The latest update
The correspondence after the June 03, 2011 meetings is given below:
On July 27, SAN replied to TNTJ
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
Thanks for your email. We will be coming to your office at 5 p.m. on July 29 (Friday) to sign the agreement.
Attached is the English draft which will be signed by us and which we expect you to sign as well. As we have already mentioned that Sunday timings will be as per your Tamil draft, any other differences with any points will only be cross checked with the video recordings of our last discussion and finalized accordingly. We are not coming to renegotiate or discuss again on any points but only to sign the agreement as per the agreed points.
If you can let us know of any concerns with any points in the attached English draft by tomorrow, it would be of great help.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
2011/7/27 TNTJ Head Office <tntjho@gmail.com>
அளவற்ற அருளாளனும் நிகரற்ற அன்புடையோனுமாகிய அல்லாஹ்வின் திருப்பெயரால் ஆரம்பம் செய்கின்றோம்.
அன்புள்ள SAN நண்பர்களுக்கு
தங்கள் மெயில் கிடைத்தது .
நா
ங்கள் உங்களுக்காக 29.07.11 வெள்ளிக்கிழமை மாலை சரியாக 5 மணிக்கு எங்களுடைய தலைமை அலுவலகத்தில் உங்களுக்காக காத்திருப்போம் .தவறாமல் கலந்துகொள்ளுமாறு கேட்டுகொள்கிறோம் .
இப்படிக்கு
தமிழ் நாடு தவ்ஹீத் ஜமாஅத்
(On July 27, SAN replied to TNTJ)
2011/7/27 SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We are in receipt of your replies (from 
pjtntj@gmail.com at July 26- 11:07 p.m. and from TNTJ Head Office tntjho@gmail.com at July 27, 10:04 a.m.) to our seventh reminder sent July 26, 2011.
Here are our replies:
Did TNTJ sent Draft or Model of Draft?
1) As per the email from pjtntj@gmail.com at July 26, 2011, whatever was in the Tamil draft is accepted. As per the email from tntjho@gmail.com at July 27, 2011, it was not draft but model of draft. Do we need to cite any other evidence that the email from tntjho@gmail.com on July 27, 2011 is a mere attempt to find some point of excuse and evade from the debate? No. Therefore, please come forward for the debate as per the agreed time mentioned in your Tamil draft. No excuses and evasion tactics please.
2) We have never asked you to send a ‘model of draft’ and you have never said so before. In fact, when we met at your office, you said you are sending the draft immediately as per the points mutually agreed (not the model of the draft). In fact, when you sent the Tamil draft on Jun 17, 2011, you never mentioned that it was the model of the draft. When we acknowledged the receipt of your email as the receipt of Tamil draft on Jun 17, 2011, and said that we will translate it, you never came back saying it was the model and not the Tamil draft itself. In fact when we sent the English translation, highlighting any of our suggestions in red on Jun 29, 2011, you never came back saying that it was the model and not the draft. But you replied on July 14, 2011 saying that there is a twist to the meaning in English draft. What was the point of raising the point of twist, if any, if it was only a model and not the draft itself? Anyone who reads all these will surely understand that you are trying to find an evasion tactics. Therefore, you will have to come for the debate as per the time mentioned in your Tamil draft, which was agreed by us well. No further excuses and evasion tactics please.
3) Further, the entire idea of ‘model’ itself is irrelevant after we have discussed and mutually agreed on the debate conditions and formalities. Model draft would have been relevant before we met to put across each other’s points. Therefore, without trying to find some lame excuses, please come forward for the debate as per the time mentioned in the Tamil draft. No further excuses and evasion tactics please.
Therefore, the time will be as per the Tamil draft, which even until yesterday was considered by you as the draft as per the email by pjtntj@gmail.com. No excuses and tactics now.
Did TNTJ Accommodate Many Things for the Sake of Debate?
While we do not want to dwell on whether you accommodated or we accommodated since we both agreed on the points; we do not want you to create an impression that you made some accommodation for the sake of conducting debates. Therefore, we briefly answer.
1) Quoting of the Holy Bible, Quran, Hadiths, etc are not an accommodation that you made. You have simply agreed for the general standard practice across the world.
2) Further, SAN suggested face to face debate on the traditional format. But we have agreed face to face debate in the format as suggested by you in addition to the panel debate for which the format was prepared by you.
3) Though SAN wanted evening debates but you suggested two day debates and we agreed for that including the timing as mentioned in the Tamil draft.
4) SAN wanted two sides to be discussed as one topic, you wanted it to be separate and we agreed for that.
5) SAN wanted one hour presentation, followed by rebuttal, you wanted 18 minutes presentation (with translation), and we agreed for that.
6) Topics we suggested or you suggested, it was agreed by both; so there is no question of any accommodation here. Further, if you look at the topics there is no single sided Islamic topic but there is a single sided Christian topic. In fact, if at all anyone has to say that they have made an accommodation it is us and not you.
Did SAN send the Timing after Discussion with Pastors?
1) You said that you will send the draft immediately after the discussion when we met. At that time, we had asked whether you are sending a copy to Bro. Ajoy etc but you said that you will be sending it only to SAN id soon. Since you said that you are sending it immediately, we definitely waited for your draft and send the reminders as well.
2) In fact, we did send you the timings after our discussion with pastors on June 17, 2011 saying that we are fine with Sunday afternoons (preferably 4-11 pm.). This was sent on June 17, 2011 at 11:20 a.m. In fact, your Tamil draft was sent on June 17, 2011 at 12:20 p.m. exactly an hour after we send the timings. However, since you did not agree with our preferable timing, we agreed as per the timing which was mentioned in your Tamil draft.
Signing on July 29, 2011
We are ready to sign the agreement on Friday (July 29, 2011) afternoon for the series of debates as per the agreed timing of debates and all other things as we agreed when we met at your office.
Please confirm by email that July 29, 2011 afternoon is convenient at the earliest (before July 28, 2011 10 a.m.) for us to send the authorized signatories and schedule their trip as well.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On July 27, TNTJ replied to SAN
அளவற்ற அருளாளனும் நிரற்ற அன்புடையோனுமாகிய அல்லாஹ்வின் திருப்பெயரால் ஆரம்பம் செய்கின்றோம்.
அன்புள்ள SAN நண்பர்களுக்கு
உங்களின் அனைத்து நினைவூட்டல்களும் கிடைக்கபெற்றோம். நன்றி.
உங்களுடைய இறுதி கடிதத்தில் நீங்கள் எதிர்பார்த்த வேகத்தில் நாங்கள் பதில் அளிக்காததால் விவாதத்திலிருந்து நாங்கள் ஓடுவதாக தெரிவித்திருந்தீர்கள்.
நீங்கள் எத்தனை விவாதங்கள் செய்திருப்பீர்களோ அதை விட பன்மடங்கு அதிகமான விவாதங்களை நாங்கள் எதிர்கொண்டிருக்கிறோம். இன்று நேற்று அல்ல 25 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பே கிறிஸ்தவர்களை விவாதத்தில் சந்தித்திருக்கிறோம். தொடர்ந்து பல முறை – ஒவ்வொரு முறையும் வெற்றிகரமாக – கிறிஸ்துவர்களை எதிர்கொண்டிருக்கிறோம். உங்களுடன் மோதுவது எங்களுக்கு அச்சமோ தயக்கமோ எள்ளளவும் இல்லை.
உங்களுடன் விவாதம் செய்வதில் ஆர்வமாகவே இருந்தோம். எத்தனை தலைப்புகள் உண்டோ அத்தனை தலைப்புகளிலும் உடனே துவங்கி ஓரிரு மாதங்களிலேயே விவாதித்து முடித்து விட வேண்டும் என்று நாங்கள் வற்புறுத்தினோம்.
எங்களின் பல்வேறு பணிகளை விட உங்களுடன் விவாதிப்பதற்கு முக்கியத்துவம் அளித்து கால ஒதுக்கி காத்திருந
021;தோம்.
நீங்களோ சுமார் 31/2 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு விவாதிக்க வேண்டுமென்று பிடிவாதமாக இருந்து விட்டீர்கள். முதல் விவாதத் தேதியையும் தாமதப்படுத்தினீர்கள்.
இப்போது முதல் விவாதத்திற்கே இன்னும் 6 மாதங்கள் இருக்கின்றன.
இவை எங்களுக்கு சோர்வு அளிக்கின்றன. 31/2 – 4 ஆண்டுகளுக்கும் உங்களைப் பற்றியே நாங்கள் எண்ணிக்கொண்டு இருக்க இயலாது எங்களின் பல்வேறு பணிகளோடு ஒன்றாகத் தான் உங்களது விவாதத்தையும் இப்போது நாங்கள் கருதுகிறோம். உங்களின் அளவு கடந்த கால நீட்டிப்பு காரணமாக உங்கள் விவாதத்திற்கென்று சிறப்பு முக்கியத்துவம் வழங்க இயலாத நிலையை ஏற்படுத்தி விட்டீர்கள்.யில் இருக்கிறோம்.
இந்நிலையில் ஒப்பந்ததிற்கு நீங்கள் திடீர் அவசரம் காட்டுவதால் எதிர்
வரும் தேதிகளில் 29.07.11 அல்லது ரமலான் நோன்பு மற்றும் பெருநாள் முடிந்து 16.09.11 இல் ஒப்பந்தத்தை பூர்த்தி செய்து கையயெழுத்து இடுவதற்கு உங்களுக்கு ஏற்ற தேதியை தெரியப்படுத்தக் கேட்டுக் கொள்கிறோம்.
ஆரம்பம் முதலே இரண்டு முழு நாட்கள் ஒவ்வோரு தலைப்பிலும் விவாதிக்க வேண்டும் என்பதில் உறுதியாக இருந்தோம் அதை தகுந்த காரணங்களுடன் விளக்கினோம் நீங்களும் ஏற்றீர்கள் சனி ஞாயிறுகளில் விவாதிப்பதை நீங்களும் ஆமோதித்தே வந்தீர்கள் ஒப்பந்தம் இறுதிசெய்யப்படயிருந்த கடேசி நிமிடத்தில் ஞாயிற்றுக்கிழமை அரைநாள் தான் முடியும் என்று பின்வாங்கினீர்கள். இறுதியில் உங்கள் சபைப் பிரமுகர்கள் மற்றும் தலைவர்களிடம் ஆலோசித்து சொல்வதாக கூறிச் சென்றீர்கள்
உங்களது பதிலுக்காக நாங்கள் காத்திருந்த நிலையில் ஒப்பந்த மாதிரி ஏன் அனுப்பவில்லை என்ற ரீதியில் உங்களது ஈ மெயில் வந்ததால் ஒப்பந்த மாதிரியை நாங்கள் அனுப்பியிருந்தோம். அப்போதே கீழ்கண்டவாறு தெரிவித்து இருந்தோம்
விவாத ஒப்பந்தத்தின் நகலை அனுப்பி வைக்குமாறு தாங்கள் கேட்டுக் கொண்டதன் அடிப்படையில் அதை இத்துடன் இணைத்துள்ளோம். ஒப்பந்தம் குறித்து பேசும் போது தாங்கள் ஆங்கிலத்தில் எழுதிக் கொண்டதால் அதன் பிரதியை எங்களுக்கும் அனுப்பி வைக்குமாறு கேட்டுக் கொள்கிறோம்.
ஆரம்பத்தில் சனி மற்றும் ஞாயிறு என்று ஒப்புக்கொண்ட நீங்கள் கடைசியாக ஞாயிறு ஒத்துவராது என்று கூறியதால், அது நிலுவையில் உள்ளது. வெள்ளிக்கிழமை ஜூம்மா நாள் என்பதாலும் ஞாயிறு உங்கள் வழிபாட்டு நாள் என்பதாலும் இரண்டையும் தவிர்த்து வேலை நாட்களில் ஏதாவது இரண்டு நாட்கள் வைத்துக் கொள்ளலாம் என இதன் மூலம் கேட்டுக் கொள்கிறோம்.
அதாவது
திங்கள் மற்றும் செவ்வாய்
செவ்வாய் மற்றும் புதன்
புதன் மற்றும் வியாழன்
இதில் ஒன்றைத் தேர்வு செய்து தெரிவிக்குமாறு கேட்டுக்கொள்கிறோம்.
நாங்கள் தமிழில் அனுப்பிய ஒப்பந்த மாதிரியை காரணம் காட்டி ஒன்றரை நாள் விவாதமாக குறைக்க முயற்சிக்கிறீர்கள். இது உங்கள் அறியாமையை வெளிப்படுத்துகிறது. அது ஒப்பந்த மாதிரியே தவிர இறுதி அல்ல. அதில் தலைப்புகள் கூட முழுமையாக இல்லை என்பதை கவனித்தே இருப்பீர்கள்.
ஞாயிறு பகல் இரண்டு மணிக்கு மேல் விவாதிப்பதில் நீங்கள் உடன்
பட்டீர்கள். எனினும் காலை அமர்வில் கலந்து கொள்வது குறித்து உங்கள் தலைவர்களுடன் ஆலோசித்து பதிலளிப்பதாக கூறிச் சென்றீர்கள். நீங்கள் எதில் உடன் பட்டீர்களோ அதை மாதிரி ஒப்பந்தத்தில் குறிப்பிட்டு இருந்தோம். உங்களிடமிருந்து பதில் வராததால் நீங்களே அதை பூர்த்தி செய்வீர்கள் என்று எண்ணி அதை அனுப்பியிருந்தோம்.
பதில் தராதது உங்கள் தவறுதான். நாம் பேசிவிட்டு சென்று இத்தனை நாட்கள் கழித்த பின்னும் நீங்கள் பதிலளிப்பதாக சொன்னதை இது வரை செய்தீர்களா?
உங்கள் தலைவர்களிடம் கலந்து சொல்வதாக சொன்ன உங்கள் பதில் எங்கே? குறைகளை உங்கள் பக்கம் வைத்துக்கொண்டு நல்ல பிள்ளை போல் விவாதத்திலிருந்து நழுவ முயல வேண்டாம். விவாதம் எப்படியும் நடந்தே தீரும்.
விவாதம் நடைபெறும் 13 தலைப்புகளில் 12 தலைப்புகள் நீங்கள் தேர்ந்து எடுத்தவை.
நேருக்கு நேர் வராமல் குழுவுக்கப்பின்னால் பீ.ஜே ஒளிகிறார். துணிச்சல் இருந்தால் தனித்து வரட்டும் என்றீர்கள். அத்தனை தலைப்புகளிலும் தனித்தே பீ. ஜே வரத் தயார் என்றோம். அனைத்திலும் வேண்டாம் ஒன்றில் மட்டும் என்றீர்கள் அதையும் ஏற்றோம். இன்ன தலைப்பில் தான் தனித்து விவாதம் என்றீர்கள் அதையும் ஏற்றோம்.
உங்கள் நம்பிக்கைகளை நிலைநாட்ட குர்ஆனின் உதவி தேவை என்றீர்கள். எல்லா தலைப்புகளிலும் குர்ஆனில் இருந்து மேற்கோள் காட்டுவோம் என்றீர்கள். அதையும் ஏற்றோம்.
இஸ்லாத்தின் ஆதாரங்கள் திருக்குர்ஆனும் ஆதாரப்பூர்வமான நபிமொழிகளும் மட்டுமே ஆகும். எனினும் ஆதாரம் அற்ற செய்திகளையும் கூறுவோம் என்றீர்கள். விவாதம் நடைபெற வேண்டும் என்பதற்காக அதில் கேட்கப்படும் கேள்விகளுக்கு நீங்Ĩ
5;ள் பொறுப்பு ஏற்றுக் கொண்டால் ஏற்றுக் ஏற்றுக் கொள்ள ஒப்புக் கொண்டோம்கொண்டோம்.
யார் எழுதிய நூல்களிலிருந்தும் மேற்கோள் காட்டுவோம் என்றீர்கள் அவை ஆதராமாகாது என்ற நிபந்தனையின் அடிப்படையில்அதையும் சகித்தோம்.
இறுதி மூன்று நிபந்தனைகளும் விவாத முறைகளுக்கே முரணாக இருந்த போதும் எப்படியும விவாதம் செய்ய வேண்டும் என்பற்காக அதையும் விட்டுக் கொடுத்தோம்
இதற்கெல்லாம் காரணம் ஆழமான அர்த்தமுள்ள விவாதம் நடைபெற வேண்டும் என்பதே. எனவே ஏற்கனவே பல முறை பேசி முடிவானது போல் இரண்டு நாட்கள் முழுமையாக விவாதம் நடைபெற வேண்டும். வெள்ளியைத் தவிர எந்த நாட்கள் ஆனாலும் சரியே போலிக் காரணங்கள் சொல்லி பின் வாங்காமல் ஒப்பந்தம் கையெழுத்து இட நேரில் வர அழைக்கிறோம்.
எதிர் வரும் தேதிகளில் 29.07.11 அல்லது ரமலான் நோன்பு மற்றும் பெருநாள் முடிந்து 16.09.11 இல் ஒப்பந்தத்தை பூர்த்தி செய்து கையயெழுத்து இடுவதற்கு உங்களுக்கு ஏற்ற தேதியை தெரியப்படுத்தக் கேட்டுக்கொள்கிறோம்.
இப்படிக்கு
தமிழ்நாடு தவ்ஹீத் ஜமாஅத்
On July 26, SAN received a reply from pjtntj@gmail.com
தமிழில் உள்ளது சரியாக உள்ளது
On July 26, SAN sent the seventh and the final reminder)
SAN basically recalled the events and had asked TNTJ to reply by July 27 at the earliest. However, the content of this email was offered to keep as private conversation, if TNTJ replies by July 27, 2011. Therefore, since they have replied, we are not publishing the content as offered. This is nothing else but just a recall of events between TNTJ and SAN.
(On July 25, SAN sent the sixth reminder)
2011/7/25 SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
Ten days have lapsed since we sent our reply dated July 15, 2011 and we have sent repeated gentle reminders as well. It is not proper on your part not to reply and delay things when everything was agreed and any points could easily be cross checked with recordings. You have to sign the agreement as agreed and come forward for all the debates.
Awaiting your response at the earliest.
Regards,
SAN
(On July 23, SAN sent the fifth reminder)
2011/7/23 SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
This is the fifth reminder to our email dated July 15, 2011. As such the draft is ready except for one or two points where you feel there is a twist, where we had already agreed that it can be checked with recordings and finalized accordingly, we think this stage should have happened in one or two days. However, already one week has lapsed since we sent you our reply.
We request you to kindly let us know when we can discuss the remaining points, if required, and sign the agreement.
Regards,
SAN
(On July 22, SAN sent the fourth reminder)
2011/7/22 SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
Hope this email will find you in good spirits.
This is the fourth reminder to the email we sent last week (July 15, 2011). We are hopeful that you are as encouraged as we are by the prospect of these series of debates. As we have agreed everything when we met and as we had agreed for the time that was proposed in the Tamil draft, we strongly feel that there should not be any further delay in signing the agreement.
Looking forward for your response at the earliest.
Regards,
SAN
(On July 21, 2011, SAN sent the third reminder)
2011/7/21 SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
This is the third reminder to the email we sent on July 15, 2011. As we mentioned in the previous email that we look forward to sign the final agreement before August 1, 2011, we urge you to let us know when we can sign the agreement.
Also, if we need to cross-check the recordings to finalize on any points where you feel there is a twist in the meaning, we request you to let us know it at the earliest as there are only few days left before August 1.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On July 20, 2011 (SAN sent the second reminder)
2011/7/20 SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
This is the second reminder to the email sent on July 15, 2011. As we have already agreed on the time that was mentioned in the Tamil draft, we would like to sign the agreement before the beginning of your Ramadan from August 1, 2011. Therefore, we request you to revert at the earliest and let us know the date when we can meet and sign the agreement.
If you any objections to any points, we can also go back to the recordings and write it exactly as we agreed on the day we met.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On July 19, 2011 (SAN sent the first reminder)
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
This is a gentle reminder to the email reply below (July 15, 2011). Please let us know when we can sign the agreement and we repeat what we have already stated that what was decided when we met at your office can be considered as final.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On July 15, 2011 (SAN replied to TNTJ)
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We are in receipt of your email dated July 14, 2011. Our responses to your concerns are as follows:
1) Two days time: When we met we had agreed for starting the debate on Sunday afternoon (2 p.m.). You had spoken to PJ sir over the phone (as he had left by that time) and had agreed for this. However, we had also mentioned that we would take the advice of Church leadership. Further, the change that we suggested to the Tamil Draft sent by you was only to start at 4 pm (or earliest 3 pm) on Sunday rather than 2 p.m. as mentioned in your Tamil Draft. If that is not acceptable to you, we are ready to bear the difficulties considering it is a Sunday, and are agreeing to start at 2 pm itself as mentioned in your Tamil Draft.
2) All other matters: If you feel there is any mistranslation or twist in the meaning of any agreement points, we can see the recordings and translate it exactly as we had agreed on that day. On all other matters, we reiterate, whatever has been agreed when we met at your office can be considered as final.
We are hoping that you are as eager as us to have these debates and therefore we urge you that let us try to sign the agreement at the earliest and respond to each other much more quickly.
Thanks and looking forward to sign the agreement and have these series of debates.
Regards,
SAN
On July 14, 2011 (TNTJ replied to SAN)
அன்புள்ள SAN நண்பர்களுக்கு,
உங்களின் இரு மெயில்களும் கிடைக்கப்பெற்றோம். மிக்க நன்றி.
விவாத ஒப்பந்த ஆங்கில மொழியாக்கம் அனுப்பியிருந்தீர்கள். பரிசீலித்தோம். அதில் கருத்துச் சிதைவுகள் உள்ளன.
நாம் ஏற்கனவே ஒத்துக் கொண்டவற்றிற்கும் மாற்றமான நிபந்தனைகளையும் அதில் சேர்த்துள்ளீர்கள். அவற்றைத் திருத்தம் செய்ய வேண்டியுள்ளது. எனினும் மிக முக்கியமான பிரச்சனையான விவாத கால அளவு தீர்க்கப்படாமல் மற்றவைகள் குறித்து பேசுவது பொருளற்றது.
முழுமையாக இருநாட்களுக்கு குறையாமல் விவாதிக்க வேண்டும் என்று ஆரம்பம் முதலே வலியுறுத்தி பல முறை வந்தோம். அவ்விருநாட்கள் சனி,ஞாயிறு என்றும் ஆரம்பம் முதலே பேசப்பட்டு வந்தது. நீங்களும் ஆமோதித்தே வந்தீர்கள்.
இப்போது திடீரென மறுப்பதும் விவாத கால அளவை மறுப்பதும் முறையாகாது.
எனவே முழுமையாக இருநாட்கள் விவாதத்திற்கு முன்வர வேண்உம். இது நீங்கள் ஒப்புக்கொண்டது தான். சனி, ஞாயிறு முடியாவிட்டால் வெள்ளிக்கிழமையைத் தவிர வாரநாட்களில் நாங்கள் தயார் என்பதை ஏற்கனவே தெரிவித்துள்ளோம். உங்களுக்கு வசதியான கிழமைகளைக் குறிப்பிடுங்கள்.
இது முடிவான பின்னர் விவாத ஒப்பந்தத்தின் ஆங்கில் மொழியாக்கத்தில் உள்ள ஏனைய நிபந்தனைகள் குறித்து முடிவெடுக்கலாம்.
[Translation by SAN]
Dear friends at San,
We received your both mails. Thank You.
You have sent Your English translation of the Debate agreement. We saw that it has some meaning twist in it.
You have added some conditions which are contrary to what we already agreed for. Yet the main problem is it is meaningless to talk about other things without deciding the duration of time.
We have been insisting from the beginning that we need two full days to debate. It was spoken from the beginning that those days as Saturday and Sunday You also accepted that.
This is not proper to deny now and denying the duration of time.
Therefore you have to come forward for Two days debate for which you have already accepted.
We have already said that if it is not on Sunday except Friday we are ready on any week days. So mention your convenient days.
Once after confirming this then we will decide about the other conditions in your English translation.]
On July 11, 2011 (SAN sent the second reminder to TNTJ)
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Lord Jesus Christ, may His name be glorified for ever and ever. Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
This is the second reminder email regarding the debate draft. If there are any concerns, please let us know. If not, let us decide on a date to sign the final agreement.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On July 7, 2011 (SAN sent the first reminder to TNTJ)
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Lord Jesus Christ, may His name be glorified for ever and ever. Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We are awaiting for your reply so that we can together finalize and sign the agreement. We do not want to disturb during your fasting season. So, we would like to finalize and sign the agreement at the earliest.
It would be great if you can let us know the likely date when we can expect a reply you.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On June 29, 2011 (SAN replied with translation)
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Lord Jesus Christ, may His name be glorified for ever and ever. Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We have translated your Tamil draft and it is attached. We have a few minor modifications which are marked in red. If there are any further comments from your side, please let us know. If not, let us decide on a date and time to sign the agreement.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
Draft in English (same as the attached document)
Agreement between Sakshi Apologetics Network and Tamil Nadu Thowheed Jamath
This is the debate agreement between Tamil Nadu Thowheed Jamath (TNTJ) and Sakshi Apologetics Network (SAN) discussed and decided by both the parties in the state head office of TNTJ at Mannady, Chennai on June 3, 2011:
Participants from Tamil Nadu Towheed Jamath:
1. Brother Galil Rasul
2. Brother P. Jainul Abedeen
3. Brother Sayed Ibrahim
4. Brother Rahamthulla
Participants from Sakshi Apologetics Network:
1. Brother Ajoy Varghese
2. Brother Venkatesan J
3. Brother Bennett
I. The venue/s for debates:
A mutually acceptable and available auditorium in Chennai, India.
II. Topics, dates, and schedule for the debates:
1. The Word of God.
SAN position: The Bible is the Word of God! (Panel debate) ( 2 Days) (21 -22 January 2012)
TNTJ position: The Quran is the Word of God! (Panel debate) (2 Days) (28 -29 January 2012)
Note: The dates for the next debate to be mutually agreed immediately after the completed debate. This practice to be adopted for all following debates.
Schedule for Saturdays:
10am to 10:42am – SAN (including 3 mins break)
10:45am – 11:27am – TNTJ (including 3 mins break)
11:30 – 11:50 SAN
11:50 – 12:10 TNTJ
12:10 – 12:30 SAN
12:30 – 12:50 TNTJ
12:50 – 01:10 SAN
01:10 – 01:30 TNTJ
03:00 – 03:20 SAN
03:20 – 03:40 TNTJ
03:40- 04:00 SAN
04:00- 04:20 TNTJ
04:20 – 04:40 SAN
04:40 – 05:00 TNTJ
07:00 – 07:20 SAN
07:20 – 07:40 TNTJ
07:40 – 08:00 SAN
08:00 – 08:20 TNTJ
08:20 – 08:40 SAN
08:40 – 09:00 TNTJ
Schedule for Sundays
[Note: On Sundays, the debate can begin at 4 pm. This gives Christians minimum time to go to church till afternoon, have lunch and come for the debate. However, if we have to start early, the earliest we can consider is 3 pm and extend it up to 9:00 pm. Fridays have been avoided since Muslims have similar commitments on Friday. The above timings for Saturdays and Sundays apply for all debates]
02:00 – 02:20 SAN – SAN not available
02:20 – 02:40 TNTJ – SAN not available
02:40 – 03:00 SAN– SAN not available
03:00 – 03:20 TNTJ– SAN not available
03:20 – 03:40 SAN– SAN not available
03:40 – 04:00 TNTJ– SAN not available
04:00 – 04:20 SAN – SAN available
04:20 – 04:40 TNTJ
04:40 – 05:00 SAN
05:00 – 05:20 TNTJ
05:20 – 05:40 SAN
05:40 – 06:00 TNTJ
06:00 – 06:20 SAN
07:00 – 07:20 TNTJ
07:20 – 07:40 SAN
07:40 – 08:00 TNTJ
08:00 – 08:20 SAN
08:20 – 08:40 TNTJ
2. Sin and Salvation
SAN Position: All people are born with sin because of the sin of Adam. They are incapable of achieving their own salvation. Therefore Jesus Christ was given as the only atonement for all creation and for all people by God and gave up his life as a sacrifice for all sin. Those who accept this will have eternal life. Those who reject this will not have eternal life. (2 days – Panel debate)
TNTJ position: No man is born with sin. Each man is responsible for his own sin. No one can bear the sin of others. Whoever has sinned must work out his own salvation and through this only he can have eternal life. (2 days – Panel debate).
3. The concept of God.
TNTJ position: Only the Islamic concept of God is true. (Panel debate) (2 days)
SAN position: Only the Christian concept of God is true. (Panel debate) (2 days)
4. The prophet-hood of Muhammad and the Deity of Jesus Christ.
TNTJ position: Muhammad is the prophet of God! (Panel debate) (2 days)
SAN position: Jesus is God! (Panel debate) (2 days)
5. Who is the role model and pattern for humanity? (P Jainull Abdeen and Jerry Thomas)
TNTJ position: Muhammad is the role model and pattern for humanity! (2 days)
SAN position: Jesus is the role model and pattern for humanity! (2 days)
6. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ
TNTJ position: Jesus did not die on the cross or rise again on the third day
SAN position: Jesus died on the cross and rose again on the third day (Panel debate) (Total of 2 days only for both positions)
7. The ‘Jesus’ of the Church and Christianity and the original Jesus
TNTJ Position: The ‘Jesus’ of the church and Christianity has nothing to with the original Jesus of history.
SAN Position: The ‘Jesus’ of the church and Christianity is the same as the original Jesus of history. (Panel discussion) (Total of 2 days only for both positions)
III. Expenses of the debate:
Both the sides must equally share the expenses of auditorium, audio, video, water, time piece, generator and the expenses which will be used equally by both sides.
IV. Arrangement of the auditorium:
1) A panel of 3 persons each from both sides is appointed to do the arrangement of auditorium and for the works done commonly by both the sides for the debate.
2) Only the expenses which mutually agreed in writing from both sides will be shared equally.
3) It is the duty of this panel to get police permission with the letters from both sides.
4) Members of the panel: At the discretion of TNTJ and SAN.
V. Audience:
1) 150 persons from each side only as only a maximum of 300 people will be allowed as audience. This audience is apart from the number of panel members (maximum of 7), and volunteers.
2) They must be seated 10 minutes before every sitting commences.
3) After 5 minutes of each sitting they can go out of the auditorium.
4) Those that go out in between the sitting will not be permitted in at any cost till that sitting is over.
5) No cell phone, walk man, audio, video recording equipments should be used inside the auditorium for recording or speaking purposes.
6) It is prohibited to get up from the seat or to talk to others or to interfere in the debate or to say the opinion or to shout or to pass a piece of paper or to distribute tracts (in and out of the auditorium). Transgressors will surely be expelled and not be permitted in to the auditorium till the end.
7) Separate places will be allotted for the audience of each group (Muslims and Christians) to sit.
8) Audience of each side will be permitted in to the auditorium only if they come with the entry token from their side.
9) Each side is responsible for any accidents caused by or to their respective audiences.
VI. Volunteers:
20 persons each from side will be appointed for in and out of the auditorium. From both sides one person each to be appointed as leaders.
1) It is their responsibility to watch over the audience and fulfill their needs such as food and water.
2) Volunteers of both sides will work separately.
3) The Muslim volunteers will be solely responsible for maintaining the decorum and behavior of Muslim participants and likewise the Christian volunteers for Christian participants.
VII. Personal responsibilities:
Every side is responsible for the needs of food and water for their own audience, scholars, volunteers and overseers.
VIII. Advertisements:
The debates should not be advertised in wall posters, notice, flex banners, TV and magazines. However, it can be announced in official websites for SAN and other religious publications, religious places such as Churches and Mosques as well as via official emails to raise spiritual and financial support with clear statement that only invited participants would be allowed and is not open to public.
IX. Video recording:
1) Both sides should take video recordings separately.
2) Date and time must be mentioned in the video recording.
3) After the debate gets over on one topic both sides to give a copy of that video recording without editing to the other group within 3 days.
4) Both the sides should get equal and fair space in the auditorium for video recording, which should be planned in advance.
5) Each group will be permitted to release its copy of the video recording for viewing of others who have not attended a debate after that particular debate is completed.
X. Time overseers:
1) Two overseers from each side will be appointed to look after the time.
2) During the debate it is their only duty to indicate the commencing and closing time of the speaker.
XI. Debate related matters:
1) It is decided that each topic to be debated separately.
2) It is decided that each topic to be debated for two days.
3) The agreement must be written in both the languages (Tamil and English) and both signed by authorized representatives.
4) Both sides can debate either as group/panel or as individual but as specified above only.
5) Whether it is Quran verse or Bible verse or sayings of the prophet the evidences must be shown from the legitimate sources. It may be hard copy or soft copy. It must be shown when the opponent asks for the same.
6) In every debate, authoritative religious scriptures such as the Holy Bible, Quran, Hadiths, etc can be used by both the sides irrespective of the topics as the debate is between Christians and Muslims. [In the Tamil draft sent by TNTJ, it was “When defense is made by showing Quranic verses as evidence TNTJ has the responsibility to answer that.”]
7) TNTJ will not accept the messages which have problems in its announcer’s chain and the messages which contradict to Quran as the evidence. Yet SAN has right to put forth sources like these. TNTJ has right to explain that with reasons and to deny and raise counter question.
8) Every side is responsible for the evidences they put forth.
9) If any one of the both (Jerry Thomas – Jainul Abedeen) who are debating dies the agreement must be renewed. [SAN feels that this point is not relevant as this Agreement is between two groups; and not two individuals. Hence this point must be removed].
10) When both the groups/panels debate each group will have a maximum of seven members including translators.
11) Not more than 150 persons each will be present as audience from both sides. This means a maximum of 300 people only.
12) 20 persons each will be there as volunteers from both sides.
13) Time overseers will be appointed on behalf of both sides.
14) During debate both sides to face the audience and speak.
15) There should not be abusive words, criticisms, mockery and personal insulting of panelists.
XII. General matters:
1) Nobody has authority from both sides to alter or to correct the debate agreement and to add or remove anything unless with mutual consent and agreement.
2) Both sides can use projectors.
XIII. Legal :
1) Nothing said in during the debate shall be liable for any legal action, such as claiming to have hurt a community’s feelings, during and after the debate. Both sides agree to consider sensitive evidence as long as appropriate sources are quoted and the opportunity for a defense is provided.
For Sakshi Apologetics Network: For Tamil Nadu Thowheed Jamath:
Authorized Signatory: Authorized Signatory:
Date: Date:
Two Adult Witnesses from Both the Sides:
1.
2.
3.
4
On June 28, 2011 (SAN updated TNTJ about the status as a matter of courtesy)
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
Just wanted to keep you posted; we are almost through with the translation and review and we are hopeful of returning the draft by tomorrow (Wednesday).
Regret the delay as we were tied up with certain programs.
Regards,
SAN
On June 17, 2011 (SAN acknowledged the receipt)
In the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Jesus Christ, be glorified forever and ever, Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We are in receipt of your Tamil email and Tamil draft. We will get this translated and revert to you with comments, if any.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
On June 17, 2011 (TNTJ wrote to SAN)
பிஸ்மில்லாஹிர்ரஹ்மானிர்ரஹீம்
3.06.11
சென்னை
விவாத ஒப்பந்தம்
தமிழ்நாடு தவ்ஹீத் ஜமாஅத்திற்கும் – SAN(sakshi apologeticsnetwork)க்கும் சென்னை மன்னடியில் தமிழ்நாடு தவ்ஹீத் ஜமாஅத் மாநிலத் தலைமையகத்தில் இரு தரப்பாரும் செய்து கொண்ட விவாத ஒப்பந்தம்.
தமிழ்நாடு தவ்ஹீத் ஜமாஅத் சார்பாக கலந்து கொண்டவர்கள் :
1. சகோதரர் கலீல் ரசூல்
2. சகோதரர் P. ஜைனுல் ஆபிதீன்
3. சகோதரர் செய்யது இப்ராஹீம்
4. சகோதரர் ரஹ்மத்துல்லாஹ்
SAN அமைப்பின் சார்பாக கலந்து கொணடவர்கள் :
1. சகோதரர்
2. சகோதரர்
3. சகோதரர்
4. சகோதரர்
விவாதம் நடைபெறும் இடம் : சென்னையில் ஒரு அரங்கம்
2) விவாதிக்கப்படும் தலைப்புகள்
1. SAN ன்: தலைப்பு :பைபிள் இறைனின் வேதம்! (குழு) (2நாட்கள்) (21-22 ஜனவரி 2012)
TNTJ யின் தலைப்பு :குர்ஆன் இறைவனின் வேதம்! (குழு)(2நாட்கள்)(28 -29 ஜனவரி 2012.)
சனிக்கிழமை காலை 10 மணி முதல் 10:42 – 3நிமிட இடைவெளியுடன் SAN
10:45-11:27 – 3 நிமிட இடைவெளியுடன் TNTJ
11:30 – 11:50 SAN
11:50 – 12:10 TNTJ
12:10- 12:30 SAN
12:30 – 12:50 TNTJ
12:50 – 01:10 SAN
01:10 – 01:30 TNTJ
03:00 – 03:20 SAN
03:20 – 03:40 TNTJ
03:40- 04:00 SAN
04:00- 04:20 TNTJ
04:20 – 04:40 SAN
04:40 – 05:00 TNTJ
07:00 – 07:20 SAN
07:20 – 07:40 TNTJ
07:40 – 08:00 SAN
08:00 – 08:20 TNTJ
08:20 – 08:40 SAN
08:40 – 09:00 TNTJ
Sunday
02:00 – 02:20 SAN
02:20 – 02:40 TNTJ
02:40 – 03:00 SAN
03:00 – 03:20 TNTJ
03:20 – 03:40 SAN
03:40 – 04:00 TNTJ
04:00 – 04:20 SAN
04:20 – 04:40 TNTJ
04:40 – 05:00 SAN
05:00 – 05:20 TNTJ
05:20 – 05:40 SAN
05:40 – 06:00 TNTJ
06:00 – 06:20 SAN
07:00 – 07:20 TNTJ
07:20 – 07:40 SAN
07:40 – 08:00 TNTJ
08:00 – 08:20 SAN
08:20 – 08:40 TNTJ
2. பாவமும் ஈடேற்றமும்:
SAN ன் நிலைப்பாடு: ஆதமின் பாவத்தினால் எல்லா மனிதர்களும் பாவிகளாய் பிறந்திருக்கிறார்கள். தங்களுடைய சொந்த இரட்சிப்பை நிறைவேற்றிக் கொள்ள முடியாதிருக்கின்றார்கள்.அதனால் தேவனால் அனைத்து சிருஷ்டிகளுக்கும் எல்லா மனிதர்களுக்கும் இயேசு கிறிஸ்து ஒரே பரிகார பலியாக கொடுக்கப்பட்டு பலியானார். இதை ஏற்றுக்கொண்டவர்களுக்கு நித்தய ஜீவன். இதை மறுப்பவர்களுக்கு நித்திய ஜீவன் இல்லை.(2நாட்கள்)
TNTJ யின் நிலைப்பாடு: எந்த மனிதனும் பாவியாக பிறப்பிதில்லை.ஒவ்வொரு மனிதனும் தனது பாவத்திற்கு தானே பொறுப்பாளியாவான்.ஒருவன் பாவத்தை மற்றவன் சுமக்க முடியாது.பாவம் செய்தவனே பாவத்திற்கு பரிகாரம் தேடுவதன் மூலமாக மட்டுமே நித்திய ஜீவனைப் பெறுவான்.(2நாட்கள்)
3. TNTJ யின் தலைப்பு : இஸ்லாம் கூறும் கடவுட்கொள்கையே சரி. (குழு) (2நாட்கள்)
SAN ன் தலைப்பு : கிறித்துவம் கூ
93;ும் கடவுட்கொள்கையே சரி. (குழு) (2நாட்கள்)
4. TNTJ யின் தலைப்பு : முஹம்மத் இறைவனின் தூதரே! (குழு) (2நாட்கள்)
SAN ன் தலைப்பு : இயேசு கடவுளே! (குழு) (2நாட்கள்)
5. மனித குல வழிகாட்டியும் முன்மாதிரியும் யார்?(நேருக்குநேர்)
TNTJ யின் தலைப்பு : மனித குல வழிகாட்டியும் முன்மாதிரியும் முஹம்மத் அவர்களே! (2நாட்கள்)
SAN ன் தலைப்பு : மனித குல வழிகாட்டியும் முன்மாதிரியும் இயேசு அவர்களே! (2 நாட்கள்)
6. இயேசு சிலுவையில் மறித்து 3ஆம் நாளில் உயிர்த்தெழுந்தாரா? (குழு) (2நாட்கள்)
7. கிறித்தவர்க&#
2995;ின் கடவுட் கொள்கை மற்றும் ஆதமின் பாவத்தினால் எல்லா மனிதர்களும் பாவிகளாய் பிறந்திருக்கிறார்கள். தங்களுடைய சொந்த இரட்சிப்பை நிறைவேற்றிக் கொள்ள முடியாதிருக்கின்றார்கள். அதனால் தேவனால் அனைத்து சிருஷ்டிகளுக்கும் எல்லா மனிதர்களுக்கும் இயேசு கிறிஸ்து ஒரே பரிகார பலியாக கொடுக்கப்பட்டு பலியானார். இதை ஏற்றுக்கொண்டவர்களுக்கு நித்தய ஜீவன் . இதை மறுப்பவர்களுக்கு நித்திய ஜீவன் இல்லை. என்ற கொள்கைக்கும் இயேசுவுக்கும் எந்த சம்பந்தமும் இல்லை.(2நாட்கள்)
3) விவாத செலவு : அரங்கம், ஒலி, ஒளி அமைப்பு, தண்ணீர், டைம்பீஸ்,ஜெனரேட்டர் மற்றும் இரண்டு தரப்பும் சமமாக பயன்படுத்தும் செலவுகளை இரு தரப்பினரும் சமமாக பகிர்ந்து கொள்வது.
4) அரங்க ஏற்பாடு :
(1) அரங்க ஏற்பாடு செய்வதற்கும், விவாதத்திற்காக இரு தரப்பினரும் பொதுவாக செய்ய வேண்டிய வேலைகளுக்கும் இரு தரப்பிலும் தலா 3 நபர் கொண்ட குழு நியமிக்கப்படுகிறது.
(2) இரு தரப்பிலும் பரஸ்பரம் எழுத்தில் ஒப்புக் கொண்ட செலவுகள் மாத்திரமே சமமாக பகிர்ந்து கொள்ளப்படும்.
(3)
இரு தரப்பினர் கடிதத்துடன் காவல் துறையின் அனுமதி பெறுவதும் இக்குழுவின் பொறுப்பாகும்.
(4) குழு உறுப்பினர்கள்:
5. பார்வையாளர்கள் :
1) ஒவ்வொரு தரப்பிலும் தலா 150 நபர்கள் வீதம் 300 நபர்கள் மாத்திரம் பார்வையாளார்களாக அனுமதிக்கப்படுவார்கள்.
2) ஒவ்வொரு அமர்வு தொடங்குவதற்கு 10 நிமிடங்களுக்கு முன்பாகவே இருக்கையில் அமர வேண்டும்.
3) விவாதத்தின் ஒவ்வொரு அமர்வும் முடிந்து 5 நிமிடங்கள் கழித்து அரங்கை விட்டும் வெளியில் செல்ல வேண்டும்.
4) அமர்வின் இடையில் வெளியே செல்பவர் அந்த அமர்வு முடியும் வரை எக்காரணம் கொண்டும் அரங்கினுள் அனுமதிக்கப்படமாட்டார்.
5) அரங்கினுள் செல் போன், வாக்மேன், ஒலி, ஒளி பதிவுக் கருவிகள் எதுவும் பயன்படுத்தக்கூடாது.
6) விவாதம் தொடங்கிய பின் இருக்கையை விட்டு எழுவதோ பிறரிடம் பேசுவதோ, விவாதத்தில் குறுக்கிடுவதோ, கருத்து சொல்வதோ, சப்தமிடுவதோ, துண்டு சீட்டு கொடுப்பதோ, பிரசுரங்கள் விநியோகிப்பதோ (அரங்கின் உள்ளேயும், வெளியேயும்)கூடாது. மீறுபவர்கள் வெளியேற்றப் படுவதோடு கண்டிப்பாக இறுதி வரை அரங்கினுள் அனுமதிக்கப் படமாட்டார்கள்.
7) ஒவ்வொரு தரப்பின் பார்வையாளார்களும் அவர்கள் அமர்வதற்கு தனித்தனியாக இடம் ஒதுக்கப்படும்.
8) ஒவ்வொரு தரப்பின் பார்வையாளார்களும் அத்தரப்பின் அனுமதி அடையாளச் சீட்டுடன் வந்தால் மட்டுமே அரங்கினுள் அனுமதிக்கப்படுவார்கள்.
9) தத்தமது அணியைச் சார்ந்த பார்வையாளர்களால், ஏற்படும் எல்லா அசம்பாவிதங்களுக்கும் அந்தந்த அணியைச் சார்ந்தவர்களே பொறுப்பாவார்கள்.
6)வாலண்ட்ரீஸ் :
அரங்கின் உள்ளும் வாயிலிலும் தரப்பிற்கு 20 நபர்கள் நியமிக்கப்படுவார்கள்.அவர்களில் இரதரப்பிலும் ஒருவர் வீதம் தலைவராக நியமிக்க வேண்டும்.
(1) பார்வையாளர்களை கண்காணிப்பதும் அவர்களின் உணவு, தண்ணீர் போன்ற தேவைகளை நிறைவேற்றுவதும் இவர்களின் பொறுப்பாகும்.
(2) இரு தரப்பின் வாலண்ட்ரீஸ் தனித்தனியாக செயல்படுவார்கள்.
7) தனித்தனி பொறுப்புகள் :
(1) தத்தமது அணியின் பார்வையாளர்கள், அறிஞர்கள், வாலண்ட்ரீஸ், கண்காணிப்பாளர் ஆகியோர்களின் உணவு, தண்ணீர் போன்ற தேவைகளுக்கு அந்தந்த அணியினரே பொறுப்பாவார்கள்.
(2) வால்போஸ்டர், நோட்டீஸ், பிளக்ஸ், டி.வி, பத்திரிகை விளம்பரங்கள் கூடாது.
7) வீடியோ :
(1) இரு தரப்பினரும் தனித்தனியாக வீடியோ எடுத்துக் கொள்ள வேண்டும்.
(2) வீடியோ பதிவின் போது தேதியும், நேரமும் அதில் இடம் பெற வேண்டும்.
(3) ஒரு தலைப்பில் விவாதம் முடிந்த பின்பு இரு தரப்பினரும் தாங்கள் எடுக்கும் அந்த விவாத வீடியோ பதிவின் எடிட் செய்யாத ஒரு பிரதியை 3 நாட்களுக்குள் மற்ற அணிக்குத் தர வேண்டும்.
8) நேர கண்காணிப்பாளர்கள்:
(1) நேரத்தைக் கண்காணிப்பதற்கு அணிக்கு ஒருவர் வீதம் 2 கண்காணிப்பாளர்
65;ள் நியமிக்கப்படுவார்கள்.
(2) விவாதத்தின் போது பேசுபவரின் துவக்க நேரத்தையும் முடிவடையும் நேரத்தையும் சுட்டிக் காட்டுவது மட்டுமே இவர்களின் பொறுப்பாகும்.
9) விவாத முறைகள்:
1. ஒவ்வொரு தலைப்பிற்கும் தனித்தனியே விவாதம் நடத்தப்பட வேண்டும் என்று முடிவெடுக்கப்பட்டது.
2. ஒரு தலைப்பின் கீழ் இரண்டு நாட்கள் விவாதம் நடத்தப்பட வேண்டும் என்று முடிவெடுக்கப்பட்டது.
3. இரு மொழிகளிலும் (தமிழ்-ஆங்கிலம்) ஒப்பந்தம் எழுதப்பட வேண்டும்.
4. இரு தரப்பாரும் தனித்தனியாகவோ, குழுவாகவோ விவாதம் செய்யலாம்.
5. திருக்குர்ஆன், பைபிள் வசனமாக இருப்பினும் நபிமொழிகளாக இருப்பினும் மூல நூற்களிலிருந்தே ஆதாரங்கள் காட்ட வேண்டும்.அவை அச்சுப்பிரதியாகவோ மென்பொருள் பிரின்ட் அவுட் பிரதியாகவோ இருக்கலாம் .மாற்று அணியினர் கேட்கும்போது அவற்றைக் காண்பிக்க வேண்டும்.
6. குர்ஆன் வசனங்கள் ஆதாரமாகக் காண்பிக்கப்பட்டு வாதங்கள் எடுத்துவைக்கப்படும் போது அதற்கு பதில் சொல்ல வேண்டிய கடமை TNTJ க்கு உள்ளது.
7. &#
2949;றிவிப்பாளர் வரிசையில் குளறுபடிகள் உள்ள செய்திகளையோ அல்லது குர்ஆனுக்கு முரனான கருத்து அமைந்த செய்திகளையோ TNTJ ஆதாரமாக ஏற்றுக்கொள்ளாது. ஆனாலும் இது போன்றவற்றை எடுத்துவைக்க SAN அமைப்பினருக்கு உரிமை உண்டு. அதைத் தகுந்த காரணங்களுடன் விளக்கி , மறுத்து எதிர்கேள்வி எழுப்ப TNTJக்கு உரிமை உண்டு.
8. எடுத்து வைக்கும் ஆதாரங்களுக்கு அந்தந்த தரப்பினரே பொறுப்பாவார்கள்.
9. விவாதிக்கும் இருவரில் (ஜெர்ரி தாமஸ் – ஜைனுல் ஆபிதீன்) யார் இறந்தாலும் ஒப்பந்தத்தை புதுப்பிக்க வேண்டும்.
10. இரு தரப்பினரும் குழுவாக விவாதிக்கும் போது ஒரு குழுவில் மொழிபெயர்பாளருடன் சேர்த்து 7 பேர் இடம் பெறுவர்..
11. இரு தரப்பிலும் தலா 150 பார்வையாளார்கள் இருப்பர்.
12. இரு தரப்பிலும் வாலன்ட்ரீஸ் தலா 20 பேர் இருப்பர்.
13. இரு தரப்பின் சார்பிலும் நேரக்கண்காணிப்பாளர் நியமிக்கப்படுவார்கள்.
14. விவாதத்தின் போது இரு தரப்பினரும் பொது மக்களை நோக்கியே பேச வேண்டும்.
15.தரக் குறைவான வார்த்தைகள் தனி நபர் விமர்சனங்கள் கேலி, கிண்டல் போன்றவை இருக்கக் கூடாது.
13)பொதுவானவை :
1. ஒப்பந்த விதிகளை மாற்றுவதற்கோ, திருத்துவதற்கோ, எதையும் சேர்ப்பதற்கோ, நீக்குவதற்கோ இரு தரப்பினரில் எவருக்கும் அதிகாரம் இல்லை.
1. இரு தரப்பினரும் புரோஜகட்டர்,ஸ்கோப் ஆகியவற்றை பயன்படுத்திக் கொள்ளலாம்.
Update:
On June 3, 2011 (Friday) from 2:30 p.m to early hours of June 4, 2011 (Saturday, around 12:30 am), SAN led by Bros. Ajoy and Venkatesh had a fruitful discussion about the debate with TNTJ led by Janab PJ and have reached an agreement on format and topics.
TNTJ and SAN are yet to sign the formal agreement. SAN is waiting for the Tamil copy of the agreement from TNTJ, which will be then translated into English and formally signed.
We will keep you updated.
From: SAN (INDIA) sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.co
m
Date: Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: Reply to SAN with Text and Attachment
To: TNTJ Head Office tntjho@gmail.com
Cc: Ajoy Varghese dajoyv@yahoo.com
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We request you to kindly update the news item published on your website (http://onlinepj.com/vimarsanangal/ithara_vimarasanagal/jeri_thamas_ottam/) with your latest email that was sent on May 14, 2011 and our below reply sent on May 14, 2011 itself. It would be great if you can update your site by May 19, 2011 (end of the day). However, if you are not updating your site by May 19, 2011, we would publish the email dated May 14, 2011 from you and our reply to that in our website with a link to your site for earlier emails.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
———-
From: SAN (INDIA) sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com
Date: Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: Reply to SAN with Text and Attachment
To: TNTJ Head Office tntjho@gmail.com
In the name of Yahweh, the only true triune God, upon which all the true prophets have God.
Our responses are highlighted in blue below.
TNTJ: Thank you for your mail dated the 5th, May, 2011. After having lost hope, it was refreshing to hear from you.
SAN: We are in receipt of your mail May 14, 2011 and we greatly appreciate it. You would never lost hope, had you read the request on April 13, 2011 email where we specifically requested you to copy Bro. Ajoy in future correspondence as we anticipated some busy schedule during the Easter time. We again request you to copy Bro. Ajoy as it would help us to respond faster.
TNTJ: Your mail however was lacking in courtesy. It uses unparlimentary language. We are not astonished. We know what to expect from apologetic missionaries. Shall we remind you from your bible? “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them”.
SAN: Glad that you agree that ‘by their fruits you shall know them’. If we go back in history, there was a man who used to abuse even his followers for no specific reason. It was his nature to abuse others. You shall read about him in the following hadiths.
Sahih Muslim, Book 032, Number 6285: A'isha reported that two persons visited Allah's Messenger and both of them talked about a thing, of which I am not aware, but that annoyed him AND HE INVOKED CURSE UPON BOTH OF THEM AND HURLED MALEDICTION, and when they went out I said: Allah's Messenger, the good would reach everyone but it would not reach these two. He said: Why so? I said: Because you have invoked curse and hurled malediction upon both of them. He said: Don't you know that I have made condition with my Lord saying thus: O Allah, I am a human being and that for a Muslim upon whom I invoke curse or hurl malediction make it a source of purity and reward?
Sahih Muslim, Book 032, Number 6286: This hadith has been reported on the authority of A'mash with the same chain of transmitters and the hadith transmitted on the authority of 'Isa (the words are): "He had a private meeting with them AND HURLED MALEDICTION UPON THEM AND CURSED THEM and sent them out."
Sahih Muslim, Book 032, Number 6290: Abu Huraira reported Allah's Apostle as saying: O Allah, I make a covenant with Thee against which Thou wouldst never go. I am a human being and thus for a Muslim whom I give any harm or whom I scold or upon whom I INVOKE A CURSE or whom I BEAT, make this a source of blessing, purification and nearness to Thee on the Day of Resurrection.)
Sahih Muslim, Book 032, Number 6293: Salim, the freed slave of Nasriyyin, said: I heard Abu Huraira as saying that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying: O Allah, Muhammad is a human being. I lose my temper just as human beings lose temper, and I have held a covenant with Thee which Thou wouldst not break: For a believer whom I give any trouble or invoke curse or beat, make that an expiation (of his sins and a source of) his nearness to Thee on the Day of Resurrection.
Rather than denying the authenticity of Hadiths, learn the nature of Muhammad by his own ‘fruits’.
TNTJ: Your mail also confirms your inherent ‘selective amnesia’. And Muslims have long been complaining against this. You try to put under the carpet inconvenient facts. We had replied to your mail dt. 13.04.11 on 17.04.11, which you pretend to have not received. Here is a screen shot of the mail.
( if image can't visible refer attachment )
If indeed you did not receive the mail, how then did you on 05.05.11 evening accept the contents of the mail in your telephonic conversation with br. Hakeem. This was just hours after you mailed us saying that it was we who had not responded.
When this mail, alleging to have been sent to you, has been put up in the website that you have mentioned, why did you not choose to specifically protest about it in your mail dt. 05.05.11.
SAN: We have already updated in our website on how we missed on email dated April 18, and it came to our notice only recently. http://www.sakshitimes.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=555&Itemid=42
TNTJ: Though we are aware that missionaries would not hesitate to utter blatant falsehood, having learnt it from their mentor Paul, when he said, ‘For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?’, we were excited when you applied this holy doctrine to as mean a thing as to deny receipt of a mail.
SAN: The verse that you quoted Romans 3:7 clearly shows how Dawwahs lie and distort the Holy Bible for their own eternal condemnation. We are going to quote Romans 3:7-8, just one more verse to show how Dawwah deceive people by misquoting the Holy Bible.
Romans 3:7-8: For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? and why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come"?–as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.
Is it not already clear that the Holy Bible has already predicted end of slanderous like you?
Further, it is not us who follow the deceptive doctrine, it is you who follow it. Do we need to elaborate on Taqiyya? Oh, Janab PJ sahib is very good evasion by denial of Haddiths, therefore we quote some Quranic verses to bring it to your notice that you indeed worship one who is called as the deceiver.
But they (the Jews) were deceptive, and Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers (Wamakaroo wamakara Allahu waAllahu khayru al-makireena)! S. 3:54; cf. 8:30
TNTJ: How could you be waiting for our reply when ours was the last communication?
To err is human. But you have confirmed the contents of the mail in the telephonic talk you had with br.Hakim a few hours later. We expected that you would apologize for the oversight, if it was indeed so. We have been waiting for a week without responding to your mail and also without releasing it in the net. This was because of our civility.
We should emphasize that it was you, who on 06.04.11, unilaterally decided to, in your own words, ‘put up on the internet’, ‘the correspondences’, ‘to ensure transparency’. Where, then, was your civility that you boast of?
SAN: Please read the above responses. Also, we do not have any issue on you putting all our correspondence on your website. But the fact that you accused us of running away from debating is what we take exception to.
TNTJ: We were waiting for your reply even after the expiry of the ultimatum on 27.04.11. We ‘put up on the internet’ all ‘the correspondences’ only on 02.05.11.
It appears you are hurt by our statement that there has been no news from Sakshi and they have ran from the debate. Please tell us what other conclusion would any sensible person make.
Particularly when there is no reply even until the expiry of the ultimatum and even 4 days after that, from the one who claims to respond in a day or two. (Refer video negotiations.)
And even more particularly when there is not a word in response for 15 days, from the one who advised us to ‘please send in your responses by email ASAP. Rather than a delaying tactic, there is instant and concrete communication email. We think email correspondences are actually quicker and more concrete in an internet age’.
SAN: In the same email, we also requested you to copy Bro. Ajoy, which you never did. You could also re-forwarded the email (as you did today) and informed by phone, specifically when world over everyone knows that it is Easter time and a missionary network can be actually busy with Easter meetings.
TNTJ: We were of the impression that we were communicating with prudent people. You have dared ‘PJ to come for a face to face public debate on an equal side topic, if PJ ever can’. Then what else did you think all the discussions and communications between us was about?
We expect you don’t lose your balance. It was the Muslims who challenged you. You had only accepted it. When the process has already been set in motion what sense does it make to challenge now?
What point are you trying to score by calling for a face to face public debate when you are accused of trying to run away?
Your challenge is only rhetoric. We ask you not to play to the gallery. Please be sincere.
SAN: We do not deny that it was Muslims who challenged Christians. However, it is really news to us that PJ is ready for one-on-one face to face debate in the traditional format (the format we suggested since anyone who reads our website clearly understands what we meant) as much as we are ready for the panel debate in the format that you suggested (not other hilarious conditions like not quoting Quran while discussing Biblical issues or only quoting PJ approved texts).
TNTJ: And finally we propose that the content of your last letter also be debated at the first instance as you have called us liars. Let the public know who has lied. We also acknowledge your one-liner dated 11th, May, 2011. That mail too sans courtesy. It shows up your training.
SAN: Of course, when you accused us of ‘a sinister design’ it showed your training as well.
TNTJ: We regret we cannot comply with your request. We, as a policy, mail only to official email addresses. We do not mark copies to others.
The intent is to avoid any future disputes. The other party may refuse to accept a valid delivery when one or few have been missed out inadvertently. Even if this is cured by a separate mail later, a dispute may arise about which date of delivery is to be treated as valid.
We advise you to use the automatic mail forwarding facilities provided by Gmail to send copies to as many persons as you like, and as instantly as the mail arrives.
We see in this one-liner, an apologetic alibi for denying receipt of our mail dt. 17.04.11. A proponent of the ‘instant and concrete communication email’‘in an internet age’, taking such a defense should either be ignorant or an imposter.
You have also sent us with the one-liner, copies of your internal correspondence. We shall not respond to any issue that is not directly addressed to us.
However we are at liberty to expose your deception. You, under the disguise of internal communication, have intentionally created mails mocking us and have sent them. The dates and time of the mails also confirm this. This is cowardliness.
After having corresponded with us many times earlier, you, in your internal mails, still appear not to know how and whom to communicate with. Interestingly those mails too have been sent to the correct address. Is it that you really do not know whom to contact or do you want to avoid the correct contact?
This reply is just to set the record straight.
SAN: We certainly appreciate you taking time to ‘set the record straight’. We also thank you for your technical advice and letting us know your official policy, which has been communicated to us only now.
We are also assuming that you do not write from any emails except your official email id and any emails we receive from Muslims (such as the one from Riyaz) has no official approval from TNTJ.
TNTJ: We as usual call you for an across the table discussion. You may suggest the dates. Once the dates are confirmed, please ensure your team includes those who will be able to take decisions and finalize the agreement in that sitting, however long it may take.
Thanking you,
Tamilnadu Thowheed Jamaath
SAN: Yes, we are confirming that we will come
for across the table discussion on May 27, 2011 (Friday) as some of our crucial members are out of Chennai now. However, if it is possible, it would be great if you can send a draft of your proposals (with agreements and disagreements to our initial email). While we will certainly send members with power to take final decision, Sakshi is not an organization started and run by one man, but it is a network of Christians across India and therefore the decision making is also collective. We hope that since you can write such lengthy emails to just to “set the record straight”, it should be not be problem for you to just email the points of agreement and disagreement.
Thanking you,
SAN
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 6:23 PM, TNTJ Head Office <tntjho@gmail.com> wrote:
In the name of Allaah the Most Gracious the Most Merciful
Dear friends at SAN,
Thank you for your mail dated the 5th, May, 2011. After having lost hope, it was refreshing to hear from you.
Your mail however was lacking in courtesy. It uses unparlimentary language. We are not astonished. We know what to expect from apologetic missionaries. Shall we remind you from your bible? “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them”.
Your mail also confirms your inherent ‘selective amnesia’. And Muslims have long been complaining against this. You try to put under the carpet inconvenient facts.
We had replied to your mail dt. 13.04.11 on 17.04.11, which you pretend to have not received. Here is a screen shot of the mail.
( if image can't visible refer attachment )
If indeed you did not receive the mail, how then did you on 05.05.11 evening accept the contents of the mail in your telephonic conversation with br. Hakeem. This was just hours after you mailed us saying that it was we who had not responded.
When this mail, alleging to have been sent to you, has been put up in the website that you have mentioned, why did you not choose to specifically protest about it in your mail dt. 05.05.11.
Though we are aware that missionaries would not hesitate to utter blatant falsehood, having learnt it from their mentor Paul, when he said, ‘For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?’, we were excited when you applied this holy doctrine to as mean a thing as to deny receipt of a mail.
How could you be waiting for our reply when ours was the last communication?
To err is human. But you have confirmed the contents of the mail in the telephonic talk you had with br.Hakim a few hours later. We expected that you would apologize for the oversight, if it was indeed so. We have been waiting for a week without responding to your mail and also without releasing it in the net. This was because of our civility.
We should emphasize that it was you, who on 06.04.11, unilaterally decided to, in your own words, ‘put up on the internet’, ‘the correspondences’, ‘to ensure transparency’. Where, then, was your civility that you boast of?
We were waiting for your reply even after the expiry of the ultimatum on 27.04.11. We ‘put up on the internet’ all ‘the correspondences’ only on 02.05.11.
It appears you are hurt by our statement that there has been no news from Sakshi and they have ran from the debate. Please tell us what other conclusion would any sensible person make.
Particularly when there is no reply even until the expiry of the ultimatum and even 4 days after that, from the one who claims to respond in a day or two. (Refer video negotiations.)
And even more particularly when there is not a word in response for 15 days, from the one who advised us to ‘please send in your responses by email ASAP. Rather than a delaying tactic, there is instant and concrete communication email. We think email correspondences are actually quicker and more concrete in an internet age’.
We were of the im
pression that we were communicating with prudent people. You have dared ‘PJ to come for a face to face public debate on an equal side topic, if PJ ever can’. Then what else did you think all the discussions and communications between us was about?
We expect you don’t lose your balance. It was the Muslims who challenged you. You had only accepted it. When the process has already been set in motion what sense does it make to challenge now?
What point are you trying to score by calling for a face to face public debate when you are accused of trying to run away?
Your challenge is only rhetoric. We ask you not to play to the gallery. Please be sincere.
And finally we propose that the content of your last letter also be debated at the first instance as you have called us liars. Let the public know who has lied.
We also acknowledge your one-liner dated 11th, May, 2011. That mail too sans courtesy. It shows up your training.
We regret we cannot comply with your request. We, as a policy, mail only to official email addresses. We do not mark copies to others.
The intent is to avoid any future disputes. The other party may refuse to accept a valid delivery when one or few have been missed out inadvertently. Even if this is cured by a separate mail later, a dispute may arise about which date of delivery is to be treated as valid.
We advise you to use the automatic mail forwarding facilities provided by Gmail to send copies to as many persons as you like, and as instantly as the mail arrives.
We see in this one-liner, an apologetic alibi for denying receipt of our mail dt. 17.04.11. A proponent of the ‘instant and concrete communication email’‘in an internet age’, taking such a defense should either be ignorant or an imposter.
You have also sent us with the one-liner, copies of your internal correspondence. We shall not respond to any issue that is not directly addressed to us.
However we are at liberty to expose your deception. You, under the disguise of internal communication, have intentionally created mails mocking us and have sent them. The dates and time of the mails also confirm this. This is cowardliness.
After having corresponded with us many times earlier, you, in your internal mails, still appear not to know how and whom to communicate with. Interestingly those mails too have been sent to the correct address. Is it that you really do not know whom to contact or do you want to avoid the correct contact?
This reply is just to set the record straight. We as usual call you for an across the table discussion. You may suggest the dates. Once the dates are confirmed, please ensure your team includes those who will be able to take decisions and finalize the agreement in that sitting, however long it may take.
Thanking you,
Tamilnadu Thowheed Jamaath
Second Update:
1) On May 14, 2011, we received an email from TNTJ to 'set the record straight'. Also, they requested SAN to give a date for an across the table discussion regarding debate.
2) On May 14, 2011 itself, SAN replied and gave the date for an across the table discussion regarding debate.
3) On May 18, 2011, as TNTJ has not yet published their correspondence and SAN's reply, http://onlinepj.com/vimarsanangal/ithara_vimarasanagal/jeri_thamas_ottam/, SAN sent an email requesting TNTJ to publish their email and our reply by latest by May 19, 2011 (EOD). If not, SAN would publish the last correspondence between TNTJ and SAN at SAN's website. We will update you May 20, 2011 again.
1) On April 13, we sent them an email responding to them asking them to send their point by point response so that we can go finalize the debate agreement in one sitting. However, April last week being a holiday (Easter) for SAN and as well it members being busy with Easter programs, SAN REQUESTED TNTJ to COPY Bro. Ajoy Varghese in their correspondence. The reason being though we may not be able to check the emails, if it goes to personal id, Bro. Ajoy would see it from his blackberry itself. For some reasons, they NEVER copied Bro. Ajoy and send an email on April 18, which we saw it only now after researching the hundreds of email that we received in due course. It must be also noted that they had the telephone number which courtesy demanded that they check with him before jumping into conclusion that SAN is not ready for debate.
2) Further, if one reads Janab P Jainul Abdeen (known in Tamil Nadu as PJ) website, one would imagine that PJ is ever ready to debate but SAN is not willing. It must be recalled here that PJ NEVER expressed his readiness to have a face to face one-on-one debate with SAN’s representative Bro. Jerry Thomas. PJ only wanted a panel debate for every single subject proposed dedicating two days for each subject. While SAN is ready for panel debates on a few subjects, it also wants PJ to debate one-on-one with SAN’s representative for it was PJ who wrote and spoke against the holy Christian faith in the last few decades in Tamil Nadu and not any panel. If PJ can write and preach against holy Christian faith, he should be ready to debate also alone. So, what is PJ boasting about when he wants the cover of a panel for a debate? So, now SAN has a made a decision that apart from panel debates, we want PJ to have one-on-one face to face debate with SAN’s representative in the usual debate format done across the world. We will keep you updated on the progress.
3) PJ DOES NOT want SAN to quote any hadiths which is not approved by him!!! SAN considers this as hilarious and totally unacceptable. While SAN notes that Muslims do quote Gnostic and other fabricated gospels, SAN is willing not to quote any hadiths which traditionally Muslims treat as fabricated. Moreover, though Muslims quote pseudo Christians (cults and liberal scholars), SAN is willing not to quote EVEN the Shia hadiths, a dominant sect within Islam. However, SAN under no circumstances would agree to debate only by using PJ approved texts!!! It is SAN’s understanding that PJ has been rejecting hadiths, which are traditionally are included in correct Hadiths, primarily to whitewash Muhammad and Islam.
4) For the first meeting with TNTJ, SAN went with a written proposal while TNTJ had NONE. SAN also responded in detail to TNTJ’s verbal proposal while all that TNTJ did was to accuse SAN in their email. SAN once again requested TNTJ to send a proposal after reviewing SAN’s proposal so that SAN can review that and go for the face to face meeting with areas of agreement and disagreement. It must be noted that until now PJ has not responded in any written form how they want debate to be.
5) PJ also does not want us to quote even Quran when we discuss on any Christian topics. We cannot agree with this. For example, we would be debating with PJ on divinity of Lord Jesus Christ not because the Holy Bible teaches it but Quran rejects it. We would certainly want to prove that even Quranic objections are based on false, contradictory and illogical reasoning. And as a Muslim, why should he have an objection regarding using Quran.
We are going to meet PJ’s group before May end(date will be finalized based on the convenience of Christian brothers and Muslim friends). Please note that some of the SAN representatives have to come from other parts of Tamil Nadu and at times from other states as well. This we have communicated to them both to their mediator Hakim as well as to them by email.
We will be publishing the final outcome of the discussion soon after that. Wait and see:
If PJ would be ready for a face to face one-on-one debate with SAN representative.
If PJ’s group would be ready to debate without imposing ridiculous condition that only PJ approved Hadiths should be used.
We are sending a copy of this news item to them as well.
