Thursday, 10 June 2010

Is James White Helping Muslims Clean Up Christian Ministries?

It never astounds me to note different depths Christian ministries will go to in order to win Muslim converts. I’m not just talking about “rice-converts” but of course speaking of my findings related to my studies with regard to Christian outreaches to Muslims.

I am desensitized to the gullibility of the Christian audience to simply absorb the material on offer, regardless of the intellectual bankruptcy the material in question espouses; as long as it is from a Christian source they will accept it blindly.

Obvious Example: Ergun Caner

The obvious example would be Dr Ergun Caner (Christian evangelist) and the scandal surrounding him. Of course, I and many other Muslims have been aware of Caner’s wilful deception of his gullible Christian flock for quite some time (see Appendix 1). The real concern is that it takes such a long time for responsible Christians to click on and say “hey this is not on”.
There is an investigation into the whole Caner saga and Christians have began to vocalise their concern and efforts to clean up Christian apologetics, especially Christian apologetics related to Islam.

I have often wondered why Christian evangelists/apologists misinform Muslims or misinform about Islam; I used to simply say to myself it is because the Muslim is the toughest to convert to Christianity, however more refined reflections lead to the thought it is a combination of factors, one of these factors is sheer ignorance on the part of Christians when it concerns Islam.

Dr James White: Cleaning up the Christian Ministries

This leads us nicely to a superficial warrior amongst the Christian arena of apologetics named Dr James White. He has been a source of amplification, of late, in helping bring Dr Ergun Caner to account. Some Christians (Canerites) have had misgivings concerning White’s involvement and intentions. As a Muslim who dabbles in apologetics, from time to time, I must say I was impressed (initially) with White’s stand up type of approach and his desire to do the right thing in bringing Christian outreaches to account (i.e. clean them up)

Actions are Judged on Intentions

James White’s Christian brothers, such as Peter Lumpkins and other Canerites, are viewing White with suspicion. What is White’s motive? Is it really to “seek integrity in ministry”?

It is difficult to believe James White is genuine with his guises of “integrity” and concern for the ministries. James White’s inconsistencies with regards to integrity and evangelical edification intimates White’s motives related to Caner are in some doubt.

White’s lack of regard for “integrity in ministry” is clear for all to see within his actions. Actions speak louder than words, James. (See Appendix 2 and 3)

James, Friends are Family Members you Choose

White has a weak link in his armour on the “integrity” front. He has an association (a friendship) with an internet Christian evangelist named Sam Shamoun. Shamoun is not renowned for his integrity but is renowned for his unscholarly work as well as manner within Christian-Muslim apologetics. (see Appendix 4)

The only thing which precedes Sam Shamoun is his tongue. A tongue which unleashes horrific comments directed at Muslims (individuals he is meant to be “saving”). Naturally this has repulsed a great deal of Muslims, yet James White is still friends with this sub-Christian character.

James White is so loyal to his Caner-esque friend that he has declined opportunities to denounce Shamoun publically. In fact, it is on the contrary, White has endorsed this individual by featuring his work on his blog as “excellent Quranic insights” and declaring Shamoun as having a “vast knowledge of Islam” whilst on air.

Shamoun and White do not exactly make obvious bed fellows but rest assured White’s actions of endorsement, friendship and a refusal to denounce his friend clearly highlight the pair are in league.

White has been under mild pressure from a Muslim debater, Bassam Zawadi, in the past to denounce Shamoun (see Appendix 5). This was met with James White avoiding the issue of Shamoun, basically staying silent on his pal. A silence which spoke volumes in saying White is a hypocrite and has no regard for the “integrity” and has no real desire to clean up Christian apologetics.

James White: One Rule for Caner, Another Rule for My Friend

White essentially operates a double standard when he bashes (to an obsession) Ergun Caner with sticks of “morality” and “integrity”. It is high time White removed himself from this realm of hypocrisy; either he stops with this obsession with Caner or deals some blows to Sam Shamoun with the sticks of “morality” and “integrity”.

Lumpkins and co are barking up the correct tree; White is not this paragon of sincerity and “integrity” he makes himself out to be whilst pressurizing his Christian brother (Ergun Caner), White’s motives in jumping on Caner are far from sincere. If he genuinely cared for “integrity” he would have dealt with Sam Shamoun by now, we are still waiting for this superhero of the ministries to clean his friend’s act and ministry up. This is a far more pressing issue than Caner; Ergun Caner is all but over, thanks to persistent Muslim investigation by Mohammed Khan, it hardly requires James White to focus all his “integrity” laden energy on delivering the final blow Caner. James, save some of that energy for your pal (Sam Shamoun).

James White: Refuse to be Wrong (Even When Proven to be Wrong)

The embarrassing saga for James White continues. When White with his Arabic teacher (Issam) in tow was bashing Caner’s lack of Arabic in his latest YouTube video he ventured too far, beyond his realm of expertise. White, in an attempt to show off his Arabic teacher, asked Issam to “recite” the first Surah (chapter) from the Quran from memory. Issam recited a few verses in Arabic but it was not Surah al Fatiha (the first Surah in the Quran) as a verse was missed out (see Appendix 2).

White endorsed this “recitation” and presented it as Surah al Fatiha; it was not Surah al Fatiha. I (Yahya Snow) pointed this embarrassing and offensive mistake out to White via a video response.

To my utter amazement White censored my video response and did not even have the courtesy or respect to change/remove the embarrassing and offensive presentation. White’s pride meant he was unwilling to correct his material and would rather leave the inaccurate material for his Christian audience to view, quite simply White showed a complete lack of care for accuracy and honesty; he STILL keeps this inaccurate material on his YouTube page despite knowing it to be inaccurate. White’s pride is leaving his Christian audience with misinformation. Is this the action of a paragon of “integrity” or a man who basically feels he is above error and self-correction?

Essentially, White, his ministry (Alpha and Omega Ministries) and his pal (Issam) are looking foolish in front of all the Muslim audience but White’s pride does not allow him to remove the offending clip and acknowledge his error. This is a huge crime within the setting of genuine Muslim-Christian apologetics, intellectual dishonesty and even deception.

White Chooses Sam Shamoun Over Jesus

It gets worse as White’s unscholarly nature and intellectual
dishonesty is unearthed further. White is also challenged, in the video, to explain his endorsement of Sam Shamoun’s outrageously dishonest and unscholarly practice.

Shamoun, in his attempt to support his argument against Muslim apologists, made his OWN translation of a Quranic verse up (one which was in utter disagreement with all recognised translations of the Quran). For the record it is important to point out that Shamoun is by no means qualified or authorised to translate the Quran or any Quranic verse. This did not stop him; this is James White’s friend we are talking about, scholarly boundaries do not apply to him! (see Appendix 3)

Nevertheless, James White committed abysmal intellectual dishonesty and inconsistency by endorsing it as “excellent Quranic insights”. All this despite Shamoun not even telling his audience he was making his own translation up which disagrees with all the translations on record (i.e. the audience were being wilfully misdirected by James White’s friend). There were other heinous acts of scholarly savagery which were present within the article endorsed by none other than the man of “integrity”, Dr James White

The hypocrisy (inconsistency) of White sets in because there is NO way White would allow a Muslim to do the same to the Bible. White presents himself as a staunch advocate of consistency yet disregards all he holds sacred in order to support his friend Sam Shamoun. (see Appendix 6)

Caner Vs White

Dr Ergun Caner has his faults and his fair share of controversy; so does Dr James White. Yet, White compounds his problems by jumping on the “bash Caner bandwagon”. James, pride always comes before a fall!

White abandoned Caner under the guise of “integrity” but will not abandon Sam Shamoun who is notorious for his anti-Christian behaviour and his shoddy scholarship. In fact, to further present the picture of the real Sam Shamoun it would be advisable to note Muslim apologists/debaters have refused to engage him based on a moral question. It does not get any worse for a Christian ministry when their leader is being shunned on grounds of morality, where is James White to clean up the ministries?

James White’s silence on this issue speaks volumes, it really does.
Will we be seeing Christians abandon White and bash him with sticks of “integrity” and “morality” in order to clean up the ministries?



Appendices

Appendix 1:

Ergun Caner of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary has been under scrutiny for some time:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mokhan247


Appendix 2:

James White being hypocritical, unscholarly and misleading (REFUSING to be WRONE, even When he KNOWS he is WRONG):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg6D2iuXBcw


Appendix 3:

James White challenged to prove his intellectual and scholarly integrity:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/06/dr-james-white-challenged-to-prove-his.html


Appendix 4:

One example of James White’s friend, Sam Shamoun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1mT-pw1WEc


Appendix 5:

Bassam Zawadi invites the man James white to rebuke his friend’s unchristian behaviour:
http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/james_white_s_inconsistency__his_refusal_to_speak_against_his_highly_ill_mannered_friend_sam_shamoun


Appendix 6:

Sam Shamoun making his own Quranic translation of a verse and keeping it quiet (amongst other things):
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/05/appeal-to-dr-james-white-and-his.html



Appendix 7

A couple emails sent to Dr White at alpha and omega ministries (aomin), please ignore the typographical errors, these emails were met with silence along with the shorter emails sending him links to my material referring to him:

Sir,

I noted your unapproval of my video response concerning Sam Shamoun. I would like to remind you of the serious nature of the allegations/intimations withinthe said video.

I have given up hope of you responding which leaves me with the conclusion that you support uncholarly endeavour when it concerns the Quran but Muslims are not allowed to do the same to the Bible. This is a harsh conclusion; I was hoping you would have taken the time out to clear your name instead of simply resorting to censorship.

If I may, I will leave you with a parting shot; how can you rebuke Ergun Caner and be free from a double standard?

I genuinely believe this is another sad chapter added to the huge volume which concerns misbehaviour amongst Christian outreaches (ministries) to Muslims.

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/06/dr-james-white-challenged-to-prove-his.html

Yahya Snow


Dear Sir,

I have been waiting a good while for your response to my blog postings and YouTube videos related to the Sam Shamoun saga. I was little surprised in seeing you unapprove my video.

In my view this issue concerning Shamoun is more pressing than the issue of Caner.

Please let me know whether you are considering a response, if you are not looking to respond then please letme know so I can get some closure and concentrate fully on other projects.

Thanks

Yahya Snow

49 comments:

Mohammad Khan said...

Interesting post :)

Ali said...

we should note that philippians 1:18 tells christians to lie, cheat and decieve (you can be creative with the words "false motives"). So it's no surprise we meet with Christians you have in your post.
A prime example of a Philippians 1:18 practice is Nonie Darwish. i suggest she stop embarassing herself. and it seems little rifqa barry is also in love with that verse.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, As salamu 'alikum wr wb!

Mash'Allah Yahya Snow has just dribbled past Derick Fisher, spun around Ron Artest ....he blows past Lamar Odom... spins around Pau Gasol and as he slams down the ball Kobe reaches in for the foul!

Yahya Snow for the three point play!

Very keen observation! Mash'Allah. Now let us see if James White is as sincere and consistent as he has been letting on.

Sam said...

Woe, is this all you cn do? Try to incite White against me? Why not take all of this energy and debate me publically or on Patlalk so you can expose me for all to see? We ca debate whether your god does pray and worship or we can debate whether the Angel of God is God or not?

Please prove to the apologetic world that you have the courage and the intelligence to defend your writings and that you are not just brave behind a keyboard but don't have what it takes to allow someone to cross examine and expose your pathetic replies.

You are juts like your prophet in this respect so you are being a good Muhammadan.

Time to put up or show up.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Hey look SS is back! The self glorified self starter.

I will restate my challenge to you SS. Why don't you take the entrace exam for Arabic and than post the test scores on the internet. I know of the perfect place, and we can have someone accompany you from the Muslim side in Chicago.

So SS since your able to go against both Muslim and non Muslim consensus and give us the 'correct' meaning of Arabic words in the Qur'an.

Surely you would love to take the Arabic exam and post your scores online for all to see. Naah you won't do that because than you would be buried by the grace of God.

So SS the only thing I can think to say to you is 'Go away kid, ya bother me'

Sam said...

Hey the granddiarrheaofthemouth19 has spoken, the gent who tried to get a oneness Christian to fight his battles for him since he knows he can't do it himself, much like Yahya knows that he can't defend his "rebuttals" or religion if his life depended upon it! Tell you what, I will take the exam if you are willing to go with me to a seminary and allow yourself to be tested for reading and translating the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek New Testament. You up for it?

Since I like to entertain kids I don't mind entertaining a child like you. So come on kid and let me have some fun by playing games with you since that is all you and Yahya are good for and capable of doing. So children, please do amuse me.

Yahya Snow said...

Sam, you misread the post...please re-read it has not designed to "incite" white against Shamoun.

However, it was designed to push white to do the honest and scholarly action

Please read it again.

Thanks
Peace

Yahya Snow said...

Grand...

Basketball...yuck...give us football ANY DAY OF THE WEEK(what you guys call soccer)

White doesnt seem to be listening though:(

I await your blog post related to White


All praise is due to Allah

Salam

WomanForTruth101 said...

HAHA wow. Look at Sam! By attacking the Muslims on here, what he's trying to do is get momentum. He's representing Christianity at it's finest.
I find it funny how he said he likes to entertain kids, yet he's the one acting like a at total child.

Dear Holy Spirit, may I ask why are you guiding your people in such a devilish manner?

Sam said...

Yahya, it is sad that you can't see that the reason why White ignores you is because all of the apologists such as Rogers, Wood, White etc., think your arguments are pathetic and that you wouldn't know a scholarly argument if it hit you in the face.

You yourself clearly realize this which is why you keep running away from debating any of us. You know what would happen to your lies, distortions and deceptions if you agreed to answer questions and defend your views in cross-examination. You would be exposed for the charlatan that you truly are.

It is obvious to all of us that you are no better than Nadir and Osama, Muslims whom no scholar or apologist takes seriously because of their pathetic arguments. Yet I must give Osama credit since he at least shows more courage than you and is willing to debate his arguments, as bad as they are.

BTW, you should put womanoftruth in her place and exhort her to honor her god and prophet by obeying Q. y6:108 which forbids Muslims from insulting the gods worshiped by others. Here she insults the Holy Spirit even though she has no problem with the spirit who came to Muhammad despite the fact that the spirit physically manhandled him, emotionally tortured him, allowed him to be bewitched by a Jew to the extent that Muhammad thought he was having sex with his wives when in reality he was simply pleasuring himself, commanded him to steal his adopted son's wife, rape captive women even if they were married, and prostitute women calling it mutah.

You should also remind to her that according to Muhammad's spirit she is a half wit who is worth half the man in value and intelligence, and who shall be part of the majority of those burning in hell, and therefore she should keep her mouth shut.

She can thank Muhammad's spirit for all these beautiful teachings.

Yahya, time to put up or shut up. Enough of your cowardice since we are all getting sick of it.

Yahya Snow said...

@Sam

I have noticed that to be a trait of yours; you calling everything and anything which opposes you "pathetic"

Hence, I don't take you seriously when you describe something as "pathetic", in fact, invariably it means what you are describing is good...that is my observation :)

Look Sam, how can I debate you when it would be deemed as legitimizing your anti-Christian behaviour? Sam, you know why people don't debate you, it is not because they are cowards rather it is because theywant to make a stand for respectful manners

I am getting a little sick of "debaters" being so pretentious and believing the world revolves around them; Sam, this post had nothing (NOTHING) to do with debating you or White...yet you turn it into a debate challenge???

Sam, even Christians are asking why White is remaing silent on this issue...that in itself speaks volumes...ok, Sam you won, James White has chosen you over Jesus (that is what it seams)...are you happy now?

As for my refutation material...Sam, you KNOW my material is potent and analytical...that is why even Christians question you about it, yourlack of responses are quite telling in this regard (btw, calling me a coward, insulting my Prophet,p, calling my material pathetic etc does not constitute as a repsonse in my circles)

As for Wood, I did not end his "debate career"...despite what he and others are saying. Wood has never responded to me on honour killings etc...
Sam, Muslims would like to debate Pastor Joseph...let him know when you meet him next.

Sam, why were you saying you had responded to my material (does Allah pray?)...when you had not responded to it???? I found that to be odd.

Womenforturuth...

Sister, please don't talk about their Holy Spirit...they may deem it to be insulting...and this is not what we wnat...we wantto give them dawah and (inshaAllah, god willing) ppl like Sam will come to the realisation that Islam is the Truth.

God bless all
Peace
Yahya Snow

Yahya Snow said...

Also Sam...

Why do you always mention Osama Abdullah and Nadir Ahmed? They must have left some sort of impression on you

Perhaps I will join PalTalk and listen to you guys interact

Peace

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

Well,

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

SS, Why would I want to get a oneness pentacostal to 'fight a battle for me'? What battle? I was never challenged to debate any issue if you could point out to me where I would like to see it.

Next, Why would I want to debate the pre-existence of Christ Jesus? Do you not know that preexistence itself is an oxymoron just like the term eternally begotten.

A person has to clarify what they mean when they use oxymorons. I think it only helps to advance people's understanding of complex issues.

As a Muslim a person who believes that The Prophet (saw) and Christ had existence before their manifestation on earth I do not see what debating the issue of the angel of the Lord would really seek to accomplish?

Maybe you could help to clarify what you feel it would help to establish?

You said,

" Tell you what, I will take the exam if you are willing to go with me to a seminary and allow yourself to be tested for reading and translating the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek New Testament. You up for it?"

You see Sam the reason that this doesn't work is due to the fact that I am not giving exegesis of the New Testament text. If you could show me on my blog spot where I have done that or where I claim to be a scholar of Hebrew or Greek than you would have a very excellent point to present.

However, you are claiming that the Qur'an claims that Allah s.w.t can pray. This goes against Muslim and non-Muslim consensus. By doing this you feel you are confident in your ability to exegete and make tafsir of the Qur'anic text.


This gives the impression that you are a person of some calibre in the Arabic language.

If you are able to make such bold statements about the Arabic text of the Qur'an, than surely you are someone who has amazing insights into the language. I don't understand why the public cannot be allowed to know your level of knowledge (or lack thereof) when it comes to the Arabic language.

I think it would only hope to show you as someone who is well grounded and able to speak on such matters. I'm afraid right now all some people (self included) are seeing is someone who has no interest in real dialouge but comes off as a very desperate apologist using the most bizzare polemic available.

Before I continue any discussion with you, I am asking you not only for the benefit of myself but for the benefit of Christians and Muslims as well, Have you publically apologised for making statements such as stuffing people in our Prophet's (saw) privates?

Have you recanted from this approach? Do you today stand as a man who no longer uses such language in dealing with Muslims?

This is also very important for me to clarify with you Sam Shamoun.

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

sam says "she is a half wit who is worth half the man in value and intelligence, and who shall be part of the majority of those burning in hell". Like i stated before in another post sam most definitely does not read his bible. According to the christian doctrine of original sin billions have gone to hell without knowing what they did. As for women in the bible well you only have to read the book of revelation to see that every evil is associated with women.
I also love this part from sam "please prove to the apologetic world" hahaha his ego is nearly as big as dr whites look sam you and mr white are complete nobodies in the field of christian apologetics that is why white wants to debate everyone and then tries to spin every debate as if he won, much like you, no wonder you 2 are such good bed fellows. The problem with you sam is you actually believe what you spew, i mean you and your team come up with the most absurd arguments that i think to myself this can only be accepted in the southern states of america and we all know how dumb and stupid they are. I suppose though you lot have bigger problems what with the holy spirit guiding ergun caner into telling a lot of fibs and decieving a major christian uni and creating havoc within your ranks you must question the power of one third of your Godhead

陳卓人 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ali said...

Why did Sam bring up weak arguments about islam like "stealing adopted son's wife" and "raping captive women"?

i agree with WFT101, he's only babbling to get momentum. he's a clear hater.

Yahya Snow said...

@Ali,

Whilst Sam is showing himself to be clear hater we still need to operate within the confines of Islam...thus we cannot go tit for tat and strat insulting their god.

They believe the Holy Spirit to be God...we believe the Holy Spirit to be an angel.

there will be honest Truth seekers viewing this material (inshAllah) and we do not want to be the ones responsible for pushing them away from knowledge and motivation to seek the Truth

Ali, I agree that Sam is out of order, perhaps you are not used to his comments, I am used to his comments now and am desensitized to his insults.

Sam's comments really indicate his lack of direction

May Allah guide him and all of us

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, As salamu 'alikum wr wb my sisters and brothers.

I think we have the momentum going in our favour. When David Wood and Nabeel are talking about moving out of the debate arena clearly things are going the way of the Muslims in the realm of apologetic.


Now the only thing that James White has ever done was to help sharpen Islamic apologetic; and of course our apologetic did need sharpened. We have been to reliant upon Deedat and Naik (May Allah be pleased with them both).

The biggest contribution that Wood offered was the Satanic verses issues and that was it! If you see their web site it clearly offers little to no apologetic. Because their apologetic is bankrupt not ours.

The only thing they can offer is the on going events in Muslim majority countries. I am suprised they haven't spun the story in Kyrgystan but give them time.

Of course all of these things are a source of shame and embrassment and Muslims need to step up to the plate and we need to have a system of accountability.

It is true that when Israel is aggressor to the Palestinians we need to step up; however when the vast majority of so called Muslim states deny their citizens basic freedoms and education we need to step up.

When a person hears of the condition of Bengali, Indian workers in Dubai and other places it's time for accountability.

Al hamdulillah Turkey is looking eastward again.

I have even seen statements from hard core salafis saying that it was fine to pray behind an Ibaadi Shi'a since they do not curse the Sahabah.

I think it's very important that we stand united in our efforts and we let our SCHOLARS (not us common peolpe) continue to hash out the differences among us.

So for those of you who have friends who have been away from doing the efforts of Daw'ah you need to give them a call.

To be honest we need more articulate sisters like the honorable Dr. Tabbasum to step up and write books and blog and give more voice to the issue of women in Islam.

I commend you all for your noble efforts.

VeritasEt said...

I suggest you rename your blog Yahya. Judging from the material you have put your time into a more apt title would be "Attacking Christian Apologists".

In all honesty this type of rumor-milling is more fitting of young teenage girls than an adult male who claims to be an apologist.

Anthony Rogers said...

(Part I)

Verbalizer said: "I think we have the momentum going in our favour. When David Wood and Nabeel are talking about moving out of the debate arena clearly things are going the way of the Muslims in the realm of apologetic."

Well that's funny. Not only are you being willfully ignorant, for surely it hasn't escaped your notice not only that David and Nabeel have been active on the debating front for some time, something that has never been true of you or Yahya, which means you retreated before ever even getting close to the battle field, but their reason for moving away from it has a lot to do with the fact that Muslims are just as fickle and arbitrary in following through with their debate agreements as they are when trying to make a case for Islam. The simple fact is that David and others put a lot of time and money into organizing debates only to have Muslims back out of them at the twelfth hour. So their reason for "moving out of debating" has a lot to do with the fact that Muslims back out of debates when they find any expedient to do so. Ironically, the precipitating incident for David and Nabeel making this decision has a lot to do with Yahya's campaign to misrepresent things David has said and done, all in an effort to keep people from debating him. The reason this is ironic is because all Yahya has done is get them to stop doing something he never in his life has had the confidence in Allah to do. And you think this speaks of some kind of momentum in your favor? Your bombast is not at all commensurate with the facts. You are going to have to try a lot harder than that.

Anthony Rogers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anthony Rogers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anthony Rogers said...

Secondly, how does it show any momentum in your favor when you have to concede not only that neither you nor Yahya are willing to debate and that you will do everything in your power to stir up hostilities between people to prevent other debates from happening, but also when you have to turn to non-Muslims to fight your battles? Your little excuse above hardly answers this point.

You said: "SS, Why would I want to get a oneness pentacostal to 'fight a battle for me'? What battle? I was never challenged to debate any issue if you could point out to me where I would like to see it."

The fact of the matter is, while you were not directly challenged, the reason you sought out the help of non-Muslims is because you did not believe that Yahya or any other Muslim apologist was competent to debate matters that Yahya makes bold to talk about here on his blog where he can delete people's comments at will. Lest you forgot or try to play coy, here is what you said in your e-mail to Oneness Pentacostal Jonathan Dupree asking him to take up the challenge Sam and I issued to Yahya on the Malak Yahweh:

"I felt that as Muslims we are not really theologically adept at dealing with this issue...."

It should be underscored that you are not only confessing here that both you and Yahya are unqualified to speak to this matter, even though that didn't stop either one of you from trying to wax eloquent on the issue in advance of the debate challenges that were made that suddenly forced the confession of your collective incompetence out of you, but you are here acknowledging that Muslims in general are not outfitted for such a task. In fact, here is what you said in a comment thread on this blog as justification for why it doesn't matter that Yahya will not fulfill the job description of an apologist for Islam and debate the subjects he has written against us on (and also why you had to turn to a non-Muslim rather than to another Muslim to do the job for him):

"You people really don't get it do you? Do you not realize that not a single Christian (of any stripe or denomination) has debated a scholar in Islam.

(Deedat,Shabir, AbdulMalik, Yahya Snow,Sami Zatari, Mr. Islam Answersback, Nadir Ahmed, Sheikh Jalal, Sheikh Awal, Dr. Naik, Yusuf Buccas, ad infitium none of them are scholars). By Allah it's true.

These people are local imams, or people who have taken up apologetic as a hobby.

Our Shyookh and Imams (both Sunni and Shi'a) simply are not even involved on that level with any of you. Because your false doctrines do not even warrant such high profile attention."


Another thing of interest in your e-mail was: “If Anthony Rogers declines such a debate than it is safe that we as Muslims and UPC Christians can dismiss him and any future antics as desperate ploys for self aggrandizement.”

This means, by your own admission, since Yahya has declined our debate challenges, and since your “Shyookh” and “Imams” decline to engage in such debates, we can dismiss you and them. The good news is that all of this makes it look like the momentum is in our favor.

Anthony Rogers said...

(Part III)

BTW, you are still parading your ignorance on the issue of the Malak Yahweh. The view of pre-Christian Jews and the early Christians is that the Malak Yahweh was a divine theophany, an appearance of the eternal God. Your attempt to reduce the Malak Yahweh to the level of Muhammad or even beneath him is just one more example why Islam is a heathen religion. Muhammad was just a man. He was not sent from heaven by God. He did not descend from heaven to earth or miraculously ascend back to where He was before. Only Jesus could (and did) say in truth, “Father, glorify Me with the glory I had with you before the world began”.

Also, keep your eye on the updates at Answering Islam. As I told Yahya on his other blog, I have a series coming out on the Malak Yahweh that will show just why it is wise not to engage us on this matter. (Sam also has many articles on the subject that go into it at greater length than what Yahya's indefensible "rebuttals" do not take into account.)

Soli Deo Gloria

Yahya Snow said...

@Veritas

You said:

I suggest you rename your blog Yahya. Judging from the material you have put your time into a more apt title would be "Attacking Christian Apologists".

In all honesty this type of rumor-milling is more fitting of young teenage girls than an adult male who claims to be an apologist.


I say:

I am not "attacking Christian apologists" but merely rebuking them on inconsistencies and errors. Rest assured, I would love to go back to my bread and butter work but these points against White had to be made.

Veritas, rather than being upset with me you should be directing your energy at James White, his actions are "attacking" Chrisitan apoogetics. Actions of Wood, Shamoun, White and Caner only further deepen the mistrust Muslims have of Christian missionaries. So if you really care for Christian evangelism then you would be supporting what I'm doing...really! :)

Veritas, out of interest, which "rumours" have I been spreading?

Thanks
Peace
God bless all
Yahya Snow

Yahya Snow said...

@Anthony Rogers...

Sir, the reason why I stepped in to counter Shamoun's presentation on the angel of the Lord was simply because Shamoun was adding his own bits ti the text (Bible)...he was turning it into the book of Sam Shamoun...this was not on, so I stepped in to counter his interpolations and misinformation.


In doing so, I put forward an argument against the angel being God, an argument which is still potent in my eyes. An argument which Shamoun has not countered.

I would like to remind you refusing debate is not the same as not havingthe confidence to debate.

I know you and the other Wood-ites are upset because Wood's debate career appears to have hit a stumbling block, however you should temper yourself in the knowledge that Wood was not representing your faith in a fashion which sincere Christians would have liked. Anthony, strip away your bias for a second and realise what I am doing is only beneficial to Christian apologetics.

Sure, it may seem as though Muslims are in the ascendency now but think of the bigger picture - be responsible.

Anthony, if Wood wants to continue his "debate career", he is free to do so, I am not in charge of him, (ppl should stop imputing power and influence on me:)). Wood will always have Muslim opponents to debate as there are a plethora of young Muslims in the ranks looking to get debate experience. I just don't think responsible Muslims should share a podium with David Wood. Anthony, he may be your friend but you must be able to see my point and recognise its validity?

In any case, Anthony, Wood and Nabeel were not your best debaters, they were one-trick ponies who became repetetive to an extreme.

Anthony, I do plan to post on my refusal to debate with you atthis current moment.

Anthony, sincere advice:

Become independent (stop being a writer for Wood and Shamoun), this way you will be free from the shackles of loyalty to people who are prone to manifest error...these are the same shackles which have resulted in one of your most experienced apologists (James White) being thrown into the realm of inconsistency, hypocrisy and even intellectual dishonesty.

I remember, I invited you, a while ago, to rebuke Wood...you remained silent (due to loyalty?)...and now look at the mess which resulted from a reluctance on the part of Wood's "friends" to rebuke him.

Anthony, doing the right thing is more important than sticking by your friends and employers. White is learning this to his cost.

Peace
God bless all
Yahya Snow

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Tony Tony Tony...

Your not fooling anyone. You have been a Christian since 1993. 17 years where are all your video debates? Where are all the great books published by you? Where is the material?

I think it's time for sincere Christians like you to stop begging for meals at other people's table. Get some self respect seriously. Infact the way that Sam has approached you recently has been a bit distant.

I refer to comment sections here:

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2010/06/were-going-back-in-help-needed.html

It seems as if Sam Shamoun was almost bothered by you. I think these people love psycophants and cheer leaders but even they get tired of it now and again.

Did you know Anthony that James White has not debated Bob Ross on regeneration before faith? Bob Ross has asked James White to debate him time and again, but James White won't do so.

He doesn't find it 'edifying' so we are told. Does this slow down White or his ministry? Nope!

The reason our shyookh do not enter into debates is because nothing fruitful if ever comes from these debates.

You may find it insincere or mean spirited but I am just speaking the truth. Our scholars deem rampant materialism and hedonism a threat to the people of Islam. They don't really see Christianity or your theology as a threat.

Nor should they as there are many interest that over lap. Where the two should be working together.

But you are not interested in sincere discussion which is evident because the cowardice that flows from you in your pretender war language.

You see yourself as some heroic marine, or you often fantasize about being part of the Roman imperium conquering far off lands.

Your use of 'Yahya on a campaign' and 'the debating front' and 'the battle field' is very telling.

Your ending statements in a language that you do not speak is also telling.

I make Yahya and all Muslims free of what I am telling to you here Mr. Rogers; but as I said before and I say again it's not always a beautiful day in the neighborhood.

I know you have constructed quite the alternative reality online where you imagine yourself as some mighty warrior who crushes the 'heathen' Muslims all for the glory of a few comments that say 'great job' 'you sure did crush him'.

You know that's great and all Tony but you know what? It's not healthy. Sooner or latter you are going to have to be a man and leave the bull mastif at home!

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, continued from above...

To Mr. Rogers

"Secondly, how does it show any momentum in your favor when you have to concede not only that neither you nor Yahya are willing to debate"

We are debating you right now what do you mean? Your more than welcome to come over to my blog and comment on the material I have presented don't be shy.

Atleast Yahya allows people to comment on here and trust me he is quite tolerant and flexible. It's the 'answeringmuslims' (we are for freedom hear us roar) team that has had a very nasty habit of blocking my comments from being published.

Apparently some people think the only way anything is accomplished is by doing 2 1/2 hour video debates that are uploaded on youtube.

If that was the case than why has the issue of Bible, Qur'an, Deity of Jesus, Prophethood of Muhammed (saw) been debated so many times?

I would love for both Muslims and Christians to do a tally of the number of people who left Islam for Christianity or left Christianity for Islam simply from viewing these debates.

You mentioned that I said in the e-mail,

"I felt that as Muslims we are not really theologically adept at dealing with this issue...."

That is correct and *note* I said 'THIS' issue not ALL issues.

However, I think what your basically trying to establish if you would stop pussyfotting around is that Christ Jesus is God.

That ends simply with the Mark 13:32. I just saved you from writing your treatise.

Mr. Rogers you quoted me saying,

Another thing of interest in your e-mail was: “If Anthony Rogers declines such a debate than it is safe that we as Muslims and UPC Christians can dismiss him and any future antics as desperate ploys for self aggrandizement.”


This is true. Think about this what are your motives to debate? Let's say you could 'destroy' me in a debate. Than what does it prove? How have you glorified Christ? What was the intended purpose or outcome?

Mr. Rogers seriously how many Muslim apologist have you sent an invitation to debate these issues? Zakir Naik? Shabir Ally? Nadir Ahmed? Sam Zatari? Mr.Islamanswersback? Adnan Qureshi? MDI? Who?

Or do you only seek to debate people like myself or Yahya people you feel you could gasp! 'man handle' ???

Mr. Rogers wake up! Time to leave the land of make believe get on the trolly and come back to reality.

Anthony Rogers said...

Sir, the reason why I stepped in to counter Shamoun's presentation on the angel of the Lord was simply because Shamoun was adding his own bits ti the text (Bible)...he was turning it into the book of Sam Shamoun...this was not on, so I stepped in to counter his interpolations and misinformation.

The problem is, as your "rebuttal" showed, and as the verbalizer admitted for you, you were not competent enough to make this assessment. The quality of your article also showed this; in fact, you virtually conceded this by agreeing with thegrandverbalizer's appeal to Oneness advocates to rescue you.

In doing so, I put forward an argument against the angel being God, an argument which is still potent in my eyes.

You need your eyes checked.

An argument which Shamoun has not countered.

I did it for him.

I know you and the other Wood-ites are upset because Wood's debate career appears to have hit a stumbling block, however you should temper yourself in the knowledge that Wood was not representing your faith in a fashion which sincere Christians would have liked. Anthony, strip away your bias for a second and realise what I am doing is only beneficial to Christian apologetics.

You don't speak for sincere Christians or even insincere Christians. And if you want to expose some illicit bias on my part, instead of simply asserting its existence you could always try and prove it in a debate.

Anthony Rogers said...

Sure, it may seem as though Muslims are in the ascendency now but think of the bigger picture - be responsible.

I'm afraid it was theverbalizer who made the empty claim that Muslims are in the ascendancy. I, on the other hand, thought of the big picture and easily saw through this claim.

Anthony, if Wood wants to continue his "debate career", he is free to do so, I am not in charge of him, (ppl should stop imputing power and influence on me:)).

Of course I didn't say that you have any power over Wood. Your "power" is simply that which mischief makers have over people who are gullible and easily manipulated. You are able to complain enough that your co-religionists will seize upon it as just the excuse they are looking for not to keep their word. The fact is, as this whole debacle has reminded us all, many Muslims break their word quite easily.

Wood will always have Muslim opponents to debate as there are a plethora of young Muslims in the ranks looking to get debate experience.

It looks like you tried to skip that stage.

I just don't think responsible Muslims should share a podium with David Wood. Anthony, he may be your friend but you must be able to see my point and recognise its validity?

David made your complaints look silly. You don't get the liberty of just insisting that you are right and pretending that anyone who doesn't agree with you is being insincere. That's the sort of power move that people try to play when they think they have power over others. I'm afraid you don't have any moral high ground here. You need to stick to manipulating your fellow Muslims.

Anthony Rogers said...

In any case, Anthony, Wood and Nabeel were not your best debaters, they were one-trick ponies who became repetetive to an extreme.

Spoken by a no-trick pony that wants to pretend he is on a race horse but won't enter any race.

Anthony, I do plan to post on my refusal to debate with you atthis current moment.

I'm sure it will partake of your trademark flare for drama and your penchant to attack and slander other people's character.

Anthony, sincere advice:

Become independent (stop being a writer for Wood and Shamoun), this way you will be free from the shackles of loyalty to people who are prone to manifest error...these are the same shackles which have resulted in one of your most experienced apologists (James White) being thrown into the realm of inconsistency, hypocrisy and even intellectual dishonesty.

I remember, I invited you, a while ago, to rebuke Wood...you remained silent (due to loyalty?)...and now look at the mess which resulted from a reluctance on the part of Wood's "friends" to rebuke him.

Anthony, doing the right thing is more important than sticking by your friends and employers. White is learning this to his cost.


If someone doesn't agree with you, that doesn't mean you are right and they are just being loyal. The fact is you are fighting Allah's battles the only way you feel competent to do so: through slander and manipulation. The remarks of Veritas above are exactly right. The name of your blog is a misnomer. You haven’t done a very good job at your “bread and butter”, so you trump up controversies and pretend that the people you can’t refute are not to be debated, all the while you want the unbridled freedom to attack and malign their names. Your prophet followed this same pattern, so it isn’t surprising that you are following suit. He couldn’t convert the peninsula through the supposed power of Allah’s word, therefore he turned to the sword. That’s why Islamic apologetics is losing momentum. I would like to say that Muslims like yourself and theverbalizer are doing Islam a disservice by behaving in this way, but it seems to me that this is really the best hope you guys have of getting any ground. You will always prove impotent before the power of the Gospel. In fact, even your thrashing about and attacking people verbally (even as your co-religionists are doing physically) won’t get you very far. The gates of hell will not prevail against the cause of God, His truth, and His people.

Anthony Rogers said...

Thegrandverbalizer,

Your not fooling anyone. You have been a Christian since 1993. 17 years where are all your video debates? Where are all the great books published by you? Where is the material?

I spent many years in a school of theology and later at a Christian classical school as well as sitting under the preaching of excellent Christian pastors and teachers at church. This is the sort of thing that people do first before sticking their foot in their mouth and pretending that they are competent to speak to certain issues.

I have many articles on Answering Islam that are there for you to try and refute. Since neither you nor any of your other co-religionists have refuted them, writing a book, which I may very well do at some point, is not very pressing at the moment.

As far as video debates go, I would certainly be open to that at the turn of the new year. Of course I live quite far from the heartlands of Islam. That is one reason for challenging people to written debates, something you shouldn't complain about since you have already spoken to the benefits of this medium. Of course written debates are not always easy to come by. If you want evidence of this, check out all my debate challenges to Muslim Yahya Snow. He has turned them all down.

I think it's time for sincere Christians like you to stop begging for meals at other people's table. Get some self respect seriously. Infact the way that Sam has approached you recently has been a bit distant.

I refer to comment sections here:

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2010/06/were-going-back-in-help-needed.html

It seems as if Sam Shamoun was almost bothered by you. I think these people love psycophants and cheer leaders but even they get tired of it now and again.


It is evident that you have your Muslim blinders on here and are trying to compensate for it by pretending you see something that isn't really there. I didn't get that from Sam's remarks, and of course our private correspondence tells otherwise.

Anthony Rogers said...

Did you know Anthony that James White has not debated Bob Ross on regeneration before faith? Bob Ross has asked James White to debate him time and again, but James White won't do so.

And did you know that Bob Ross wrote a refutation of your Oneness hero's? And did you know that Bob Ross is a Calvinist? Probably not. That's why you pretend it is relevant to bring up the disagreement between Dr. White and Bob Ross on the ordo salutis.

The reason our shyookh do not enter into debates is because nothing fruitful if ever comes from these debates.

You may find it insincere or mean spirited but I am just speaking the truth. Our scholars deem rampant materialism and hedonism a threat to the people of Islam. They don't really see Christianity or your theology as a threat.


People who don't feel threatened usually don't shrink back from debate. They also don't lash out and murder people whose theology they do not feel is a threat. Your countries aren't free because freedom means the freedom of the gospel to conquer the hearts of Muslims the world over.

Nor should they as there are many interest that over lap. Where the two should be working together.

But you are not interested in sincere discussion which is evident because the cowardice that flows from you in your pretender war language.


"Pretender" is a word we reserve for people who vaunt themselves to be one thing but really are another. For an example of this, you might think of people who pretend to be apologists but won't offer an apologetic for their position in a real debate.

You see yourself as some heroic marine, or you often fantasize about being part of the Roman imperium conquering far off lands.

My use of the slogan "Semper Paratus" is not dervied from the marines you goof. The Latin Bible existed long before the marines.

Anthony Rogers said...

Your use of 'Yahya on a campaign' and 'the debating front' and 'the battle field' is very telling.

I'm surprised you don't recognize this kind of language; it litters Islam's war manual and the history of your warrior-leader and his warrior followers.

Besides that, it also litters your comments above. You speak of "challenges", "stepping up", "gaining momentum", "the debate arena", "cowardice", ad nauseum.

Once again I have to remind you that we reserve such terminology for something very different than you have in mind. The word "coward" for example is usually reserved for people who are reduced to pretending they have the goods to prevail but who only spend their time making excuses for why they and their scholars do not, to use your words, step in the debate arena.

Your ending statements in a language that you do not speak is also telling.

I went to a Christian classical school, knucklehead. Latin was a requirement. It's been a while, but I can still get by.

I make Yahya and all Muslims free of what I am telling to you here Mr. Rogers; but as I said before and I say again it's not always a beautiful day in the neighborhood.

I know you have constructed quite the alternative reality online where you imagine yourself as some mighty warrior who crushes the 'heathen' Muslims all for the glory of a few comments that say 'great job' 'you sure did crush him'.

You know that's great and all Tony but you know what? It's not healthy. Sooner or latter you are going to have to be a man and leave the bull mastif at home!


Of course I am having this discussion with you online, so I'm not sure how that fact allows you to impute to me all your weird comments. You are a very strange fellow.

By the way, your fixation for my dog seems a good bit unhealthier than even what you are falsely accusing me of here. This is very strange behavior for a guy who elsewhere also showed a proclivity to read gay desires into other men.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.


Gosh Tony here you are again. If you were here right now I would give you a good knock upside your head knucklehead. Hello! Anyone home!

I said,

You see yourself as some heroic marine, or you often fantasize about being part of the Roman imperium conquering far off lands.

Your attempted response.

My use of the slogan "Semper Paratus" is not dervied from the marines you goof. The Latin Bible existed long before the marines.

Where did I make the claim that it is from the marines you big goof ball!


"This is the sort of thing that people do first before sticking their foot in their mouth and pretending that they are competent to speak to certain issues."

Hince all the more you need to boost your ego with writen debates to the cheers of 'you sure did get him Tony'.

Mr. Rogers you have said,

I have many articles on Answering Islam that are there for you to try and refute. Since neither you nor any of your other co-religionists have refuted them, writing a book, which I may very well do at some point, is not very pressing at the moment.

Links?

"That's why you pretend it is relevant to bring up the disagreement between Dr. White and Bob Ross on the ordo salutis."

<Now this impressed me the fact that you even know about the ordo salutis! Honestly I thought you would be clueless about it.

Do you agree with Ross that White is teaching heresy? Or do you believe that Bob Ross needs a dose of reality? Or would you just prefer to quitely walk away?

But it is relevant you think just because you go around issuing debates at whim and if people do not respond to them it some how means that Islam is 'running scared'?

This is very silly. Muslims and Christians debate all the time.

I still see you have not bothered to respond to the Mark 13:32 passage which completely refutes your Malak Yahweh argument.

Absolute silence again more pussyfooting from you.

"Your countries aren't free because freedom means the freedom of the gospel to conquer the hearts of Muslims the world over"

I am completely suprised that a man who likes the works of Van Till prefers liberalism over Federal Vision. Learn something new every day.

"I went to a Christian classical school, knucklehead. Latin was a requirement. It's been a while, but I can still get by."

I doubt it knucklhead.

About the bull mastif I personally love animals. However, the reason it comes to mind so often is 9/10 of the guys I know own one are rank cowards who couldn't hold thier own in a one on one or owe some drug dealer money.

However, you are probably among the 1/10 that are not.

and no Mr. Rogers I still won't be your neighbor.

Anthony Rogers said...

Gosh Tony here you are again. If you were here right now I would give you a good knock upside your head knucklehead. Hello! Anyone home!

About the bull mastif I personally love animals. However, the reason it comes to mind so often is 9/10 of the guys I know own one are rank cowards who couldn't hold thier own in a one on one or owe some drug dealer money.


Are you the same guy who complained above about all the martial terminology in my posts? You sure don't waste time contradicting yourself. You should really try and remember what you say so you don't turn around and play into your own hands.

I would tell you why your remarks above are far from true, but I get far more entertainment watching you pretend you have some insight into my personal history.

As for my dog, maybe it will help you get her off your mind if I tell you she is fixed.

Where did I make the claim that it is from the marines you big goof ball!

Actually, I meant to say that you are falsely assuming it is from the US Coast Guard. It isn't; you are simply ignorant.

Links?

As for your request for the links, you will simply have to ask Yahya if I can post them or else go to the authors section on Answering Islam and you will find my articles. As it is, in the past Yahya has erased all links to my refutations of Islam and of his material in particular.

Now this impressed me the fact that you even know about the ordo salutis! Honestly I thought you would be clueless about it.

Do you agree with Ross that White is teaching heresy? Or do you believe that Bob Ross needs a dose of reality? Or would you just prefer to quitely walk away?


Now you see, you are so busy pretending you know something about me and making up what you don't that you are surprised I am familiar with such issues.

For the record, although it is not relevant to you, and even answering the question I realize may give the false impression that you have some insight into such matters, I agree with Dr. White.

I still see you have not bothered to respond to the Mark 13:32 passage which completely refutes your Malak Yahweh argument.

Why would I respond to Mark 13:32? As Christians we are taught to submit to what God has said, not "respond" to it. Is "responding" to what God says a Muslim practice?

If you think the passage teaches something that contradicts the Old Testament's teaching on the Malak Yahweh, then you are going to have to argue the point and not just assert it.

If you think it contradicts New Testament Christology, then you need to tell me why so I can educate you.

We have dealt with the argument that some Muslims have tried to make from the passage a number of times on AI.

I am completely suprised that a man who likes the works of Van Till prefers liberalism over Federal Vision. Learn something new every day.

And I am surprised you pretend to know about things you obviously don't. The Federal Vision controversy post-dates Van Til (nota bene: one "L" in Van Til), and I am not an advocate of liberalism. By the way, the Federal Vision is not the same as Christian Reconstruction either, a mistake you make on your blog. And Van Til was not an advocate of the latter either.

I doubt it knucklhead.

As for your doubts about my education, what do I care? Besides, it is easily provable. In fact, you can see that for yourself by picking up an issue of some of the magazines or journals I have written for.

Thanks for acting like you know things. You obviously don't.

Yahya Snow said...

Anthony...

So you are attacking me now:(

Anthony, it is surprising that you and your associates champion free speech etc yet there would be noooo way Shamoun/Wood/ChrisitanPrince/DavidWood/VFX would allow the comments you have made and the attacks you have just aimed at us, our fellow Muslims and our faith.

Anthony, Shamoun's horrifically offensive comments are allowed yet Wood and Shamoun operate real censorship.

No longer do Christians have this belt of "free speech" to beat Muslims with.

As it is late i will quickly address your claim that I am attacking. Anthony, i am simply rebuking unShristian behaviour and deception.

White (as shown in this post) is clearly involved in hypocrisy, misinformation and intellectual dishonesty. i simply call him out on it...he remains silent and his silence speaks greatly towards his guilt

Wood, I simply called out his unChristian behaviour...others did the same, including his friend of six years (F.Qureshi). So Anthony, please do not present me as the bad guy...I'm doing the "Christian" thing, yet because your firends are on the receiving end of the rebukes you attack me :(

Perhaps a more positive stance would be for you tosit your pals down and get them to behave in a more scholarly and responsible fashion.

As for Wood making my rebukes look "silly"...anthony,I don't even think you believe that...you are too smart to fall for that.

The potency of my rebukes are highlighted by the fact that Wood's friend disagreed with wood too (he too thought Wood was unChristian) and Sheikh Awal (a respected debater) considered Wood unworthy of debate based on his (Wood's) behaviour.

So, Anthony, you are flogging a dead horse my friend.

As for your material...I have had a quick skim and it is offers nothing which makes me want to believe an angel in the Old Testament is God.

I will respond to your article in the course of this week, don't expect the response to be lengthy.

PS, when is part two coming out???

You do like to leave us in suspense...i will just look at part one for now.

Peace
May Allah bless all. Ameen

Yahya snow

Anthony Rogers said...

So you are attacking me now:(

What are you referring to here? I have made some obvious observations that can hardly be gainsaid. If you would not be as overly general as you often are and would actually address the specifics of what I have said, then I might be able to explain things to you better. As it is you aren't refuting anything by make such vague comments.

Anthony, it is surprising that you and your associates champion free speech etc yet there would be noooo way Shamoun/Wood/ChrisitanPrince/DavidWood/VFX would allow the comments you have made and the attacks you have just aimed at us, our fellow Muslims and our faith.

I have never criticized you or anyone else for deciding that certain people cannot behave well enough to have a conversation with others and should therefore be blocked. You were banned from Answering Muslims twice for your behavior, agree or disagree as you may with David's decision. Your comments about how his behavior ought to disqualify him in the eyes of other Muslims only came after this fact and hardly look sincere on your part for this (and other) reason(s). But you will have to search your own motives.

Anthony, Shamoun's horrifically offensive comments are allowed yet Wood and Shamoun operate real censorship.

The reason you were banned on AM has been explained many times. It wasn't for reason of censorship. Sam banned you on his Youtube page because you had a block on all comments coming through on your videos (just like you used to screen everything on your blog and delete whatever you didn’t like). And lest you forget, you deleted many of my comments on this blog before and then went and entirely erased every comment I made here before a certain date. In none of the posts of mine that you erased was I caustic and that has never been your stated reason for deleting them. You have always said it was because you disagreed with the ideas I was communicating or the information I was providing. That is called censorship.

No longer do Christians have this belt of "free speech" to beat Muslims with.

Of course we do. Free speech is absent wherever we find Islam in the ascendancy.

Anthony Rogers said...

As it is late i will quickly address your claim that I am attacking. Anthony, i am simply rebuking unShristian behaviour and deception.

This seems obviously not to be the case.

White (as shown in this post) is clearly involved in hypocrisy, misinformation and intellectual dishonesty. i simply call him out on it...he remains silent and his silence speaks greatly towards his guilt.

I don't know why White is "ignoring" you, but there are any number of possible and quite legitimate reasons for doing so. As you can only imagine, there are many young Muslim e-pologists (and others) who think he needs to address them. How could he possibly do so? But I don't know his reasons; I can't speak for him.

Wood, I simply called out his unChristian behaviour...others did the same, including his friend of six years (F.Qureshi). So Anthony, please do not present me as the bad guy...I'm doing the "Christian" thing, yet because your firends are on the receiving end of the rebukes you attack me :(

You have a lot to do with sewing the hostilities and stirring up discord between men like Farhan and David. I like Farhan as far as Muslims go, but he is a Muslim and therefore he has what I would consider to be a skewed outlook on the world and an improper standard for measuring such things. The fact that Farhan, a Muslim, agrees with you over David is hardly surprising. Did it pass your notice that Christians like me agree with David? This is par for the course.

Perhaps a more positive stance would be for you tosit your pals down and get them to behave in a more scholarly and responsible fashion.

If I did such a thing, I wouldn't be trying to get them to behave more like you. Your scholarship is lacking in my eyes.

As for Wood making my rebukes look "silly"...anthony,I don't even think you believe that...you are too smart to fall for that.

Flattery will get you nowhere. I most certainly believe what I said.

Anthony Rogers said...

The potency of my rebukes are highlighted by the fact that Wood's friend disagreed with wood too (he too thought Wood was unChristian) and Sheikh Awal (a respected debater) considered Wood unworthy of debate based on his (Wood's) behaviour.

I addressed this above.

So, Anthony, you are flogging a dead horse my friend.

But I am flogging you!

As for your material...I have had a quick skim and it is offers nothing which makes me want to believe an angel in the Old Testament is God.

The question isn't whether you believe the word of the prophets: you are a Muslim; no one expects you to. The question is whether you will have enough personal and scholarly integrity to acknowledge that that is just what the Old Testament, ancient Judaism, and the early Christians all believed and taught. I'm not holding my breath.

I will respond to your article in the course of this week, don't expect the response to be lengthy.

I won't.

PS, when is part two coming out???

Not sure yet. I have another series (in five parts) that was "completed" before this one but held off on having it published to get some feedback and chase down some issues related to the subject. I may work on finalizing that first, or I may finish the series on the Malak Yahweh. As well, I also have to decide whether it will be a three, four or seven part article. I have envisioned organizing the material in several different ways. So, we will see.

You do like to leave us in suspense...i will just look at part one for now.

I hope you enjoy it and it leaves you panting for more.

Yahya Snow said...

Anthony...

You said:

I have never criticized you or anyone else for deciding that certain people cannot behave well enough to have a conversation with others and should therefore be blocked. You were banned from Answering Muslims twice for your behavior, agree or disagree as you may with David's decision. Your comments about how his behavior ought to disqualify him in the eyes of other Muslims only came after this fact and hardly look sincere on your part for this (and other) reason(s). But you will have to search your own motives.


I say, that is utterly incorrect, my rebukes of Wood were prior to him banning me, if you remember I was the one who criticised Wood when he was insulting Nadir and Abdallah by featuring an immature poll related to them...subsequently Wood removed the poll...i guess my rebuke worked.

I also rebuked Wood for his post on Nadir ahmed...which was a personal attack gone tooooo far.

So my rebukes of unChristian behaviour on the part of your associates are long standing and were not out of "revenge" as you are wrongly intimating.

In any case, regardless of the motives my rebukes are potent and your men (Wood,Shamoun and White) are all guilty as charged.

People question the motives of White rebuking and exposing Ergun Caner....regardless of the motive...white is right...the Chrisitanevangelist Ergun Caner is bringing the ministries into disrepute through his dishonesty.

As forWood banning me,..his recent ban was due to me "cancelling" his debates....this was immature on his part.

As for his intital ban...well, I've already addressed it. there was noooo way that was for "bad behaviour"...if you call that comment (bad behaviour then surley your friend Sam shamoun takes the biscuit...oh yeah, I forgot...Shamoun is above reproach in your eyes.

Here:
Ban worthy discourse?:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6590312557191237519&postID=8397958699663275226


Anthony, if youcannot see howwrong and inconsistent you are then I am concerned...I ask you to rethink

this is all getting a little futile and tiresome...I'm off

I bid you good night...I'm sure we will talk again after my response toyour article...God willing

Peace

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Mr. Rogers you said,

"As for my dog, maybe it will help you get her off your mind if I tell you she is fixed."

The problem is you are not fixed Mr. Rogers. Especially when you sign off,

"I hope you enjoy it and it leaves you panting for more."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoregulation

Indeed I am worried. Sorry Tony but you served the pitch and I knocked it out of the park!

"Where did I make the claim that it is from the marines you big goof ball!"

"Actually, I MEANT TO SAY that you are falsely assuming it is from the US Coast Guard. It isn't; you are simply ignorant."

The correction to your own error would be appreciated accept that you have corrected nothing.

"By the way, the Federal Vision is not the same as Christian Reconstruction either, a mistake you make on your blog."

May I have the quote from my blog where I say they are the same thing?

"Why would I respond to Mark 13:32? As Christians we are taught to submit to what God has said, not "respond" to it. Is "responding" to what God says a Muslim practice?

If you think the passage teaches something that contradicts the Old Testament's teaching on the Malak Yahweh, then you are going to have to argue the point and not just assert it."

I have done exactly that! I have argued the point and I have asserted it. I even saved you the trouble of writing 20 page treaties.

It doesn't matter if Christ incarnated a thousand times as an angel. I already told you it doesn't effect my theology.

However, angel or no angel Mark 13:32 still applies. Are you trying to assert that the MALAK YAHWEH knew all things as the creator of the universe does?

If so than you need to stop pussyfooting around and show us the text.

As far as James White is concerned it looks like you are both in agreement on heresy.

So you and Bob Ross and White are all Trinitarian well isn't that nice.

However, I am with Bob Ross on this one. You cannot prove any where that regeneration is prior to faith.

Your damnable heresy was squelched long ago by those much more adept than myself.

Let me know when your serious.

Anthony Rogers said...

Verbalizer,

I'm not sure what you knocked out of the park. If you were trying to be witty you obviously labor under a different idea of what is considered witty.

As for the correction to your assumption that I picked up the phrase Semper Paratus from the Coast Guard, you stand corrected.

As for your conflation of Christian Reconstruction with the Federal Vision, here is one place:

"However, a word to the wise now you know why all the cronies of James White and those who dote on him will NEVER come to this blog and address the issue of why James White will NEVER debate Gary Demar on Federal Vision.

Any Christian who wants to turn the United States into a theocracy should be very careful what they wish for. The question would be this 'who's version of Christianity would be doctrine and who would be burned for heresy'?

Would all Catholics, LDS, Jehovah's Witness, SBC , Methodist be burned alive for not accepting the teachings of Calvinism? Or how would the so called "reformed baptist" and presbyterians work out their differences on baby baptism? Which doctrine is in error here?

Those of you who have not looked into Dominionism, Christian Reconstructionism, or Federal Vision would be wise to do so."
(here)

Anthony Rogers said...

And you do the same thing again in another post:

I had a feeling that James White would refrain from debating Gary Demar on the issue of "Federal Vision". I explored that in my blog entry here: http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/05/james-white-to-debate-gary-demar-on.html

The reason is simple: Anyone who stands in the way of the Christian reconstructionist or Theonomy would be utterly crushed! The United States will become a theocracy one day. If the Catholics, Baptist, Mormons, Muslims and others don't like it too bad!"
(here)

Anthony Rogers said...

As for Mk 13, You haven't told us what the passage teaches or why it contradicts the OT's teaching on the Malak Yahweh or why it is contrary to orthodox Christology. If you are just going to keep asserting that it is, then I will just assert that it isn't. The fact that you think an assertion is equivalent to an argument goes a long way in explaining to us how you became convinced that Islam is true.

As far as James White is concerned it looks like you are both in agreement on heresy.

Now you see, even with my caveat I knew you would falsely conclude that I was granting that you are somehow competent to say anything about these matters.

So you and Bob Ross and White are all Trinitarian well isn't that nice.

Yeppers.

However, I am with Bob Ross on this one.

No you aren't. And why would I care anyway?

You cannot prove any where that regeneration is prior to faith.

Says you.

Your damnable heresy was squelched long ago by those much more adept than myself.

That's laughable. Squelched by who? Where? When? Show me one ecumenical creed that defines it as "damnable heresy". Show me one Protestant Confession that calls it "damnable heresy". In fact, show me where Calvinistic Trinitarian Bob Ross says it is "damnable heresy".

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord,

Mr. Rogers

"As for the correction to your assumption THAT I PICKED UP THE PHRASE Semper Paratus FROM the Coast Guard, you stand corrected."

Actually, your attention to detail is not that great.

What I said was


"You say Semper Paratus the quote of the United States Coast Guard but no amount of preperation can prepare one for the hurricane!"

It is the quote of the United States Coast Guard. But I did not say you got it FROM there.

It is laziness like this and lack of attention for detail that would cost you many debates.

Another thing that clearly shows me your not ready for a debate with me is again simple sloppiness.

"By the way, the Federal Vision IS NOT THE SAME as Christian Reconstruction either, a mistake you make on your blog."

May I have the quote from my blog where I say they are THE SAME thing?

Now it is obvious to all who have seen you put your foot in your mouth try and wiggle and squirm by your little maneuver to change from saying 'THE SAME' to saying,

"As for your CONFLATION of Christian Reconstruction with the Federal Vision, here is one place:"

It is a disingenuous maneuver like that shows how futile your debate 'skills' are.

Again your tip toeing away from Mark 13:32 is obvious.

"As for Mk 13, You haven't told us what the passage teaches or why it contradicts the OT's teaching on the Malak Yahweh or why it is contrary to orthodox Christology."

My use of Mark 13:32 is only to be used as a proof text that Christ Jesus and the Angels (Malak Yahweh included) do not have FULL KNOWLEDGE and do not KNOW the day or the hour.

Infact all you do is more pussyfooting. This is quickly followed up by

"The fact that you think an assertion is equivalent to an argument goes a long way in explaining to us how you became convinced that Islam is true."

Again more bluster that doesn't add anything.

You cannot prove any where that regeneration is prior to faith.

"Says you."

Wow! Can someone say, 'abandon ship'?

Absolutely no attempt to show regeneration is prior to faith.

Anthony Rogers said...

You are starting to bore me.

About the only thing interesting in your last post is the statement that I am not ready for a debate with you.

I'll come back to your self-flattering remark in a moment. Very quickly let me just say that your evident dissimulation on what you meant by bringing up the latin phrase Semper Paratus and the motto of the US Coast Guard is evident. All the more evident is the fact that you either don't know logic or have problems using the English language when you deny that you were identifying Christian Reconstruction, theonomy, dominionism, etc. with the Federal Vision.

In the first place, you said White won't debate DeMar on the Federal Vision (and let me just point out here that your confusion is evident right here for DeMar has never identified himself as a Federal Visitionist though he is a Reconstructionist and Theonomist).

You then said: THE REASON is simple: Anyone who stands in the way of the Christian reconstructionist or Theonomy would be utterly crushed!

If you weren't trying to identify the two, then by all means I would love for you to show me how "The Reason" you offered is supporting evidence of your claim why White won't debate Gary DeMar on the Federal Vision.

As far as your remarks on Mark 13, in light of your pompous, self-flattering claim above, I hereby express my willingness to debate the matter with you. As your inferior, you shouldn't have any problem putting me in my place.

Let me know when you would like to debate. Otherwise I have no further interest for the time being in playing with someone whose deficiency in logic, language, Christian theology, ecclesiastical history, etc., are only too evident.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Mr. Rogers you lack of attention to detail, pussyfooting and attempt at deflection is what I would say is boring.

In your own words Mr. Rogers.

"I have no further interest for the time being in PLAYING with someone whose deficiency in logic, language, Christian theology, ecclesiastical history, etc., are only too evident."

Evident enough that you offer no attempt to respond to Mark 13:32.

We already have debated and you have already fled the scene. The interesting thing is that you'll come back for more.

Since that is the case and with Yahya's permission you can have the last text on this matter.

Your too predictable Tony.

So since your done PLAYING with me why don't you go run along now...

As I said to Sam, "Go away kid, you bother me"