars like Prof Bart Ehrman , Prof Geza Vermes , Prof Dale Tuggy (to name a few) that points out the errancy of the bible and the nature of Jesus (works which I reference to)?
Lets see how many post do you need to answer the questions. Can you stop running and stand your ground to answer. Issit asking too much?
In 2000, a televised debate between Dr. WilliamCampbell representing Christian view point and Dr. Zakir Naik representingIslamic view point took place.
On December 7, 2005, a TV channel (QTV or Al-Noor)showed a debate between William Campbell and Zakir Naik, which showed theother side of the polemic. In the past it was Zakir Naik trying to proveother religions wrong; this time it was William Campbell rebutting hisarguments.
This was fair enough. If you don’t want your religion criticized don’tdo it to other religions. When Dr. Campbell criticized Muslims forclaiming scientific discovery in the Quran one had to listen.
The TV channel took a fair decision, but when Dr. Campbell began cuttingclose to where it hurt, the program was suddenly taken off in favor ofna’at. If this was done out of fear it was not a good decision andshowed Dr Naik in a bad light. (Later news is that Dr Naik won thedebate.)
Muslims are convinced that Dr. Naik won thatdebate. In fact once you watch the video, unless you know the Quran andIslam fairly well, this is the impression that you get. Dr. Naik was soconfident and so boisterous throughout the debate that anyone watchingwould think the same.
Or did he? I went through this debate and haveanalyzed the talk of Dr. Naik paragraph by paragraph. In this paper I haveshown that Dr. Naik misrepresented everystatement he made on the Quran. There is not a single claim that Dr. Naikhas made about the Quran being miraculous or scientifically accuratethat is true.
I have entitled this paper, World’s GreatestShowman, because after watching his performance, in my opinion, it describeshim best. Dr. Naik is a magician. Magicians make you believe they cut peoplein two, make objects disappear and reappear and make rabbits come out of anempty hat. Butin reality none of that happens. The ability of the magician is to makeyou believe in things that do not happen. Dr. Naik uses a different kindof tools to perform his magic. He uses words. He can make hisaudience believe in things that are not true. In this paper, I am going toshow his tricks and what he uses as setup to make things lookdifferently. By the time you finish reading this paper, you'll beable to detect them too. But that is not all. Since all the Muslims usethe same tricks, although not with the same proficiency of Dr. Naik, you'll be ableto detect their tricks too.
A good magician is dexterous and his moves areswift - so swift that they are hard to detect. However, if you replay his actsand watch then in slow motion, or even frame by frame, you may be able to catchhis tricks. This is whatI have done with Dr. Naik's talk.
This paper will eventually be available for free download and also ina printer friendly format. It may even become available in a book format. I hope all those who have seen the debate between Dr. Campbell and Dr.Naik and were swayed by Dr. Naik's showmanship read this paper to see howhe deceived everyone. Anyone who has seen or heard Dr. Naik owes it tohimself to read this paper. He rehashes the same things in all his talks. Here, the tricks of a master magician areexposed. Read it and pass it on.
There is no doubt that Dr. Naik is great. One must acknowledgethe merits of his opponent. His greatness is in his ability to twist thetruth. He is dexterous with words and has an excellent memory forremembering the verses of the Quran. If he was alawyer and I was a criminal, I would want him as my attorney.
You can watch the debate by clicking on the links atthe bottom of this page while following the transcript in the followingpages. When it comes to my responses, you can click on pause and read whatI have written.
I say it with all certainty that this paper demarksthe end of Dr. Naik's glory and will bring down his empire. Once his fans read this, it would be as if a balloonis punctured. They will seethrough his veneers of lies and chicanery and his tower of cards willcrumble. The proof is overwhelming. Manyof them may write to him asking him to respond. Dr. Naik will not becausehe cannot. Perhaps he would come with silly conditions like he didbefore, asking for a face to face debate or demanding that I organize aconference attended by 10,000 people, or raise the reward of $50,000dollars that I am offering to anyone who can prove me wrong to one milliondollars. Most likely someone else will respond saying Ali Sina is notimportant for Dr. Naik to waste his time on.
These are of course lame excuses. There is nothingone can say in a face to face debate that one cannot say in writing. Theproblem of a face to face debate is that one can play 'magic' and fool theaudience, while this is not possible in a written debate.
17:81 Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehoodperished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound toperish."
When this verse was first proclaimed (when Muhammad conqueredMecca) it was anachronistic because then it was Falsehood that had taken over theTruth with force, treason and tricks. Finally, thanks to the Internet,this violent force has become helpless and Truthis reemerging. You can say that verse was false when uttered. But ironically,it was prophetic because it is very true today. Today Truth is back with vengeance andFalsehood is bound toperish.
In 2000, a televised debate between Dr. WilliamCampbell representing Christian view point and Dr. Zakir Naik representingIslamic view point took place.
On December 7, 2005, a TV channel (QTV or Al-Noor)showed a debate between William Campbell and Zakir Naik, which showed theother side of the polemic. In the past it was Zakir Naik trying to proveother religions wrong; this time it was William Campbell rebutting hisarguments.
This was fair enough. If you don’t want your religion criticized don’tdo it to other religions. When Dr. Campbell criticized Muslims forclaiming scientific discovery in the Quran one had to listen.
The TV channel took a fair decision, but when Dr. Campbell began cuttingclose to where it hurt, the program was suddenly taken off in favor ofna’at. If this was done out of fear it was not a good decision andshowed Dr Naik in a bad light. (Later news is that Dr Naik won thedebate.)
Muslims are convinced that Dr. Naik won thatdebate. In fact once you watch the video, unless you know the Quran andIslam fairly well, this is the impression that you get. Dr. Naik was soconfident and so boisterous throughout the debate that anyone watchingwould think the same.
Or did he? I went through this debate and haveanalyzed the talk of Dr. Naik paragraph by paragraph. In this paper I haveshown that Dr. Naik misrepresented everystatement he made on the Quran. There is not a single claim that Dr. Naikhas made about the Quran being miraculous or scientifically accuratethat is true.
I have entitled this paper, World’s GreatestShowman, because after watching his performance, in my opinion, it describeshim best. Dr. Naik is a magician. Magicians make you believe they cut peoplein two, make objects disappear and reappear and make rabbits come out of anempty hat. Butin reality none of that happens. The ability of the magician is to makeyou believe in things that do not happen. Dr. Naik uses a different kindof tools to perform his magic. He uses words. He can make hisaudience believe in things that are not true. In this paper, I am going toshow his tricks and what he uses as setup to make things lookdifferently. By the time you finish reading this paper, you'll beable to detect them too. But that is not all. Since all the Muslims usethe same tricks, although not with the same proficiency of Dr. Naik, you'll be ableto detect their tricks too.
A good magician is dexterous and his moves areswift - so swift that they are hard to detect. However, if you replay his actsand watch then in slow motion, or even frame by frame, you may be able to catchhis tricks. This is whatI have done with Dr. Naik's talk.
This paper will eventually be available for free download and also ina printer friendly format. It may even become available in a book format. I hope all those who have seen the debate between Dr. Campbell and Dr.Naik and were swayed by Dr. Naik's showmanship read this paper to see howhe deceived everyone. Anyone who has seen or heard Dr. Naik owes it tohimself to read this paper. He rehashes the same things in all his talks. Here, the tricks of a master magician areexposed. Read it and pass it on.
There is no doubt that Dr. Naik is great. One must acknowledgethe merits of his opponent. His greatness is in his ability to twist thetruth. He is dexterous with words and has an excellent memory forremembering the verses of the Quran. If he was alawyer and I was a criminal, I would want him as my attorney.
You can watch the debate by clicking on the links atthe bottom of this page while following the transcript in the followingpages. When it comes to my responses, you can click on pause and read whatI have written.
I say it with all certainty that this paper demarksthe end of Dr. Naik's glory and will bring down his empire. Once his fans read this, it would be as if a balloonis punctured. They will seethrough his veneers of lies and chicanery and his tower of cards willcrumble. The proof is overwhelming. Manyof them may write to him asking him to respond. Dr. Naik will not becausehe cannot. Perhaps he would come with silly conditions like he didbefore, asking for a face to face debate or demanding that I organize aconference attended by 10,000 people, or raise the reward of $50,000dollars that I am offering to anyone who can prove me wrong to one milliondollars. Most likely someone else will respond saying Ali Sina is notimportant for Dr. Naik to waste his time on.
These are of course lame excuses. There is nothingone can say in a face to face debate that one cannot say in writing. Theproblem of a face to face debate is that one can play 'magic' and fool theaudience, while this is not possible in a written debate.
17:81 Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehoodperished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound toperish."
When this verse was first proclaimed (when Muhammad conqueredMecca) it was anachronistic because then it was Falsehood that had taken over theTruth with force, treason and tricks. Finally, thanks to the Internet,this violent force has become helpless and Truthis reemerging. You can say that verse was false when uttered. But ironically,it was prophetic because it is very true today. Today Truth is back with vengeance andFalsehood is bound toperish.
Jeezuz!! What a long copy paste but no information in the article by your 'hero scholar' in Ali Sina. There are only 2 sentences that summarises the article which I have bolded and reproduce here :
In this paper I have shown that Dr. Naik misrepresented everystatement he made on the Quran. There is not a single claim that Dr. Naikhas made about the Quran being miraculous or scientifically accuratethat is true.
Where is the so called 'I have shown' evidence? Can you now provide the Quran verse number(s) and show where did Dr Naik misrepresented the Quran? Ha ha .... lari lagi lah tambi t̶r̶u̶t̶h̶.̶8̶ ... snake .8 ni. You actually have nothing lah tambi. You are just an empty vessel making incoherent noise.
So much for Ali Sina and you. Dua2 kaki kencing.
You keep on avoiding and running away from the points I raised.
- Sam Shamoun is not a scholar , as far as I know he is a school dropout. However you claim he is a scholar. Can you back up your claim?
- Why is that when muslims criticse the Bible and Christianity you keep on insisting references to scholars (BTW pastors are not scholars). However you are ok with your polemics against Islam and Quran with references to 'answering islam' and 'faith freedom'. Since when are these entities scholars?
- Why do you brush aside works by real scholars like Prof Bart Ehrman , Prof Geza Vermes , Prof Dale Tuggy (to name a few) that points out the errancy of the bible and the nature of Jesus (works which I reference to)?
Lets see how many posts do you need to answer the questions. Can you stop running and stand your ground to answer. Issit asking too much?
LOL , you made the claim by referencing to Ali Sina's article. I asked for proof. Why are you asking me to contact him or whatever he is (as we don't know what this entity actually is)? You made a claim , it is your responsibilty to provide the evidence. Unless you don't have any which is the case here. You don't have any evidence ... do you?
LOL another 2 sloppy videos.
In the first , Dr Naik stated that a muslim who terrorise a terrorist can be a terrorist as the person strike terror in a terrorist. What is wrong with such a sentence? He did not say a person must be a terrorist.
In the second video , there are 2 things that makes the Christian claim that the comforter is the holy spirit not accurate
(1) The comforter would only come when Jesus goes away. The so called holy spirit was already around before Jesus was born and when Jesus was around , you know lah the bird like creature that desended on Jesus (luk3:22) .... BTW is the holy spirit a bird? How can the comforter be the holy spirit as Jesus stated that the comforter would only come when he goes away.
(2) The comforther would glorify Jesus. Prophet Muhammad(saw) glorified Prophet Eesa(as) (or to you Jesus). We muslims glorify Prophet Eesa(as) (or Jesus to you). The Quran mention Prophet Eesa(as) (Jesus to you) numerous times and it is an article of faith for us muslims to believe in Prophet Eesa(as) (Jesus to you). Can you now show me where in the bible the Holy Spirit glorify Jesus? The holy spirit ni burung aje (luk3:22) .... terbang sini dan sana
You keep on avoiding and running away from the points I raised.
- Sam Shamoun is not a scholar , as far as I know he is a school dropout. However you claim he is a scholar. Can you back up your claim?
- Why is that when muslims criticse the Bible and Christianity you keep on insisting references to scholars (BTW pastors are not scholars). However you are ok with your polemics against Islam and Quran with references to 'answering islam' and 'faith freedom'. Since when are these entities scholars?
- Why do you brush aside works by real scholars like Prof Bart Ehrman , Prof Geza Vermes , Prof Dale Tuggy (to name a few) that points out the errancy of the bible and the nature of Jesus (works which I reference to)?
Lets see how many posts do you need to answer the questions. Can you stop running and stand your ground to answer. Issit asking too much?
Holy SPIRIT can't be the SPIRIT of islam, Bible says without Holy SPIRIT no one can confess JESUS is LORD, if Muslims would have Holy SPIRIT than they would surely confess JESUS as LORD.....
Author
Post time 3-5-2016 09:26 PM
