For the background to this debate see my review from yesterday
The verses from the Qur’an I was not able to find during the debate are these:
(33:35) Surely the men who submit (to Allah) and the women who submit (to Allah), the men who have faith and the women who have faith, the men who are obedient and the women who are obedient, the men who are truthful and the women who are truthful; the men who are steadfast and the women who are steadfast, the men who humble themselves (to Allah) and the women who humble themselves (to Allah), the men who give alms and the women who give alms, the men who fast and the women who fast, the men who guard their chastity and the women who guard their chastity, the men who remember Allah much and the women who remember Allah much: for them has Allah prepared forgiveness and a mighty reward.
(4:124) Whoever does good and believes -whether he is male or female – such shall enter the Garden, and they shall not be wronged in the slightest.
(16:97) Whosoever acts righteously – whether a man or a woman – and embraces belief, We will surely grant him a good life; and will surely grant such persons their reward according to the best of their deeds.
(40:40) Whosoever does an evil deed will be requited only with the like of it; and whosoever acts righteously and has attained to faith be he a male or a female they shall enter Paradise and be provided sustenance beyond all reckoning.
Categories: Christian extremism, Debates, Feminism, Islamophobia, London, Missionaries, Speakers Corner
Blogging Theology 
Paul,
Thanks a lot for your initiative. In this Part 1 you sent, I can see your passion and concern to help defend Islam and Muslims.
May Allah (swt) continue to bless you in your words of justice, goodness, piety, and truth.
LikeLiked by 6 people
thank you Omer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry Paul, but Lizzie was so much more informed, calm and reasonable in that video. I can see why you felt the need to put a “disclaimer” in place a day or so ago.
Like
Hilariously, Lizzie’s own Bible does not live up to her feminist standards.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You did call Lizzy a radical feminist, but I must say that your agitation, body language, rhetoric and interruptions weree more on par with any type of radicalism than Lizzy’s calm, careful and informative responses.
Interestingly, she pulled you up on avoiding to answer questions just like what happens here 😜
LikeLike
Paulus, you never fail to make me laugh 😉
Also, Paul did answer questions [not all though, due to time restraints], he also asked counter questions to expose lizzy’s hypocrisy, which she never responded to.
LikeLike
After Lizzy’s first 5 minutes she asked Paul to answer her questions in relation to the 7 ways women are subjugated in the Koran. Paul proceeded to spend the next five minutes not even attempting to address this issue.
Paul’s demeanour was agitated, his rhetoric was over the top, he routinely interrupted and he was clearly distressed. Lizzy was composed, calm and informed.
I guess, ironically, Paul was subjugated by a women in public on his own faith!!!
LikeLike
I don’t think Lizzy quoted all 7 verses, she only quoted 4 [correct me if i’m wrong]. Paul responded to 2, and also made some claims in those 5 minutes. Lizzy, on the other hand, didn’t respond to anything, she just kept on making claims. You’ve probably heard of the machine gun tactic, that’s what Lizzy did. She knew 5 minutes wasn’t enough for Paul to respond to everything, even if he did, she’d just make more claims. Why else do you think she didn’t respond to any of his claims [regarding the misogyny in the bible], and kept on making claims instead? She didn’t even counter any of his responses, because she knew she was just spouting the pfander nonsense. Br Paul specifically stated that he wants to expose her hypocrisy, which is why he quoted the bible.
You might want to check out other videos of Lizzy in SC, she’s better than the other disciples, but still very insincere and hypocritical.
LikeLike
“Why else do you think she didn’t respond to any of his claims [regarding the misogyny in the bible], and kept on making claims instead?”
Did you watch the video, because she directly answered a similar statement/question Paul made. She didn’t consider the debate topic to be in Christianity, so why would she spend time answering irrelevant questions?
LikeLike
I called out her double-standards and hypocrisy on her feminist critique of the hijab. Very relevant indeed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s called consistency.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If the debate topic is X, you don’t discuss Y. Nothing to do with consistency. And even then Lizzy mentioned that to be *fair* her article under discussion did discuss henunderstanding of the Biblical passages cited.
Just like in the video, you Muslims clearly have no interest in listening to what your *opponents* have to say.
Your disinterest when Lizzy spoke combined with your need to continually ask themuslims I think he audience to look up things for you shows how outclassed you really were.
LikeLike
Yes I was out classed. Hey ho…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Informed Lizzie indeed! Just about as informed as Paulus.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve just watched part 1 and 2. Well done, brother Paul. Thank you for your passion and thoroughness in exposing Pfander as a group of hypocritical, lying hatemongers.
LikeLiked by 2 people
thank you 🙂
LikeLike
Part 2
LikeLike
Out of curiosity, is she really tall or are you really short?
LikeLike
I’m a midget.
LikeLiked by 1 person
She’s standing on a chair lol.
LikeLike
(16:33′) the face of the liar. [URL=http://www.sherv.net/][IMG]http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/blue-face/about-to-puke-smiley-emoticon.png[/IMG][/URL]
Thank you, br. Paul for that moment. It’s a historical one!
LikeLike
An insightful comment on youtube
LikeLike
Didn’t the mother of Jesus wear head covering? The level of hypocrisy of these secularised Bible-trashing anti-Muslim types (I dare not even call them Christian) is astounding.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed. The double standards are blatant.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Time Time
“I’m not finished yet but I will let you continue”
Wow Paul you are such a gentleman lol
LikeLike
Paul so you whole opening statement was nothing more than a logical fallacy LOL.
You didn’t even show up with a copy of the article you are supposed to be debating. LOL
LikeLike
Watching Part two and you continue on with your logical fallacy.
You got beat by a GIRL lol
LikeLike
Poor Paul lol
LikeLike
The Quran And Prophetic Statements On Wives
Islamic scripture has strongly emphasized and taught to love your wife, to feed them, to treat them with kindness, as it is clearly shown in the following statements from Prophet Muhammad (p) [54]:
“I went to the Messenger of Allah and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them.” (Sunan Abi Dawud Book 11, Hadith 2139. Eng. Tran., Sahih Al-Albani, https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/99 )
The above is a clear command from Prophet Muhammed (p) not to hit your wife.
The Prophet (p) used to treat women very tenderly. [55] [56] [57] [58] He said:
‘Whoever remains patient with regards to the misbehaviour of his wife, Allah will give him a reward as great as Ayub’s (Job) for his affliction. Likewise, if a woman keeps patient with regards to the misbehaviour of her husband, Allah will give her a reward as great as Aishah’s Bint Bint Muzahim, (the Pharaoh’s wife).’ (Al-Hakim in Al-Mustadrak – Transmitters of this Hadith are trustworthy) (Major Sins [translators: Abdul-Hamid A. Eliwa Ali M. As-Sawi, Wa’il A. Shehab, Mahmud AI-Qastawi] by Imam Shamsu ed-Deen Dhahabi, page 136, online source http://www.islamtomorrow.com/books/major_sins/majorSins.pdf )
The best husband is the one who is best to his wife [59]:
“The Prophet said: ‘THE BEST OF YOU IS THE ONE WHO IS BEST TO HIS WIFE, and I am the best of you to my wives.’” (Sunan Ibn Majah volume 3, Book 9, Hadith 1977. Eng. Tran., Hasan, Darussalam https://sunnah.com/urn/1262960)
The most perfect faith are from the men who have the best bahviour towards their wives:
“Messenger of Allah said, ‘The believers who show the most perfect Faith are those who have the best behaviour, and the best of you are those who are the best to their wives.’” (Riyad as-Salihin Book 1, Hadith 278. Eng. Tran., https://sunnah.com/riyadussaliheen/1/278 )
A husband should not hate his wife because if he dislikes something in her, he will find something else he likes about her:
“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger saying: A believing man should not hate a believing woman (wife); if he dislikes one of her characteristics, he will be pleased with another.” (Sahih Muslim Book 8, Hadith 3469. Eng. Tran., https://sunnah.com/muslim/17/81)
God loves kindness:
“’A’isha, the wife of Allah’s Apostle, reported that Allah’s Messenger said: ‘A’isha, verily Allah is kind and He loves kindness and confers upon kindness which he does not confer upon severity and does not confer upon anything else besides it (kindness).” (Sahih Muslim 2593 Book 32, Hadith 6273. Eng. Tran., https://sunnah.com/muslim/45/99 )
Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058 – 1111 AD) – Ihya Ulum-Id-Din:
“The Prophet of God said, “the most perfect of believers in faith are those who are the finest in manners and most gentle toward their wives.” He said, “The best among you are the most charitable toward their wives…” (Book On The Etiquette of Marriage – Being the Second Book of The Section on Customs In The Book: The Revival of the Religious Sciences (“Ihya Ulum al-Deen”) [Translated by Madelain Farah], by Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali, part 2 (II), page 96)
Buying gifts for your spouse, there will be love between one another:
“…that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Give gifts and you will love one another.” (Al-Adab Al-Mufrad Book 30, Hadith 594. Eng. Tran., Hasan, Al-Albani https://sunnah.com/adab/30/57 )
Classical Scholar, Shaykh Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058 – 1111 AD) has put the above report in the section of “The Etiquette Of Marriage”:
“Exchanging gifts is desirable, and results in friendship.’ The Prophet said, “If you exchange gifts, you will love each other.” (Book On The Etiquette of Marriage – Being the Second Book of The Section on Customs In The Book: The Revival of the Religious Sciences (“Ihya Ulum al-Deen”) [Translated by Madelain Farah], by Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali, part 2 (II), page 89)
Sahih al-Bukhari:
“Whatever you spend (on your wife) will be considered a Sadaqa (charity) for you, even the mouthful of food you put in the mouth of your wife.” (Sahih al-Bukhari volume 7, Book 64, Hadith 266. Eng. Tran. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/69/4 )
Live with your wife in kindness (Quran 4:19):
“O you who have believed, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by compulsion. And do not make difficulties for them in order to take [back] part of what you gave them… And LIVE WITH THEM IN KINDNESS. For if you dislike them – perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good.” – Quran 4:19 (Sahih International)
Friends and allies of one other:
“The believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Those – Allah will have mercy upon them. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” – Quran 9:71 Sahih International)
The husband and wife are likened to clothing in the Quran (S. 2:187). They guard, respect and honour each other:
“They are clothing for you and you are clothing for them.” – Quran 2:187 (Sahih International)
In Quran 30:21 it says that God has placed “tranquality”, “affection” and “mercy”:,
“And of His signs is that He created for you from yourselves mates that you may find tranquillity in them; and He placed between you affection and mercy. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought.” – Quran 30:21 (Sahih International)
Ibn Kathir’s (1301 – 1373 AD) commentary on the above verse:
“Out of Allah’s perfect mercy He made their wives from their own kind, and CREATED LOVE AND KINDNESS BETWEEN THEM. For a MAN STAYS WITH A WOMAN BECAUSE HE LOVES HER, or because he feels compassion towards her if they have a child together, or because she needs him to take care of her, etc.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) [Abridged by A Group of Scholars Under The Supervision Of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri. Maktaba Dar-us-Salam – Second Edition, 2003], volume 7, page 535)
Muhammad b. al-Sa’ib al-Kalbi (d. 763 AD) exegesis on S. 30:21,
“(And of His signs) of the signs of His divine Oneness and power (is this: He CREATED FOR YOU SPOUSES) human beings like yourselves (from yourselves that ye might find rest in them) so that the husband may find rest in his wife, (and He ordained between you) HUSBAND AND WIFE (LOVE) LOVE OF THE WIFE FOR HER HUSBAND (AND MERCY) of the husband towards his wife; it is also said that this means: love of the young ones of the old ones and mercy from the older ones towards the young ones. (Lo, herein) in that which I have mentioned (indeed are portents) signs and lessons (for folk who reflect) upon what Allah created.” – (Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas on Surah 30:21 – online source http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=30&tAyahNo=21&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 )
Source:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2017/02/03/a-historical-analysis-of-the-beat-verse-quran-434/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul, you should have mentioned the verses in the New Testament where the Bible endorses “marital rape”:
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/27/does-the-new-testament-endorse-marital-rape/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mark 10:12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
Corinthians 7:39 A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes…
Romans 7:2-3 …By law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.
If you look in the above passages a woman cannot divorce her husband unless she commits Adultery. If a woman gets attacked, abused, beaten she cannot divorce her husband if she does:
“she would be called an adulterous”. The verse in Corinthians emphasizes on this matter again that the woman is bound to her husband for rest of her life and in Romans it can’t get any clearer that a woman cannot divorce her husband unless he dies otherwise she will be a called an adulterous. Where is the right for woman? So when she gets abused, tormented tortured by her husband, she cannot do anything but faithfully sit there and get slapped, beaten by the husband.
Woman not allowed to speak
1 Corinthians 14:34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.
Mathew Henry Commentary of the Bible says the following:
The apostle 1. Enjoins silence on their woman in public assemblies and to such a degree that they must not ask questions for their own information in the church, but ask their husbands at home. They are to learn in silence with all subjection: but, says the apostle Paul “I suffer them not to TEACH, 1 Timothy 2:12: I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet….. A teacher of others has in that respect a superiority over them, which is not allowed the woman over the man, nor must she therefore be allowed to teach… (Mathew Henry’s commentary acts to revelations page 583)
Woman not allowed to Teach
1 Timothy 2:11-12 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
Very nice verse indeed!! A woman is not allowed to teach? The following commentary on the Bible states:
Woman must learn the principles of their religion, learn Christ, learn the scriptures; they must not think that their sex excuses them from that learning which is necessary to salvation. They must be silent, submissive, and subject, and not usurp authority. The reason given is because Adam was first formed, then Eve out of him, to denote her subordination to him and dependence upon him; and that she was made for him, to be a help-meet for him. And as she was last in the creation, which is one reason for her subjection, so she was first in transgression (2 cor: 11:3), and that is another reason . Adam was not deceived, that is not first.; the serpent did not immediately set upon him, but the woman was first in the transgression, and it was part of the sentence , Thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over you Genesis 3:16.” (Mathew Henry’s commentary acts to revelations page 813)
Church taught that woman had no souls:
“These old Christian theologians found the nature of woman a prolific subject of discussion, a large party classing her among brutes without soul or reason.As early as the sixth century a council at Macon (585) fifty-nine bishops taking part, devoted its time to a discussion of this question, “Does woman possess a soul?” Upon one side it was argued that woman should not be called “homo;” upon the opposite side that she should, because, first, the Scriptures declared that God created man, male and female; second, that Jesus Christ, son of a woman, is called the son of man. Christian women were therefore allowed to remain human beings in the eyes of the clergy, even though considered very weak and bad ones. But nearly a thousand years after this decision in favor of the humanity of the women of Christian Europe, it was still contended that the women of newly discovered America belonged to the brute creation, possessing neither souls nor reason. As late as the end of the sixteenth century an anonymous work appeared, arguing that women were no part of mankind, but a species of intermediate animal between the human and the brute creation.”
(MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE. WOMAN, CHURCH AND STATE: Chapter 2 celibacy. Page 56)
LikeLike
Flying Pir,
Good info. So when women in Islam had their rights, Christians were still subjugating their women and arguing whether or not they had souls.
These poor Christian women are kept in bondage, married to their “Superior” Christian husbands and forced to submit to his every desire. They suffer torture, beatings, and all forms of abuse. In accordance with the Bible, these faithful Christian women are forced to keep silent…….but their eyes speak of their immense suffering.
As good Muslims it is imperative that we do the loving thing and create a social justice movement to liberate these poor subjugated, oppressed Christian women from their abusive overbearing Christian husbands who can’t control their own sexual desires.
Please give to the Islamic fund for liberating oppressed and subjugated Christian Women. 🙂
LikeLike
OMG Paul you sound like an hysterical teenage schoolgirl.
LikeLiked by 2 people
David Wood likes me:
LikeLike
Another case for the grammar vigilante
LikeLiked by 1 person
What the hell did I just read…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well Part 1 was interesting – an exercise in how to ignore what the other said. P2 on the train home.
LikeLike
The liberated, confident, standing up for women’s rights, HS-inhabitated missionary almost cried.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You mean Bilal?
LikeLike
You got sacked you from your missionary job, right?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yeah, too many converts from Islam 😂😂
LikeLike
Is she single? Good looking and smart. If she has a bloke he is a lucky man.
LikeLike
Try David Wood
LikeLiked by 3 people
😂😂
LikeLike
You haven’t seen her in other videos i guess…
LikeLike
Maybe Hatun is single. Good luck.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LOL
LikeLike
Anyway I discovered this:
LikeLiked by 2 people
Spread hummus, not hate!!
LikeLike
Lol.
Bilal got his arse kicked by a girl.
LikeLike
Hopefully I will do better next time
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yeah, he got completely smacked. When Paul used the word nefarious I almost keeled over.
LikeLike
Actually nefarious is one of my favourite words.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Credo quia absurdum
LikeLike
“Look over there – where? Here comes Jeannie with her new boyfriend”
LikeLiked by 1 person
The only one spewing any hate in these two video’s was Paul Williams. Nothing but hatred and demonizing Jay Smith, Lizzie and their organization.
LikeLike
Hop the State
LikeLike
My Williams did either of the two ever respond to your email regarding YOUR terms for the debate?
LikeLike
No. I also emailed other members of Jay Smith’s organisation. No one ever replied at any time.
LikeLike
I just got done watching the video of your original debate challenge in it you said and I quote.
“Your article on the Hijab (yes). Your article on the Hijab is full of hatred to words Muslims and (un intelligible) to the way many NAZI’s spoke about the Jews in the 1930’s. I will debate this with you.”
You continue to go about how you read the article and its full of lies and hatred…
“I read it two days ago, and it reminded me of what Goebbels said about the Jews. It was full of hate and vennom to words Muslims… it lied… and lied again…and I will debate you we can read this article in public I will debate you in public on television on radio about your writings and the way you lie and defame about Muslims.”
So why would you think that the topic was on anything else but your original debate challenge if they never responded to your emails regarding the change of topic?
LikeLike
I mentioned other issues to debate them on too did you not notice that? It was never just about her bigoted article.
Christian ms should condemn hate, not make excuses for it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul they didn’t accept that, but evidently you FAILED to notice that
1. You said you would debate her on her article being full of lies and hatred
2. That you would read from the article in public.
So again I asked since they never responded to you regarding the topic change why would you think she was going to debate you on anything other then what you challenged her on in the video?
LikeLike
Ok good point. It’s a shame Jay Smith stopped me from debating many of these points. He was clearly scared by what I might say!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Its a shame that Paul didn’t answer Lizzie’s questions regarding the blog she made about Nikes Hijab not very Sporting.
Would of been interesting to hear what he would’ve said back as a response.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree. I was willing and ready to answer them all but Jay Smith disrupted the debate preventing further discussion.
LikeLike
Watching the video it seemed very much that Paul didn’t answer it at all even before Jay spoke up….
I wanted to hear Paul’s response to Lizzie’s article when she read the 2nd paragraph about how Muslim women like wearing the veil? And how Nike made it easier for them?…
Jay didn’t say a word then and Paul didn’t answer at all.
The problem I find with the video is before Jay spoke up, Paul mentioned Jay Smith and Pfander when the debate should have just been about Lizzie and her article….
I feel that if Paul had an issue with Jay or Pfander, there should have arranged another debate just on that topic and not diverted the subject to something else.
LikeLike
As I understand it, the debate not only in regard to the hijab article alone. The email which Paul Williams sent to Jay Smith stated that the debate was to be on the subject of “Islamophobia in Europe and how certain Christian groups are contributing towards the increasing hatred toward Muslims” This opens the debate up to address the issue in many different ways, including bringing attention to the various ways that Pfander contributed towards the increasing hate towards Muslims, some of which Yahya Snow outlined here: https://bloggingtheology.net/2017/03/30/paul-williams-and-lizzie-schofield-debate-a-few-possible-discussion-points/
Paul only stated that he would use the hijab article as evidence of Pfanders hate speech, not that the debate would be limited to that article alone.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Paul mentioned Jay Smith and Pfander when the debate should have just been about Lizzie and her article….”
My public debate challenge included all the above. See the footage and my emails to them. They pulled a fast one on the day.
Sneaky and dishonest.
LikeLike
We don’t know, not knowing Paul or the Pfander team… We’re just taking they’re word for it or there was lack of communication on their part…
But even if that was the case, he still failed to answer the questions regarding the 2nd chapter, just seemed like he avoided it completely.
It doesn’t look good to the viewers…. If he’s so passionate about what he believes about the article and Pfander and their hatred towards Muslims then his arguments came across very weak lacking substance.
People may have believed him if he answered Lizzie’s questions but it just appears that he avoided them!
LikeLike
“We don’t know, not knowing Paul or the Pfander team… We’re just taking they’re word for it..”
Not so. See my original debate challenge at Speakers Corner and my emails to them. Also Jay Smith disrupted the debate and stopped Lizzie and myself from discussing these issues any further which I had prepared to do.
LikeLike
Well here is the original debate that I can see:https://youtu.be/drVD-u6PxTE
Where are the emails?
Even if they didn’t respond to the emails, the topic at hand regarding the article and especially the 2nd paragraph was never answered by Paul and that was one of the earliest comments Lizzie made, that being said… Can you see hatred in at least the 2nd paragraph?
Jay only spoke up when he was being spoken about by Paul….
It was a debate with Lizzie only so if Paul didn’t want Jay to defend himself why did he mention Jay?
LikeLike
dude – keep up: https://bloggingtheology.net/2017/03/29/31959/
LikeLike
Philspin,
Try to keep up.
In regard to the hijab article Paul has repeatedly said, and the videos verify that he “was willing and ready to answer them all but Jay Smith disrupted the debate preventing further discussion.”
As mentioned previously the debate topic was about “Islamophobia in Europe and how certain Christian groups are contributing towards the increasing hatred toward Muslims” Therefore, Paul W. had every right to bring up the name of Jay Smith who is the head of a well known nefarious Islamophobic hate group called Pfander. As Jay was not a scheduled debater he should have remained quiet and allowed the participants (Paul & Lizzie) to discuss the issue at hand. The fact that Jay interrupted the debate was a clear and underhanded attempt to derail it in order to distract from the facts that Paul was attempting to lay out in order to publicly prove that Pfander is indeed a hate group. Jay Smiths actions indicate that he is aware that there is merit to Paul Williams accusation, which is backed up by plenty of online public evidence to prove the point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said Ibn Issam.
LikeLike
Philspin only has half of the story and he is complaining about Paul Williams actions at the Big Debate, while ignoring or making excuses for Jay and Lizzie. Uffffff.
LikeLike
Re: ‘Keep up’ – sorry, with every respect, I’m not able to spend excesses amount of time on this as I have other responsibilities.
The only point i’m trying to make is when it was Luzzie’s time, she started the debate (jay wasn’t even in the camera) she started to read her article and explain the 2nd paragraph…
It was Paul’s turn, he chose to continue what he was saying before Lizzie had her time, that’s fine…. The problem im making is, he never answered her questions about it?!…
This was before Jay said a word so there is no way he could have disrupted it.
I’m only querying the 2nd paragraph!
LikeLike
There was much I could have said. I was still reading out my pre prepared remarks.
LikeLike
Instead of defending his religion from the alleged accusations made in Lizzie’s article and pfander ministries, Bilal spent 90% of the debate ranting and raving and pointing his finger at the bible and Jay Smith.
Paul, after your feeble showing on Sunday I don’t think you’ll have to worry about running away from debate challenges in the future as no serious Christian apologists should consider worthy of their time.
LikeLike
Well that’s a relief. People like you will stop harassing me to debate them. Thanks!!
LikeLike
In response to my response…
Thank you
I think this kind of debate is much better held in a formal way…. Where there is a moderator and everyone has an equal opportunity to express their belief and concerns in their own time frame.
Speakers Corner is great for great discussions and communication as long as its respectful… Unfortunately there were far more accusations than scriptual facts…
Maybe you and the Pfander team can arrange something?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think that is a very sensible suggestion.
LikeLike
She’s not a spiritual person
LikeLike
Paul reading the guidance from the Bible to those types of Christians is similar to someone reading anti-theft statutes to a kleptomaniac. Whooosh!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Lol
LikeLike
Going through the video quickly this time, I think the best part was when Paul characterised Lizzie’s rhetoric as nefarious and Jay Smith as self-radicalised (lol).
LikeLike
Paul,
You might like to chastise your fellow commentator Eric. Back on his own blog he is saying that wearing hijab is a MUST for a Muslim women- whether a woman has a “good” heart or a “bad” heart, the hijab “must” be worn.
Jilbab adalah KEWAJIBAN AGAMA, baik si pemakai berhati baik mau pun buruk, maka Jilbab tetap WAJIB dikenakan oleh para Wanita Muslimah sesuai dengan ketentuan Syariat, sebagaimana firman Allah Swt dalam QS.33.Al-Ahzaab ayat 59.
This is precisely what Lizzy is arguing against, the forced religious implementation put on a Muslim woman.
LikeLike
You will also find Eric publically stating that it is haram for a “kafir” to be in leadership over a Muslim majority
Berdasarkan Al-Qur’an dan As-Sunnah serta Al-Ijma’ bahwasanya Orang Kafir HARAM memimpin umat Islam di negeri Islam atau di wilayah mayoritas muslim.
This explains why he was involved and promoted he religious riots in Jakarta where radicals were calling for the removal of an elected Christian in political leadership in Jakarta.
Please, Paul, don’t be fooled by these so called “moderates”.
LikeLike
Eric also says that only Muslims are entitled to enter politics
Islam itu suci dan Ulama itu mulia, sedang politik (سياسي) itu PENTING untuk mengurus negara dan bangsa. Karenanya, hanya Islam yang suci dan Ulama mulia yang boleh masuk ke dalam politik agar tidak dikotori oleh para Politisi Durjana
Remember, this is coming from the “tolerant”, “pluralistic” and “religiously open” Indonesia. Dangerous and scary stuff you are allowing on your blog!!
LikeLike