Sunday, 14 April 2013

Questioning Sam Shamoun about David Wood of

Sam Shamoun Detests Cross Dressing
Sam Shamoun, you were looking tremendously serious when reading the Old Testament verse which condemned cross-dressers so I take it you actually believe this portion of the Old Testament is still a ‘live’ teaching for the Christians of today (i.e. it has not been abrogated by the New Testament).

Sam Shamoun Ashamed of David?
No cross-dresser would pass you on the footpath (let’s Americanize it for you…sidewalk) after seeing your passionate contortions of the face and hearing you categorically condemn cross-dressers via Deuteronomy 22:5

I’m not too sure if you are serious though. Your partner, David Wood, was agreeing with you and all that but he was found to be wearing his wife’s pink nightie on camera.

Could you explain to the numerous readers of this blog (getting closer to half a million visits since its inception) what is going on here.

Has Deut 22:5, according to your theology, been abrogated by the NT? If it has not been abrogated then…

Have you rebuked this cross-dresser? If you have not rebuked him….why not?

Sam Shamoun v David Wood: I bet Dr Nabeel Qureshi is Glad he Jamp Ship

A Lesson for the Haters

Sam, the lesson you can learn from this episode is, when people of your ilk come out with one of those nutty lies to insult a Prophet of God, you only wind up making yourself look foolish. Really…just have a gander at the Sam Shamoun section or the David Wood section. With each year you become less relevant…it’s time to change your ways!


Rabbis v an Islamophobe

Kamal Saleem with 3 different conversion stories

Muslims persecuted in Spain


Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

How I came to Islam by Cesar Yusuf Guardado

Yahya Snow said...

Firstly it's a complete and utter lie to claim Prophet Muhammed wore his wife's clothing. An absolute lie. It's a reference to house as shown by Ayamen1 here:

Even the related hadith would tell the honest enquirer that it's not a dress. I guess some Christian folk have no regards for honesty.

As for Dave - he does not receive revelations. So according to your intimation here, Dave (or anybody other Christian) can break the rules within the Bible for purposes of 'satire'.

Are you and Dave going to have a gay marriage when having a go at homosexuals in New York (for reasons of satire)?

Are you and Dave going to produce your own pornography to 'satirize' the porn industry? Most of it is pumped out from America...Perhaps you and Dave should talk about it...or maybe not as I wouldn't want you to do something silly in order to 'satirize' it whilst talking about it.

Or maybe you and Dave will go out to your local mall to pick up girls whilst talking/'satirizing' adultery and fornication.

I doubt Samuel Green will go along with any of that.

Think about it. Don't allow your desire to defend your buddy make you support silly argumentations.

Anthony Rogers said...

In your year off you still haven't learned anything.

First, denying something isn't the same thing as refuting it. You have done the former (ad nausea). Now it is time for the latter.

Second, evaluating something and coming to a different conclusion from someone else is not evidence that we "have no regards for honesty." We just don't assume evidence should be forced to hunch over and bow down to Muhammad. Evidence wasn't created to hymn Muhammad's praises but to signify the truth.

That's right. David doesn't receive revelations. But David is no dummy. If you see the big boys lifting weights, then you lift weights to get big. If wearing women's clothing worked for Muhammad, why not for David? He will be a prophet in not time. Just wait and see.

There is a lot of porn emanating from unbelievers in America. No doubt about it. Believe it or not there is also whole religion that institutionalizes adultery and fornication and calls it holy and religious. Christians like myself abominate the porn industry and the adulterous institution of Islam.

Think about it. Don't allow your desire to defend a false prophet make you support silly arguments.

Radical Moderate said...

Snow man, what are your thoughts about Paul Williams self destructing and rebuffing your interventions