Sam Shamoun -Gets Paid For Bad Apologetics

Christian Seems to Believe Rape is Allowed in Bible

 
We have already seen raping captives is not allowed in Islam however this video is interesting for those who bash Muslims. Here we see an odd Christian apologist who appears to believe rape of female captives is allowed in the Bible!

Strange Christian Apologist Believes Rape is Allowed in the Bible?

If video does not play, please see:

 

Friday, 26 July 2013

The worst Christian explanation of ‘Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.’?

 
Now I’ve witnessed shoddy Christian apologetics to the extent where the Christian apologist is making stuff up or just presenting nonsense. Here we see a Christian apologist, Sam Shamoun of ABN, presenting an explanation of Numbers 31:17-18 which he seems to have just made up on the fly.

Do these Christian apologists actually think about what they are saying or do they automatically assume their Christian audience is half-asleep and/or stultified of mind?

Here’s the passage the Christian apologist attempts to explain:

17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. [Numbers 31:17-18 NIV]

Watch this astonishingly confusing explanation of Numbers 31:17-18


If video does not play, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRoXngFaiDY

What’s that I hear?

Do I hear a stampede of disgruntled Christian donors to this Christian apologist’s house asking for their cash back? Do I hear Bassim Gorial calling the bank to cancel any cheques he handed this man for such an insufficient and confusing explanation?

I remember reading in a book that said all the intelligentsia left Christianity for communism a few decades ago. I genuinely believe Christians have lost many of their intellectuals to secular humanism in current times and thus are reliant on a string of apologists who are not the best intellectually (in the case of this Christian apologist, Sam Shamoun, almost bankrupt in this regard).

I can say I’ve had some dealings with this particular apologist, Mr Shamoun, he strikes me as somebody who is quite dim and even lacking mental balance:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Sam%20Shamoun

The question I have for the Christians out there, why are you relying on folklike the apologist in the video? Surely it only presents you and your community in a negative (and even intellectually dishonest) light…

 

I publish this video to counter this man’s money making operations on the net and warn people from his shoddy and intellectually dishonest apologetics. Do you really think he should get paid for such arguments?

Explanation

This is one of the problems with amateur Christian apologists who are collecting cash on the net. Rather than just saying they don’t know, they turn up with a dud light-bulb stuck to their head presenting theories that just don’t make sense and/or make them look intellectually dishonest.

As for the Numbers 31:17-18 that Christians (and Jews) struggle with, why not just accept a Muslim understanding of them – that’s to say you don’t know whether those teachings are actually from God or just forgeries added to the OT?! Simple. Problem solved!

Christians need to stop employing amateur Christian apologists who make stuff up to make them feel better about Old Testament passages they don’t understand.

For a believer, if they believe God did something they don’t need to make up excuses.

Invitation to something better

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com/

 

Saturday, 20 July 2013

Muhammad ‘Pedophile’ Lies refuted

 
ABN’s Sam Shamoun helps show Prophet Muhammad’s (p) marriage with Aisha was Biblical

To the Angry Christians out there who are insulting Muslims based on Muslim minimum age of sex being puberty, please look into your Bible and realise it’s the SAME for the Bible too.

The problem with these Christian critics is simple, they just don’t know what their own Bible teaches them. These people are so busy putting others down yet don’t even realise they are putting their own Bible down (literally and metaphorically) in the process.

There is an interesting sign for those who reflect, it’s interesting that the biggest criticism (marriage to Aisha) Christian critics presented to attack the Prophetic brother of Prophet Jesus (Prophet Muhammad pbut)is actually perfectly acceptable according to the Bible. Think about it.

It’s time for these Christians to repent to God (the God of Prophet Jesus).

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Christian apologist claims Bible age of consent is puberty:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/age-of-consent-in-bible-is-puberty.html

 

Monday, 15 July 2013

Is Sam Shamoun Mentally ill?

 
 
 
This piercing article by The Muslim Debate Initiative’s Ijaz Ahmad is another indictment of shame on Sam Shamoun’s apologetics career. Apart from nobody from mainstream Muslim communities taking him seriously his own colleagues and co-religionists have denounced him in categorical terms. Also note the deceptive ploys which Shamoun and his crew play in order to dupe a mainstream Muslim apologist to debate him:

Why Sam Shamoun Abuses Muslims and Former Christians

Many persons have questioned why Sam Shamoun has a persistent need to curse, insult, mock and attack Muslims and former Christians. Numerous answers have been given, many of his former friends have come forward, sympathetically to us Muslims and apologized to us, and distanced themselves from his behaviour. Very recently in fact, I became privy to a conversation Sam had and from the first response he gave, it was filled with childish insults, words not befitting of any adult, mature, human male. Yet, today I’d like to present, directly from the horse’s mouth, why Shamoun hates Muslims and apostate Christians. The following comment was posted by Shamoun on Br. Paul Bilal William’s website on December 7th, 2012, at 9:41 PM via his Facebook account (take with permission from Br. Paul’s website):
BTW Paul, the reason I get on you is because of your blasphemous rants and smear campaigns against committed Evangelicals like David Wood and James White. if you were to stop with your filthy blasphemies, i.e. “Don’t crucify me” (comment to Andalusi in your first debate with Green), “Praise the Lord, Jesus has spoken,” then I would actually hail you as a top Muslim apologist who is actually quite well read when it comes to current NT scholarship. I don’t mind your arguments, what I mind is your hatred of Evangelical Christianity and blasphemous slurs against the Jesus of the NT. If you want more people to take you seriously then you need to drop the rhetoric. If you do then I will treat you with respect. Let me know how you want to proceed from here on end.
Let’s dissect Shamoun’s reasoning:
BTW Paul, the reason I get on you is because of your blasphemous rants and smear campaigns against committed Evangelicals like David Wood and James White.
Apparently, because Br. Paul and Muslims like him who do not agree with Sam’s friends, they deserve to be insulted and abused. According to Mr. Shamoun, once you disagree with his ‘Evangelical friends’, you’re open game for whatever comes out of his mouth. Is this proper Christian behaviour? Do James White and Samuel Green agree with this level of decorum? Let us continue:
if you were to stop with your filthy blasphemies, i.e. “Don’t crucify me” (comment to Andalusi in your first debate with Green), “Praise the Lord, Jesus has spoken,” then I would actually hail you as a top Muslim apologist who is actually quite well read when it comes to current NT scholarship.
Now, isn’t this the pot calling the kettle black? Sam Shamoun who is renowned for blaspheming the Islamic faith, finds it atrocious that a Muslim could use sarcasm! I don’t seem to follow Shamoun’s reasoning here, how is it okay for him to blaspheme the Islamic faith and call for others (even though they clearly aren’t) to stop doing so, when he himself spends hours doing so himself? As you can see in this comment, Sam Shamoun concedes to Br. Paul being one of the top Muslim apologists who is quite well read – something Sam himself isn’t.
I don’t mind your arguments, what I mind is your hatred of Evangelical Christianity and blasphemous slurs against the Jesus of the NT.
To be a bit technical, if I as a Muslim were to say that I disbelieve that Christ is God – that is a blasphemy, and I’ve never really seen a Muslim say anything more than this, but publicly deny Christ’s alleged deity. Now, in Sam’s mind this is a blasphemous slur, but he has no problem insulting the Islamic God on a daily basis with far greater intensity, there is not one email exchange that I’ve had with Sam that has not included an insult towards Allaah ta ‘aala or Muhammad (peace be upon him). The hilarity of this comment is that Shamoun is focused on abusing others and then cries wolf when anyone disagrees with his faith. Clearly these are hallmarks of a mentally unstable individual who is in denial of his own actions.
If you want more people to take you seriously then you need to drop the rhetoric. If you do then I will treat you with respect. Let me know how you want to proceed from here on end.
Lastly, Sam should take his own advice. No Muslim da’ee looks at Sam respectfully because of his rhetoric. Sam has had to invent magnificent lies to hide his shame and embarrassment from being sidelined by both the Muslim and Christian communities. He gladly claims that no Muslim would dare share a stage with him for a debate, but many have in the past, but due to his abusive, petulant, childish and mentally unstable behaviour, many persons really don’t want to bother wasting their time on him. Very recently a group of Christians led by Pastor G. Saieg had to secretly set up a dialogue with Muslims in Toronto, Canada. They refused to say that Shamoun was accompanying them. The night before the event, they revealed his participation and the organizers pulled out. It is not because they are afraid of him, but they wish not to have a foul mouthed individual share a stage with them.
 
Ironically enough, the dialogue did happen, without Shamoun, thereby implicitly accepting that he is not an individual that is needed or one which they cannot do without – he is just as dispensable to the Muslim community as he is to the Christian community.Another lie that Shamoun has had to invent, is that the Muslim Debate Initiative is using ‘mafia’ behaviour to stop popular Muslim speakers from engaging him. As a contributing member for MDI, and as one who speaks to, sometimes on a daily basis with Muslim speakers – this cannot be furthest from the truth. Not a single speaker is ‘afraid’ of Sam, the very reason he gives for abusing Br. Paul, is the same reason Muslim speakers refuse to engage with him – drop the abusive rhetoric, drop the insults, drop the curses.
 
What Sam does not know and he should know, is that several of his former colleagues have spoken to Muslim speakers such as myself and they have informed us that they themselves do believe he is mentally ill, many of them have been victims of his insults – such to the extent they’ve cut working relationships with him.
 
Sam, if you’re reading this, remember, we don’t fear you – we just don’t respect you because of your behaviour.
 
wa Allaahu ‘Alam.
 

NOTE: Article written by Ijaz Ahmad of Calling Christians. Highlighting is my own. The original article can be seen here:
http://callingchristians.com/2013/07/15/why-sam-shamoun-abuses-muslims-and-former-christians/

My opinion: Sam Shamoun has taken to abusing me via email and also spam comments on this blog. He does not like people pointing out his errors, outright dishonesty and misbehaviour. Folk such as Anthony Rogers continue to hang with him (perhaps out of fear or a misguided sense of Christian unity) whilst others such as Negeen Mayel have left the anti-Muslim cesspit which Shamoun has been drowning in for a long while

Sam Shamoun – Idiotic Arguments:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/sam-shamoun-youre-idiot.html

Proof Sam Shamoun is a Fool:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/100-proof-sam-shamoun-is-fool.html

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

 

Sam Shamoun, you’re an idiot!

 

Is this Sam Shamoun fella off his rocker? This video further highlights the man’s idiocy and hatred. This Sam Shamoun fella actually insults his modern-day Bible just to poke fun at Muslims. He professes to be a Christian apologist too. What an idiot!

Sam, wake up.

Stop wasting your life PRESENTING STUPID ARGUMENTS and spamming on my blog. Go away, drop your hatred of Muslims and Islam, rethink your life and your religion.

EMAIL: YAHYASNOW@YAHOO.CO.UK

Learn about Islam:
Deenshow.com

 
Posted by at 10:00
 

Sunday, 14 July 2013

AnsweringIslam.org Cons Anthony Rogers

 
Does it get much more dishonest and pathetic than this. The anti-Muslim website, AnsweringIslam.org, actually winds up conning its own contributor.

An article written by their chief writer Sam Shamoun contained some deceptive quoting which one of their other contributors (Anthony Rogers) used in a debate against a Muslim opponent on whether Prophet Muhammad (p) is mentioned in their modern-day Bible.

Watch this shocking video highlighting the manner in which AnsweringIslam.org is even conning its own Christian colleagues!

Anthony Rogers Conned by AnsweringIslam.org

If video does not play, please see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6sCJdN366w

For those who want more information on this issue please see:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/answeringislamorg-tacit-admission-of.html

Anthony Rogers – does he have enough moral and testicular fortitude to speak out?



It’s important for Christians to speak out against such dishonesty. So far Anthony has not spoken out. Don’t be afraid Anthony, speak the truth…

Does Answeringislam.org believe in all their resurrection stories unlike William Lane Craig?:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/william-lane-craig-doubts-resurrection.html

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk




 

Wednesday, 10 July 2013

AnsweringIslam.org – Tacit Admission of Dishonesty

 
So here we have it folks. As close to an admission you will get from Sam Shamoun of dishonesty – sadly no apology!

You will know that one of Shamoun’s colleagues (Anthony Rogers) was the victim of some misinformation concerning the number of soldiers who accompanied Prophet Muhammad to liberate Mecca, see here:

Anthony claims Al-Tabari said it was 12,000 (which was found to be untrue – see here). Anthony got the misinformation of A-Tabari stating 12,000 liberated Mecca from Sam Shamoun’s article, see the screenshot of the relevant part in case Sam has another bout of dishonesty:
 
 
So, as you can see, Sam Shamoun partially quoted from the Al-Tabari reference, this is the part which he did cite:

The Messenger marched with 2,000 Meccans and 10,000 of his companions [who had marched with him and] with whose help God had facilitated the conquest of Mecca. Thus there were 12,000 in all …”

You can see, the citation is incomplete and it’s unclear (due to the omission of the entire reference). However, it becomes OBVIOUS why Sam Shamoun did not cite it fully. He did not cite it fully as the full reference shows the 12,0000 were in fact going to confront the Hawazin NOT THE MECCANS (the Hawazin were confronted 19 days AFTER the Conquest of Mecca in the Battle of Hunain). Here is the full citation which Sam Shamoun provided upon being pressured in my comment section yesterday:
 
The Messenger marched with 2,000 Meccans and 10,000 of his companions [who had marched with him and] with whose help God had facilitated the conquest of Mecca. Thus there were 12,000 in all. The Messenger of God placed ‘Attab b. Asid b. Abi al-‘As b. Umayyah b. ‘Abd Shams in charge of Mecca [to look after] the men who stayed behind while he proceeded to confront Hawazin.”

Notice the omission of WHO these 12,000 were confronting? Sam tried to mislead people into thinking that the Al-Tabari reference was telling us 12,000 took part in the Conquest of Mecca by DECEPTIVELY omitting the part where it tells you it was concerning a battle against the Hawazin (Battle of Hunain)
 
So as we can see, the reference is clearly not about Mecca. Shamoun knew this but misdirected (let’s be blunt deceived) Anthony Rogers and other Christian readers into thinking the number of soldiers in the Conquest of Mecca were 12,000. Shamefull deceptive!

Summary

Sam Shamoun, in his desperation to push away the Muslim argumentation that Deut 33:2 refers to Prophet Muhammad and the 10,000 soldiers who liberated Mecca, dishonestly claims that the number of the soldiers was 12,000. He uses the reference from AlTabari (above) to convince his Christian audience of this whilst KNOWING the reference was not about Mecca but about the Battle of Hunain (confronting the Hawazin) –  a battle that took place 19 days after the Conquest of Mecca which comprised of 10,000 companions who took part in the Mecca conquest and 2,000 others (largely Meccan converts to Islam after the Conquest of Mecca)  who swelled the ranks AFTER the Conquest of Mecca.

Sam Shamoun knew the AlTabari citation was in fact about a different battle hence his omission of the crucial part of the reference  (that the 12,000 were going to confront the Hawazin NOT to conquest Mecca)

In fact, even from the bit he did cite, anybody with decent reading comprehension would be able to see that AlTabari was not referring to the Conquest of Mecca but soe battle AFTER the conquest as he differentiates between the 10,000 companions (those who helped liberate Mecca) and the 2,000 Meccans who joined he Muslims after they had seen their city taken over by the Prophet (p).

So all in all, we have seen a tacit admission from Sam Shamoun of dishonesty. Can somebody call Dr James White and ask him to clean up this rotten ‘ministry’ of Shamoun’s? Failing that, email Samuel Green. Or if he is too busy to get the hoover and dust cloth out why not call Ergun Caner and ask him to clean up this corrupt ministry!

PS The number of 10,000 is actually confirmed by alTabari in that citation for those who are informed but there is actually a Hadith from Bukhari which confirms the number to be 10,000. See here:

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Does Answeringislam.org believe in all their resurrection stories unlike William Lane Craig?:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/william-lane-craig-doubts-resurrection.html

The Sam Shamoun section:

Sam Shamoun needs a lesson in scholarship and logic, step forward Dr Shabir Ally:
 

Monday, 8 July 2013

100% Proof Sam Shamoun is a Fool

 
I only have one question: why, oh why, do we waste our time with Sam Shamoun? It was time to retire Sam Shamoun more than half a decade ago. Sam Shamoun is an apologetics disaster, in this video we take evidences from his recent debate. Evidences for what? Evidences to show this man is a blithering FOOL.

Note, in this video the Bible is not referenced to mock the Christian or attack those related beliefs but to simply highlight the ignorance, foolishness and hypocrisy of the Christian ‘apologist’ Sam Shamoun. It’s amazing this man has resorted to throwing his Bible behind his back and is now using atheistic arguments to attack Islam and Muslims. Such is his hatred of Muslims and Islam.

Fool Alert: Sam Shamoun Arguing Against Islam

If the video does not play, please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUPJeuCazyc

Shamoun attacked the Muslim belief that Satan (a Jinn) has bowel movements and urinates. Shamoun attacks it as he believes it’s ‘irrtiaonal’. Yet the fool believes Satan can have sex with human women and impregnate them (thus according to his beliefs Satan produces sperm). This fool threw his Christian beliefs under the bus to simply use atheistic arguments against Islam. Such is his hatred for Islam that he is willing to disregard the Bible to attack Islam. FOOL!

Shamoun also attacks a hadith of a miracle of people hearing food glorifying Allah. Shamoun lies and claims the food was talking to Prophet Muhammad and praising him. However Shamoun’s main contention is that he believes hearing food glorifying God is ‘irrational’ . Erm, this FOOL forgets according to the Bible Christians must believe in talking animals (donkey and serpent) and the FOOL forgets he also believes in other miracles according to the Bible such as Jesus walking on water, resurrections, changing water into wine etc.

So the FOOL simply shows himself to be insulting the accounts of miracles in the Bible whilst using atheistic arguments to attack Islam. Such is this man’s hatred of Islam – he will throw his own Christian teachings under the bus at the whiff of an opportunity to attack Muslims and Islam. FOOL!

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com/

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

 

Sunday, 7 July 2013

Silly ABN Christian Arguments against Muslim Beliefs of Paradise

 

Paradise is Physical and Spiritual

This video covers the myth some Christian missionaries present and/or perpetuate of the Muslim belief in Paradise being solely physical. This of course is incorrect, for a Muslim the greatest pleasure is that of seeing Allah. Being in the presence of Allah and being able to see him is a spiritual experience which we should all strive for. For a Muslim, in this life, the spirituality of praying to Allah is unrivalled even in this world – our favourite food and other activities cannot beat the experience Muslims feel when worshipping God in this life. So why should anybody think that the physical would surpass the spiritual in Heaven? It won’t.

Sex in Paradise

The video also covers the inconsistent attacks of the Muslim belief that sex is something that does occur in Paradise. For some reason this is a chief objection by Christians – perhaps some use it in a disingenuous fashion to portray Muslims in a manner akin to the sexually-negative portrayals Christian orientalists of the past did. The video expands on Dr Shabir Ally’s teachings of there being nothing wrong with sex in Paradise and that it actually helps Muslims to abstain from illicit sexual intercourse in this life.

Dr Shabir Ally makes the point that those who do not believe sex is not something they will experience in Paradise are more likely to fall into the pitfall of adultery and/or fornication (sexual sins). Dr Ally’s claims are actually backed up by statistics where it is shown 80% of young evangelical Christians in America engage in sex before marriage whilst a recent study has shown Muslims to be the best behaved with it comes to sex out of all the major faith groups:

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/muslims-have-least-sex-outside-of.html

Conclusion




Christian missionaries need to stop with such lines of argumentation, try thinking and reflecting upon Muslim teachings and argumentations. If you do so genuinely you will realise the Muslim has the stronger argumentation.

Related:
Jesus has Muslim brothers/sisters
The incarnation?
Original sin?
Learn about Islam

Feedback: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

 

Saturday, 6 July 2013

Fool Sam Shamoun Obsessed with Breasts and Male Genitalia Throws the Bible Behind his Back Again

 
 

This popular video of Dr Shabir Ally dressing down an internet Christian ‘missionary’ called Sam Shamoun is still playing on the mind of Shamoun and his followers to this day despite it being over a decade old.

Here is the video where Sam Shamoun is made to look a blithering  fool by Dr Shabir Ally:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYFl-mKrbK4

Recently I rebuked Sam Shamoun and his buddies for their lewd comments concerning the male gentialia on a Christian missionary TV station, ABN:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/sleazy-shamoun-asked-to-apologise-to-dr.html

Shamoun’s response was not to apologise but just humiliate himself further and show his ignorance and complete disregard of the Bible. Shamoun and one of his followers proceeded to spam my blog  with any material that Shamoun could get his hands on which contained the mention of breasts or male genitalia as though that material is equivalent to Shamoun’s lewd jokes about erection sizes on Christian TV. What a blithering fool!

This fool has clearly not learned from Dr Shabir Ally’s admonition – where Shamoun was inexplicably comparing the following with the mention of the word kawaaib

She lusted after lovers with genitals as large as a donkey’s and emissions like those of a horse. And so, Oholibah, you relived your former days as a young girl in Egypt, when you first allowed your breasts to be fondled. [Ezekiel 23:20-21 NLT]

Aside from the above verses I would like to point you to the fact Christians believe oral sex is in the Bible too (Song of Solomon). See here for the well-known Pastor Mark Driscoll state oral sex is in the Bible (see the 3.10 – 3.25 video timeframe):

Meet the fools

Now any self-respecting and Bible-respecting Christian is not going to spam Muslim comment boards with anything in Muslim sources which mention breasts or genitalia whilst knowing of that passage in Ezekiel and of their belief that oral sex is in Song of Solomon. It would just be insulting the Bible indirectly, right?

Well, meet the blithering fool Sam Shamoun and his lackey Radical Moderate. Please note, I’m not using any Bible verse to insult Christians or argue against the Bible itself but basically to highlight the sheer foolishness and inconsistency of these Christian bigots.

Here’s their spamming of translations of the Quran and commentaries mentioning breasts – this weirdo even capitalises the word breasts as though he is some silly school boy:

Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards and maidens with swelling breasts, like of age, and a cup overflowing. Therein they shall hear no idle talk, no cry of lies, for a recompense from thy Lord, a gift, a reckoning, S. 78:31-36 Arberry

Compare how the following English versions translate Q. 78:33:

And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age; Hilali-Khan

maidens with pears-shaped breasts who are of equal age (to their spouses) Muhammad Sarwar

and girls with swelling breasts of the same age as themselves, Palmer

And damsels with swelling breasts, their peers in age, Rodwell

and [damsels] with swelling breasts, of equal age [with themselves], Sale

And here is how Muhammad and the Islamic expositors explained these verses:

meaning, wide-eyed maidens WITH FULLY DEVELOPED BREASTS. Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid and others have said…

“This means ROUND BREASTS. They meant by this THAT THE BREASTS OF THESE GIRLS WILL BE FULLY ROUNDED AND NOT SAGGING, because they will be virgins, equal in age…” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 78:33; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Another famous commentator, ar-Razi, stated in his Tafsir (Volume 8, p. 311) that:

“The kawa`ib are the buxom girls (nawahid) whose breasts have become FULL (taka“abat) and ROUND (tafallakat).” (Bold and capital emphasis ours)

The word Kawaaib in classical Arabic indicates a young woman’s age – not her physical attributes. It has no sexual connotation. See the following video from the 5.16 timeframe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=da3YLuyw8bQ

Apart from his obvious immaturity this Christian clearly shows he must have the same issues with the word breasts in the Bible. In fact, the Biblical verse in Ezekiel actually talks about breasts being fondled. I guess he has capitalised and highlighted this in his copy of the Bible. What an immature fool.

If he wants more occurrences of the word ‘breasts’ in the Bible here are the search results for that word in the Bible:

http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=breasts&qs_version=ESV

I’d imagine Shamoun will have a lot of capitalising and highlighting on his to-do list tonight.

Old dogs can’t learn new tricks – Shamoun comes up with the same old refuted stuff

Shamoun  goes overboard with the mention of the Arabic word farj. This just highlights Shamoun’s dishonesty as he has already been refuted on this before, see the following excerpt by AnsweringChristianity:

The Christian missionary Sam Shamoun claims that Archangel Gabriel breathed into the vagina of Mary in order that the conception of Jesus would take place, he alleges that the above Qur’anic verse [Referencing 66:12] ideally gives this understanding. Although he quotes Imam Ibn Kathir, he simply (or intentionally) fails to understand what the Imam is saying. All Muslim commentators and scholars indisputably agree that Angel Gabriel breathed into the opening of Mary’s garment, not into her vagina as the missionary’s mind fantasizes.

  It is reported on authority of Ibn ‘Abbas and Qatada that Archangel Gabriel appeared to Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran, in a human form, he approached her in order to breathe the spirit of Jesus into her, but she prevented him from even approaching the opening of her garment; this is the meaning of Mary guarding her farj because the Arabic word “farj” applies to any opening, gap or slit. When Gabriel introduced himself to Mary and informed her about his mission, she let him breathe the spirit of Jesus into the opening of her garment; this is the meaning of breathing into her farj. However, Mr. Shamoun – without a glance of hesitation – assumed that the Arabic word “faarj” must refer to the vagina of Mary and that Gabriel directly breathed into her vagina.

See the entire refutation and rebuke here:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/shamoun-farj.htm

The shamed missionary spams the following translation:

Ubayy b. Ka‘b told that he heard God’s messenger say, “If anyone proudly asserts his descent in the manner of the pre-Islamic people, tell him to bite his father’s penis, AND DO NOT USE A EUPHEMISM.”

He as usual, has already been rebuked for his repertoire before by a brother on a MDI comment board, here is the comment which was left for Shamoun in order to explain this:

Here we have a man who does not know the basics of Arabic and interpretation of hadiths and is arguing by copy pasting a statement of prophet out of context and out of its linguistic meaning .
THE ACTUAL ARABIC TEXT IS : “فأعضوه بهن أبيه ولا تكنوا”

This is a figure of speech and the provided translation is inaccurate as the translation is literal, which made the intended meaning to be lost. The underlined first word means “bite” but in this sentence it means “stick to” and this is one of the meaning of this word in Arabic. The second word means “penis” but it also does not actually give the meaning of “penis” here since it is used to refer to the “semen” that is inside it. Having said that, the actual statment means in correct translation: “He who is proud of his origins in a manner that is similar to the era of pre-Islam, let him stay next to his father’s semen [i.e. let him remember that his actual origin is a flithy semen]. So, as you can see it is not a verbal abuse but rather a strong explicit reminder of something that make one get over the phony pride.

THE CONTEXT: The context is crystal clear that the meaning what Sam Shamoun is driving is wrong .Prophet Mohammed here is not using bad language he is using an Arabic phrase used to convey the message that ‘ we originated from a small and filthy thing as semen ‘ , so what is there to boost of 

Prophet instead is giving a good message that nobody is superior just on the basis of lineage.
But as for Shamoun he is at his usual best of misquoting , arguing without knowing basic Arabic.His usual costumers are his like minded Christians who think he is exposing Islam .Any one with a basic knowledge about Islam will know he is exposing nobody but his own ignorant self.

http://thedebateinitiative.com/2012/06/26/sami-zaatari-vs-david-wood-is-muhammad-a-good-role-model-for-society/

Apart from Shamoun being wrong, does he not stop to even read his Bible, aside from the Bible references we have already highlighted what about this one which makes reference to sexual intercourse and male emissions.
 
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. [Genesis 38:8-10 (King James Version)]
 
What a fool. Shamoun’s Bible mentions private parts, oral sex, male emissions yet he is feigning some offense at Arabic words he does not even understand!
 
Please be reminded that I am not arguing against the Bible by bringing up these Bible references – I’m simply highlighting to you that the Christian missionaries either don’t know what’s in their own Bible or are just insulting it knowingly as all their feigned offence at Arabic words they misunderstand would apply stronger to the Bible as the Bible does contain words that are offensive to modern ears – as the prominent Bible teacher David Pawson mentions concerning the book of Ezekiel.

Conclusion

Folks this is an immature way to argue against Islam or any faith. It just shows how apologetically bankrupt Christian missionaries are and it also illustrates the inconsistency they operate from. On the one hand these Christians believe oral sex, description of male genitals and emissions as well as references to sex are in their Bible yet they feign some misguided offence at some Arabic words and terms they don’t understand.

Come on where is the consistency?

These people wind up insulting their Bible with such shallow argumentations.

Fools!

Shamoun also made mention of Abu Bakr’s strong words against the pagans from History of al Tabari. This is actually explained here in  detail by Waqar Cheema:
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2013/05/suck-clitoris-lat-befitting-response-abu-bakr.html

Shamoun also makes reference to sex in Paradise. Concerning this, Shamoun has been spectacularly rebuked and humbled in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN6Ys8aO9-Q

 Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

 

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

Sleazy Shamoun Asked To Apologise to Dr James White, Bassim Gorial, Mary Jo Sharp, Negeen Mayel, Zipporah Shamoun, Helen Shamoun

 
The sleaze in ABN evangelism must stop. It’s time to take heed of the call to clean up. You cannot be presenting the type of sleazy behaviour of Sam Shamoun and his buddies exhibited as evangelism.

Sam Shamoun is called to apologise. This man and his friends were making x-rated ‘jokes’ on Christian TV. Is this evangelism?

 
For those who want video evidence of this Christian missionary’s x-rated behaviour see the video in this post – watch all of it to come across the specific example:
 
Open Message to Mr Sam Shamoun
 
You have let down all those people who have given you donations. How can you allow such material to go on the net knowing that your daughter (Zipporah) and mother Helen Shamoun could view such material in the future?
 
I understand people making mistakes and living in sin. It happens. We are all humans. However I cannot understand how you can act in such a way whilst under the umbrella of evangelism? I cannot understand the lack of apology and action coming from ABN. Do they condone such behaviour?
 
I hope you realise your rampant hatred of  Muslims and Islam has led you into humiliation and sin once again.
 
You have once again shown yourself to be a liability to the community you claim to be representing.
 
If you have any shame and sense you will apologise for your sleazy behaviour. You are a grown man, you cannot be acting in such a lewd manner and expect people to continue to fund your sedentary lifestyle.
 
I urge you to apologise publicly for such shameful behaviour.
 
Sam, let me know if you decide to do the right thing and apologise for your shameful and moronic behaviour so I can remove this post. Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
 
The interesting thing here, it’s the Muslims are calling these people to clean up. By their fruits ye shall know them…
 
 
 
 
 

Sunday, 30 June 2013

Debate: Was Muhammad a True Prophet? Osama Abdallah v Sam Shamoun (Review) by Yahya Snow

 
I feel compelled to write on the debate between Osama Abdallah and Sam Shamoun on the topic of whether Prophet Muhammad (p) was a Prophet.

Constructive criticism of Osama Abdallah

Before the debate review, some constructive criticism for Osama Abdallah in order to help Osama Abdallah in the future.

Sam Shamoun is a dishonest and obnoxious man who is considered unworthy of debate – the man is a true disaster in Christian apologetics. By debating such a person one ends up appearing to be ‘legitimizing’ and allowing his insults, deceptions and general craziness to be swept under the rug. Mainstream Muslim speakers do not consider Shamoun with any regard. The man has some serious issues of dishonesty hatred towards Muslims and immorality as highlighted in the Sam Shamoun section here:

I cannot agree with Osama’s decision to share a platform with Shamoun. Why feed the trolls? Why help resuscitate his dead apologetics career? Why allow his unchecked insults and blasphemies go unpunished? This is a man who trolls comment sections and abuses Muslims in his attempts to arrange a debates.

Osama, from my understanding had FOUR DEBATES against FOUR different opponents in TWO days

This is a ridiculous amount of responsibility to take on. I actually criticise Osama for taking on such a work load. Why he did so I am not sure. It certainly is not wise and nor beneficial to oneself or the audience. How does he expect to do each topic justice with his attention diverted 4 ways? This is not a game – it’s serious business.

You can’t offer the same clarity, quality information and quality argumentation in each debate as you would if you focussed on one debate like each one of his opponents (Sam Shamoun, Anthony Rogers, Dr Edward Dalcour and Louis Lionheart).

Osama was had – either he was duped or he made a humongous error in judgement and his opponents rubbed their hands with glee. The ‘Center for Religious Debate’ must have been licking their chops with anticipation of the lone ‘sheep’ that was going to be hunted by for of their ‘wolves’ The interesting thing here is, as you will see in the review below, his opponent could not make any real inroads due to an absence of genuine and consistent argumentation.

Osama’s performance in many ways reflected this four-fold dilution despite making numerous good points he lacked flow, organisation of thoughts, coherence (at times), research, planning, structure and decorum (at times). This is not doing the Muslim community justice at all.

The organisation of the debate was shoddy. It seemed as though they were forming the debate format whilst debating. Osama close to the end just became less professional and less controlled – it actually became a farce. I guess the stress of having to do 4 debates in 4 days with 4 different opponents was getting to him. I also think Osama’s lack of preparation added to his frustrations which led to his inability to maintain an acceptable level of restraint.

Muslim argumentation is so much stronger than Christian argumentation and much of the leg work has actually been done for you by the likes of Dr Shabir Ally. For a Muslim debater it’s essentially just a matter of turning up ORGANISED and PREPARED. Have an opening statement penned. For me there is no excuse for a Muslim debater not to be fluent in his OS. No excuse at all. Pen it and practice it. Then turn up and deliver it.

Debate Review: Osama Abdallah v Sam Shamoun on ‘Was Muhammad a True Prophet?’

Osama used the Bible to convince his audience of the Prophethood of Muhammad. This is fair enough and makes sense as I believe his immediate audience was primarily consisting of Christians. However Osama spent too long on this line of argumentation, in fact most if not all his presentation was based on this line of argumentation which for me was an unwise move on the part of Osama.

It’s easy to argue for the Prophethood of Muhammad (p) as here is a man (p) who called people back to Abrahamic monotheism, performed miracles, confirmed the previous Prophets (p) including Jesus and significantly he came with a Book (the Quran) from God which contains historical, numerical and scientific miracles.

Scientific facts in the Quran (by Abdur-Raheem Green):

Historical Facts in the Quran:

Mathematical miracles in the Quran (Dr Shabir Ally):

Those around the Prophet are actually powerful witnesses as here we have thousands of people who met him (many of whom knew him well) were so convinced of the Prophethood of Muhammad (p) which was revealed to the Prophet that they were willing to die for such beliefs. This is a powerful witness for those who want to reflect.

The fruits of what was revealed to Prophet Muhammad have actually defended Mary (may Allah bless her further) against false allegations and have the lowest amount of sex outside of marriage (fornication and adultery) –  a recent study has shown that Muslims have the least sex outside of marriage out of all the world’s major religions:

 

Aside from producing a group of people who are better behaved sexually than any other group we can also see Muslims are famous for not drinking alcohol. Medical professionals would applaud this as alcohol is a risk factor for cancer amongst other ailments of the health – sincere Christians would also appreciate this in the light of the following verses in their Bible:
“Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.” [Book of Proverbs 20:1]
“And be not drunk with wine”. [Book of Ephesians 5:18]

Islam brings back the teachings of covering your head (a teaching which is forgotten by many Christian women), keeping a beard for the man and worshipping God alone through prostrations (the manner in which Jesus worshipped God).

Osama would have made better use of his time if he truncated the arguments from the Bible and added a standard presentation to his Biblical arguments – similar to the accumulative type which Dr Shabir Ally or an iERA speaker would present.

Sam Shamoun throws the Bible behind his back

Sam Shamoun had no genuine or consistent argumentation. Shamoun focuses on 2 or three small incidents in the life of Prophet Muhammad (p) and presented his own narrative to argue against the character of Prophet Muhammad (p). In the process he threw the Bible behind his back. His desperation to argue against the Prophethood led him to such an inconsistent and disingenuous level of argumentation.

If he can accept Moses (who according to Exodus 32 passed on the command from God to kill roughly 3000 men plus according to Numbers 31 it shows Moses giving the instruction to kill boys and women) , David (who according to the 2 Samuel 11 committed adultery), Lot (who according to the Genesis was involved in incest unknowingly) and Solomon (who according to the1 Kings 11 had 700 wives and 300 concubines – the same reference also says he was led astray by his wives) as Prophets then he would be hypocritical to argue against Prophet Muhammad in such a way.

Shamoun presented the same tired and already-refuted argument of ‘special privileges’ for Prophet Muhammad (p). Shamoun tries to make out that the Prophet Muhammad was using the religion as a self-serving vehicle. This again is another argument which lacks thought. Theres an account where Umar ibn AlKhattab was weeping upon seeing the austere way Prophet Muhammad lived. He did not live in luxury. Surely if you were a man who was misusing a religion to gain special privileges you would not live in such austerity. Here is an article by Bassam Zawadi to aid people’s understanding further:

The pagans, upon seeing the followers of Prophet Muhammad (p) increasing, they offered him wealth and power to the extent of him becoming the richest amongst them and a king – Prophet Muhammad declined and stood fast to Islam. So Shamoun’s self-serving argumentation is just  illogical, old, boring and oft refuted.

The problem with Sam Shamoun is his hatred and pride leave his ability to think logically clouded hence arguments of this calibre. In fact Shamoun or anybody else for that matter does not need copious research to realise the invalidity of the ‘self-serving’ argument as numerous people who were staunch believers and contemporaries of Prophet Muhammad – people who knew him well –risked their lives and some actually lost their lives for the religion revealed to the Prophet. People don’t risk or lose their lives if they believe the founder is solely in it for himself. Here is a short article by Sami Zaatari to aid people’s understanding further:

 
 
Shamoun throws his Bible aside in order to argue against what he deems ‘irrational teachings from ahadith’
 
 
Shamoun then proceeded with an inconsistent (hypocritical) line of argumentation which he deemed to be ‘irrational teachings’ of Prophet Muhammad (p). An example here is Shamoun’s criticism of Adam’s height being 60 cubits.

On what basis can Shamoun as a supposed Bible-believing Christian criticise this? Shamoun actually believes in giants as the Bible mentions them (Genesis 6). So what is Shamoun’s problem? Clearly a desire to grab any absurdly inconsistent (hypocritical) argument and throw it out there!

It highlights the lack of argumentation he has. In fact Osama Abdallah actually presented science to show that the inhabitants of earth were bigger in the early history of the earth – hence the size of dinoaurs. However, I don’t think Osama needed to even go to such an extent with Shamoun’s argumentation as Shamoun believes angels had intercourse with humans (women) and the offspring were giants. Thus his Bible is indicating heavenly bodies are actually bigger!

Another example here is his criticism of the Muslim belief that Satan urinates. Shamoun believes this is irrational as he believes Satan is a spiritual being so does not urinate. Erm says who? Has Shamoun met Satan and followed him around to check if he urinates or has bowel movements? Why is Shamoun trying to make Satan out to be cleaner than human beings?

The elephantine portion of inconsistency (hypocrisy) of his argument is highlighted as angels (genuine spiritual beings) are believed (by Paul and other Trinitarian Christians such as Shamoun) to have sex and lust:

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/christian-head-coverings-stops-sexual.html

So why is Sam Shamoun objecting to Satan urinating whilst Paul was believing that angels have sex with humans and lust after Christian women who don’t cover their heads?

Looks like Shamoun is defending Satan and attacking angels all in order to present a case against the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). Bizarre!

Shamoun wastes time by making much hoohaa over ‘satan in your nose’. It seems as though Shamoun just plucked this argument from some tacky anti-Muslim flyer and just ran with it in the debate.

Again, Shamoun throws his Bible behind his back just to leach on to any argument against Islam:

He must have read his own Bible which has dozens of statements about Satan entering the bodies and bellies of people. The Gospel of John says that after Judas ate food from Jesus’ own hand, “Satan entered into him.” (John 13:27) So if after eating food from Jesus’ hand one could not be safe from Satan, what is surprising if an ordinary person has Satan near his nose during the night? [Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi]

Did Shamoun even stop to bother to check if his anti-Muslim flyer style argument had already been discussed by scholars? Shamoun, would do well to read the following by Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi:

Muslim scholars explain that the nose is one of the ways to one’s mind and thoughts. Satan tries to put his ideas and suggestions into the mind of a person during his sleep as well. The best cure is that after waking up one should clean one’s nose, make ablution for Prayers and seek God’s protection. Some other scholars say that Satan is a symbol of everything bad and evil. Through this symbolism the Prophet was warning the people to be conscious about the cleanliness of their bodies. In the hot and dry climate, the nose does become stuffy during the night. One feels like the devil was in the nose. This was the Prophetic way to tell the people to keep themselves clean and make ablution as soon as they get up.

All Semitic languages, and especially Arabic, are full of metaphors and hyperboles. Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) used to speak in parables; similarly, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) used to instruct his people sometimes in a metaphorical and symbolic language. It is reported that Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) supposedly said, “Do not give dogs what is holy; and do not throw your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot and turn to attack you.” (Matthew 7:6) These words fit very well on those who do not try to understand the Prophetic pearls and holy language. The author of this flyer should pay attention to these words of Jesus.”

I would also ask Shamoun to look at this video as this Christian is being ridiculed by for believing in talking animals (snake and donkey) as he believes in the Bible. Shamoun tossed the Bible behind his back  and resembled the man mocking the poor Christian in the video whilst presenting  his argument against food praising God. Why is Shamoun arguing like an atheist? Simple, he feels he has to throw his Bible behind his back in order to argue against Islam. God can make whatever He wills talk – serious Christians and Muslims know this. Here is the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq6zqDYfcek

 

 
In sum Shamoun’s argumentations against selected ahadith were actually hypocritical as he once again threw the Bible behind his back just to scrape some silly arguments from the bottom of the barrel to use in some internet debate against the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). What a sad man.

Shamoun bangs on about slave girls – he even claims rape took place. Erm the Islamic sources are vast, there’s no record of rape and Islam does not allow rape of slave girls or anybody else. Here is an article by Bassam Zawadi to aid people’s understanding further on slave girls and the rape allegation:

Shamoun also makes a big deal out of Mut’ah. He forgets Islam did not come down all at once. It was revealed over a period of 23 years so the prohibition is not necessarily immediate – this is the same for alcohol there was no prohibition of alcohol initially. Article on Muta being forbidden in Islam by Sami Zaatari:

Shamoun throws honesty and commonsense out of the window

We’ve seen Shamoun is so entrenched in his hatred of Islam that he throws consistency and his Bible behind his back but here he just lost all control and decided to throw honesty and common sense out of the window.

Shamoun just literally started to make stuff up. He claimed Aisha was prepubescent when her marriage was consummated. What a liar. Even this ignoramus would know that scholarly consensus is that Aisha had attained puberty. The marriage between Prophet Muhammad and Aisha was similar to the practice which Jews practiced (even at the time of Jesus). See here for the scholarship of Jesus scholar, Geza Vermes, on this subject (it beats listening to Shamoun’s lies):
 
Shamoun lied further by claiming the Quran allows sex with prepubescent girls. Another blatant lie which goes against scholarly consensus and common sense – who are you going to believe scholarly consensus or an anti-Muslim bloke on the internet who is making crazy claims?

Which lie is Shamoun going to regurgitate next? The ‘thighing’ lie? See here:

Conclusions

Osama Abdallah was unprepared, lacked composure and wrongly chose to go almost exclusively with arguments of Biblical prophecies of Prophet Muhammad (p). He did not even present half of the standard material that non-Muslims should be made aware of when discussing the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). 40 minutes for an OP should be used better. When you are arguing for the affirmative then the OP becomes even more important as you need to present more material than your opponent. Osama should have made better use of his 40 mins.

Sam Shamoun was dishonest, disingenuous and inconsistent to the extent of throwing his own Bible behind his back. The baulk of Shamoun’s presentation was inconsistent as he simply threw the Bible behind his back to make way for emotional arguments against the Prophethood of Muhammad (p). This speaks volumes of Shamoun’s demeanour – he is motivated out of pride and a misguided hatred for Islam rather than from a stance of BIBLICAL evangelism.

Again, I point Shamoun to his own Bible and ask him how he can accept the Prophethood of Moses, David, Solomon and Lot (in the light of respective Biblical stories highlighted earlier in this review) yet reject the clear Prophethood of Muhammad and present hypocritical arguments against him? Is it due to hatred and pride?

 
His inconsistent (hypocritical) and illogical arguments are one thing but his outright lying is another. Please can we send Shamoun back to the debate-blacklist. The man is an embarrassment to Christian apologetics.

Now you see why educated Christians would not value Shamoun’s argumentation.

Education and consistency is a good thing, Mr Shamoun. Try it some day.

Do I recommend this debate? No. It has little benefit. There’s plenty of other presentations out there that are of greater benefit to the truth-seeker and the researcher.

Doubtless, this debate will be viewed by cheerleaders who just want a bit of entertainment. Debates on such topics are not games. This is serious stuff.

If you want to learn about Muslim arguments for the Prophethood of Muhammad here is a presentation from Dr Shabir Ally:

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s