UIRC Refuted – Dawwah Runs Away from Debating Two Sided Foundational Topics

UIRC PresidentUIRC, Hyderabad, another typical Islamic Dawwah- wants to attack the Christian foundational topics but do not have the courage to debate Islamic foundational topics with SAN. In these email correspondence and telephonic conversations, you would see that UIRC’s double standard. Is this not cowardliness and shameless hypocrisy not to discuss Islamic foundational topics  but to debate only on Christian foundational topics? Those who do not want to debate their foundational topics, has moral right to question other’s foundational topics.


Summary of Events

  1. A Muslim (probably proxy) of UIRC, Hyderabad approached SAN to debate on foundational Christian topic.
  2. To ensure parity in topics and also to expose the shallowness of Islam compared to the glorious Biblical faith, SAN insisted on debating foundational topics of both religions.
  3. Realizing that Islam can NEVER stand a critical scrutiny, this proxy started behaving immaturely and UIRC tried to escape by not responding. (For evidence of first three points, read the email correspondence).
  4. However, SAN caught UIRC president Mr. Shafi directly when he visited a Christian book stall who agreed orally for two sided topics but later UIRC retracted it in telephone.
  5. UIRC came with a ridiculous reason for their refusal to debate with SAN on two sided topics- SAN’s approach is negative – finding differences!!! (For evidence for the 4&5 points, read the summary below.  Audio recordings of the telephonic conversation are available with SAN. If UIRC ever disputes any of the points mentioned below in the summary, we will produce the relevant records). 

Summary SAN UIRC Telephonic Conversations: Latest

SAN Team called Syed Ilyas Ahmed from UIRC as per UIRC email and finally got him over the phone after repeated attempts. Given below is the summary of conversations.

First Telephonic Conversation between SAN and UIRC After Letter, Emails and Meeting Mr. Shafi

SAN representative recalled the oral agreement of Mr. Shafi for two sided topics (Crucifixion of Jesus Christ and Prophethood of Muhammad) and mentioned that the telephonic call is furtherance to that. Though initially UIRC person mentioned that it is a good time to speak, as soon as the subjects were mentioned Syed Ilyas Ahmed requested it to be discussed at a later date as UIRC happens to be busy. UIRC also mentioned that the topics were not discussed (though it was mentioned in the letter and email after discussing with Shafi). UIRC

also requested SAN to come to their office, wherein SAN requested it to be video recorded. However, UIRC was not so keen on video recording the discussion (though when they approach others they do video record their discussion). It was agreed to call later and call ended.

Second Telephonic Conversation between SAN and UIRC

SAN asked UIRC if they would be interested in debating on a topic that covers the foundational issues of both the parties since UIRC was conducting Dawah programs across the state on foundational aspects of Christian faith. Since the Islamic standpoint according to UIRC is that Jesus was not crucified based on Muhammad’s teaching and Quran, SAN questioned if the very foundations of Islam (Muhammad’s teaching and Quran) are reliable. 

SAN expressed interest in debating UIRC on any topic that covers the foundational aspects of both the faiths for one complete day so that both the parties and audience will have sufficient time for analysis and response in detail. However UIRC was not willing to participate in discussions on any topic that covers both parties’ foundational issues.

During the discussion UIRC said SAN’s approach in dealing with Islamic topics is not positive. SAN team fittingly responded that UIRC’s allegation on Christian faith is also not positive and attacking in nature. For example disputing with historical aspects such as Christ’s death, SAN firmly asked why UIRC is not willing to debate on Islamic topics? Don’t they have any content on aspects related to Islamic faith? During the discussion topics like Quran Vs Bible, Prophet hood of Mohammad Vs Divinity of Jesus Christ, ect were proposed from SAN side for which UIRC did not agree to discuss on. UIRC stressed that they will be willing to debate only common issues, and SAN team asked which are the common topics and the few topics UIRC gave were only related to Christian faith such as is Jesus God, Did Jesus die on the cross etc..

SAN team exposed effectively that the topics they proposed are not common for both, they are only Christian topics. Finally UIRC seem to agree to debate on the topic of God in both the faiths since it is common for both according to them but even for that they were not willing to debate later. SAN team expressed interest in debating for a day or two on topics of both the sides again and invited them to come forward for the panel discussion.

Finally UIRC asked who will be resource persons and SAN team said since we are asking for a panel debate of one or two days it will be represented by 4 or 5 people.   

Third Telephonic Conversation between SAN and UIRC

After few days UIRC got back to SAN team and expressed their unwillingness to debate on topics that deal with foundational aspects of both faiths. UIRC said they are not ready for that. UIRC said topics of both sides as suggested by SAN will disturb communal harmony for which SAN said it will be true to Muslims to disturb communal harmony both scripturally and historically not to Christians in any way. SAN team said if SAN brings out the written evidence from Islamic scriptures Islamic extremists will create communal disharmony as taught in Islamic scriptures.

Concluding the animated discussion UIRC did not agree to discuss any topic that covers foundations of both the faiths rather stuck to proposal of discussing one sided Christian topics.

 

SAN Acknowledgement to UIRC Email- Before the First Telephonic Conversation

From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:48 AM
Subject: SAN reply to UIRC
To: uirchydap@gmail.com

Let 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 be gloried forever and ever. Amen.

To UIRC,

We are happy to receive an acknowledgement for our registered post especially in the same email trail which we have been trying to reach for you several weeks but have got no response.

Further, to Mr. Shafi’s agreement to debate on the prophethood of Muhammad (which he agreed to George Anthony Paul when they accidentally met and which was our condition to debate on the crucifixion of Lord Jesus Christ) and our willingness to debate on crucifixion of Jesus Christ, we will be calling you this week in the below mentioned number to discuss about the modalities of the debate.

Thanks and regards,

SAN

 

Courier Acknowledgement Finally from UIRC

From: uirchydap <uirchydap@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 31

, 2012 at 2:58 PM
Subject: UIRC reply to Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “SAN (INDIA)” <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>

 

In the Name of ALLAH the most gracious and most merciful

To

Sakshi Apologetics Network,  India

We hereby acknowledge your emails through Registered Post.  Please contact Br SAYED ILYAS AHMED, Joint Secretary & Events Manager UIRC on Mobile No  +xx xxxxx xxxxx in between 11 am to 5 pm for further information.

Thanks and Regards,

UIRC

 

Courier Cover Letter from SAN to UIRC and the Attached Content

Let 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, be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Hello URIC,

One Mr. Abdul Qader, supposedly known to UIRC, had approached us and invited us for a debate with you on the topic crucifixion.  We had expressed our willingness to have a panel debate with you provided you also be ready to debate on an equally important and parallel Islamic topic, the prophet-hood of Muhammad, which is the only reason for Muslims to doubt the crucifixion, which otherwise is unanimously agreed by all credible historians. We had sent several emails to your email id:  uirchydap@gmail.com. But NEVER got a response from you.

Again, when our brother George Anthony Paul met Mr. Shafi at Christian Truth Book Room, beside YMCA Secunderabad accidentally and had mentioned to him about all these emails, Mr. Shafi not only expressed his willingness to debate on both the topics but gave the same email id: uirchydap@gmail.com. SAN had again sent the email to this id and again the result was same: NEVER got a response from you.   

Therefore, we are couriering you all these correspondence along with this letter for you to read and respond. If you still do not respond, we would be compelled to confirm beyond any doubt that you are afraid to have a panel debate with us on the topic of prophethood of Muhammad and therefore is using non-response as an evasion tactics and all what Mr. Shafi mentioned to George Anthony Paul were just a face saving attempt to escape from being caught red handed. 

You can email us: sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com (which you already have through our emails to sent to you).

Call George Anthony Paul:xxxxxxxxxx

Regards,

Sakshi Apologetics Network

 

Attached Copies of Email Attempts to Contact UIRC

From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: uirchydap@gmail.com

To

Br.Shafi

UIRC President.

Let the name of Triune God 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 be glorified fo

rever and ever. Amen.

I am George Anthony Paul, hope you remember our meeting at Christian Truth Book Room, beside YMCA Secunderabad. In this accidental meeting at Christian Truth Book Room, I mentioned about the email that Sakshi Apologetics Network has been sending your organization about a panel debate on any two sided topic.

Hope you saw the emails that we sent to your organisation. We have been sending these emails to the same email address which you gave me in writing, which is uirchydap@gmail.com.

In our conversation when I asked can we debate about prophethood of Muhammad? You said, why not. 

 

However, as per our previous emails which we sent we would like to debate on a two sided topic. Hence we can have a one day pannel debate on prophethood of Muhammad and crucifixion.

Waiting for your response.

Thanks and Regards,

George Anthony Paul

 

From: Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “SAN (INDIA)” <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>

If your frustration is gone, can we talk about debate ?

— On Mon, 3/12/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>
Cc: uirchydap@gmail.com

Date: Monday, March 12, 2012, 9:08 PM

 

Let 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, be glorified forever and ever.

Is UIRC looking for some school level debate competition where their “local guardian” would register for them debate or are they grown up enough to engage in inter-religious debates? If they want inter-religious debates with Sakshi, they would have to directly enter into a signed agreement with Sakshi where the formats, topics (crucifixion of Jesus Christ, prophethood of Muhammad), duration etc should be mentioned. Hope we do not have to teach you these basic requirements. Your emails are sending wrong signals about UIRC. You are exposing them as immature and scared bunch of kids.

As we mentioned in the previous emails, we would not only expose their shallow and illogical arguments but also their cowardliness and insincerity. We will soon call off any of their lame attempts to bluff public by saying that they were not aware of these emails though your emails demonstrate that you are a proxy for them.

Regards,            

<

p style=”margin: 6pt 0cm; line-height: normal” class=”MsoNormal”>SAN

 

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:

“Your inference might as per “dawwah logic” but not as per proper logic.  You asked us whether we are ready to debate on Crucifixion with UIRC. We said we are ready to debate with UIRC on crucifixion but UIRC should be ready to debate with us on the topic ‘prophethood of Muhammad” and they should directly interact with us.

Good, that you agreed to debate on crucifixion with UIRC. When you debate on this topic, you have direct interaction with them and you can ask them directly for next debate on any topic.

 

— On Mon, 3/12/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>
Cc: uirchydap@gmail.com,

Date: Monday, March 12, 2012, 1:08 AM

 

Let the name of Triune God 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 be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Mr. Abdul Qadeer,

Your inference might as per “dawwah logic” but not as per proper logic.  You asked us whether we are ready to debate on Crucifixion with UIRC. We said we are ready to debate with UIRC on crucifixion but UIRC should be ready to debate with us on the topic ‘prophethood of Muhammad” and they should directly interact with us.

Even after we expressing our willingness to debate on crucifixion (for that matter any Christian topic) provided UIRC is ready to debate on parallel Islamic topic, we never heard a SINGLE response from UIRC and you also NEVER stated UIRC’s willingness to debate on any Islamic topic of equal importance. Since UIRC is afraid to directly interact with us and they are hiding from debating with us on Islamic topic, the logic demands that UIRC is running away from the Islamic topics.

Your initial lame excuse of UIRC not seeing any of these emails does not work anymore. For arguments sake, even if we assume that they are not checking any emails, you had the responsibility to update them as we are speaking of debating with UIRC. Further, we will soon close all loopholes of this excuse from UIRC.

UIRC and other Dawwahs should not only be exposed of thier shallow and illogical arguments but they should be exposed of their cowardliness and insincerity.

Regards,

SAN

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:

What I infer from this is, you actually do not want to debate on Crucifixion.

When you decide to do it, reply me.

— On Fri, 3/9/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>
Cc: uirchydap@gmail.com

Date: Friday, March 9, 2012, 12:10 PM

 

Let the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God upon which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was called by the name Lord Jesus Christ be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Is UIRC afraid to respond to SAN directly that they use a proxy who repeats meaningless questions? Have some courage to respond.

Regards,

SAN

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:

sidelined from the question asked ?

 

“Can you debate on Jesus Crucifixion?”

— On Thu, 3/8/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>
Cc: uirchydap@gmail.com,

Date: Thursday, March 8, 2012, 12:04 PM

Let 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, be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Mr. Abdul Qadeer,

Is UIRC so afraid to communicate to us directly that they need a proxy like you? If such is the case, we wonder what would happen to them if a debate happens.

Ask them to muster some courage and email us directly rather than writing meaningless emails.

Regards,

SAN

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:


Courage
Confidence
Sincerity
…..

You cannot debate on Jesus Crucifixion ??

— On Wed, 3/7/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>

Cc: uirchydap@gmail.com,
Date: Wednesday, March 7, 2012, 1:32 PM

 

Let 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 be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Mr Abdul Qadeer,

Glad that you agreed that you initiated this debate discussion rather than anything which your god did for UIRC as you claimed earlier. So, instead of writing meaningless emails, why you don’t you ask UIRC to respond to us.

Hope we haven’t completely shattered their confidence by proposing a both sided topic. Please let them know that it was not our intention but we only wanted to debate with people with courage and sincerity.

Regards,

SAN

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

You have written such a big email, was it harder for you to say, “Sakshi is ready to debate on topic ‘Was Jesus really crucified?’ “

 

I have initiated the debate on this topic, but you are avoiding it. You are failing to sway those christians , who think, none is answering UIRC Public Lecture on topic “Yesu siluwa vaastavaalu”.

 

-AQ

 

 

— On Wed, 3/7/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network

To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>, uirchydap@gmail.com
Cc:
Date: Wednesday, March 7, 2012, 12:06 AM

 

Let 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, be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Mr. Abdul Qader & Others at UIRC,

Mr. Abdul Qader: You invited us to debate with Shafi when we did not even knew who this Shafi is and what this UIRC is but now you are pretending as if we are urging this UIRC to debate because of their stature(we have all the email correspondence between you and our brothers). Further, you are writing in the same email we are avoiding the topic and then in the same breath you are saying we are desperate to debate with these new dawwah deluded guys. Did you initiate or did we initiate? Are we avoiding or are we desperate to debate? Do you know why are you are speaking such meaningless statements? We will teach you.

You and your Dawwah friends can never successfully debate on Islamic topics because your Islam is indefensible. We Christians are ready to debate on the topic of crucifixion but we see when we suggested the prophethood of Muhammad as well, you seems to be certain that debate would not happen. We already said that if this topic is too tough for Shafi & co, we can suggest something simpler.

UIRC: having interacted with established Dawwahs and small time Dawwahs such as yours, we know that Dawwahs have made evasion as a new science and one of the techniques is to pretend that you get hundreds of emails and there is no time to respond. These days everyone knows that such excuses are evasion tactics and will not work. If you find the topic on prophethood of Muhammad  too tough to handle, we can suggest some simpler topics such ‘Death of Muhammad: What Really Happened?” If you cannot defend your religion, do not speak on other religions as well. We are ready to debate on any Christian topic as long as you are ready to debate the parallel topic in your religion? Is this a good offer? Now, do not run again.

Regards,

SAN

 

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

Sakshi Apologetics Network – As the name suggests, you are to defend the Christian doctrines. Br.Shafi has given a Lecture in Public refuting crucifixion. None to debate on this topic and I see even you are avoiding it.

 

You seem to be desperate to debate with Br.Shafi of UIRC. Alhamdulillah, God had raised Br.Shafi’s stature so high, that you are urging him for a debate.

UIRC gets emails from everyone, that they want to debate with Br.Shafi of UIRC, it is not possible for your emails to reach him.

Anyways, Good Luck.

-AQ


— On Sat, 3/3/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Second Reminder Re: About the Debate Invite_ Sakshi Apologetics Network
To: uirchydap@gmail.com
Cc: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>,
Date: Saturday, March 3, 2012, 3:51 AM

 

Let 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 be gloried forever and ever. Amen.

Dear Friends at UIRC,

This is the second reminder.

In your website, you said “The primary aim of the UIRC is Da’wah i.e. cl

earing the misconceptions of non Muslims regarding Islam and proper presentation of Islam in Local Language Telugu.”

This is a golden opportunity to do that. As per our studies, Muhammad can never be a true prophet. We had debated this (both in English & Telugu) with other Dawwahs and they were not able to clear any of our questions or provide a proper reply. Since this is your “primary aim”, we hope that you would soon agree to debate with us and respond to us.

However, if the prophethood of Muhammad is too tough for Shafi, Siraj ur Rehman, Syed Ilyas Ahmed and others to handle even together in a panel debate, we can propose some simple Islam topics as well.

Waiting for a positive reply.

Regards,

SAN    

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:47 PM, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:

Let 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 be gloried forever and ever. Amen.

Dear Friends at UIRC,

This is a gentle reminder to the below email.

Hope you would be interested to debate with Christian apologetics groups and not just with those pastors/Christians untrained in comparative religious studies.

Awaiting a positive reply.

Regards,

SAN

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:

Let 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 be gloried forever and ever. Amen.

Dear Friends at UIRC,

A few days back, a Muslim named Abdul Qadeer had approached us asking us if we were ready to debate with UIRC. We had expressed our willingness to debate with you on any both sided topics. You can see our official correspondence with him below. When we had mentioned to us that he would convince you after we agree, we had advised him that he as a Muslim should convince you first and then UIRC should approach us officially.

As we are yet to hear from you, we are wondering if it could be because that  (a) he has not approached you  or  (b) he was not able to convince you for a both sided panel debate as you might be willing only for one sided topics. We do not want to conclude anything at this stage and therefore we thought of approaching you directly and officially.

If the first reason is the real case, please do treat this as our official invite for a panel debate on both sided topics. If this be the case, we are sure that we can discuss further on the topics and other conditions.

If you want to debate on the topic that Mr. Abdul Qadeer suggested, ‘Crucifixion of Jesus Christ’ (both Biblical and Quranic perspective); we would suggest that we should also debate on ‘Prophethood of Muhammad (in the light of the Holy Bible and Quran). Or else, we can together discuss a few other both sided topics as well and come to a conclusion.

Looking forward to hearing from you assuming that the first case is true. We have copied Mr. Abdul Qadeer also in this email.

Warm regards,

SAN Team

 

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: Reply to Abdul Qadeer’s Invite
To: Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>

Let 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 be gloried forever and ever. Amen.

Hello,

This would be the final email to you. In your email below, you said “if you agree to debate on this topic, I can convince Br. Shafi-UIRC.” You as a Muslim, should first go and speak to your Muslim friends at UIRC and not to us. If you want them to debate with us, and ask them to send an official invite to us. As such we are always open for debates with Dawwahs on topics of both sides as mutually agreed in an equal and fair formats.

We will discuss more about the topic, formats, etc only with UIRC once they send an invite to us. We see no point in discussing these with you and we haven’t made you or accepted you as a facilitator.

Regards,

SAN Team

 

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hi,
I understand your policies and wanted to re-iterate that both the religions (Islam and Christianity) has addressed the crucifixion of Jesus. The topic is not at all unilateral. If you agree to debate on this topic,

I can convince Br.Shafi – UIRC.  I can also ask them to send you official invite for this educative debate.

 

You dont have to answer every individual but I am a facilitator to you both for this debate. Please re-think and let me know.

 

-AQ

— On Sat, 2/18/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Reply to Abdul Qadeer’s Invite
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>

Date: Saturday, February 18, 2012, 1:09 PM

 

Let the name of Yahweh, the only true name of God up on which all the true prophets have called, who in flesh was known by the name Lord Jesus Christ be gloried for ever and ever. Amen.

Hello,

We cannot keep responding to each and every individual emails.

Please see our official mail below and we would expect UIRC’s official invite. Any further negotiations on topics, formats, etc can only be done officially with UIRC.

As such Sakshi neither unilaterally imposes topics of debate nor accepts unilateral proposals but believes that it has to be discussed and arrived by mutual agreement.Such discussions can only take place officially.

Expecting an official UIRC invite email.

Regards,

SAN Team

 

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Abdul Qadeer <hey_qadir@yahoo.com> wrote:

 

Hi ,
I am a working employee, so taking time to reply you in weekend.

 

However, If you see my first email sent to Mr.Sudhakar Mondithoka & Your Team, I stated that

We (Group of muslims) after watching a Lecture in Telugu on “Yesu Silwa Vaastavaalu” by Br.Shafi of UIRC Hyderabad, had a proposal for debate in Telugu between Sakshi and UIRC.
Any telugu speaker from Sakshi, like Sudhakar Monditoka, Satyaprakash or anyone from Sakshi is interested to debate with Br.Shafi of UIRC, we can co-ordinate for this event to take place.

 

We think Br.Shafi had put good reasons to support his argument and anticipated you would come forward to debate on this topic.

 

Please let me know, if you are interested to debate on this topic then we can engage UIRC.


–AQ.


— On Fri, 2/17/12, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:


From: SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Reply to Abdul Qadeer’s Invite
To: “Abdul Qadeer” <hey_qadir@yahoo.com>

Date: Friday, February 17, 2012, 10:54 AM

Let 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, be glorified forever and ever. Amen.


Hello Abdul,

Have you relayed the below mail to UIRC? Can we expect a response?

Regards,

SAN Team

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:12 PM, SAN (INDIA) <sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com> wrote:

Let 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, be glorified forever and ever. Amen.

Dear Friends at Universal Islamic Research Centre,

We are relaying this message through Mr. Abdul Qadeer, who on behalf of you, invited us for a educative debate with Universal Islamic Research Centre (UIRC). If this message through Mr. Abdul Qadeer is an official invite from UIRC, we request you to send the invite from your official email id to this email id.

We would be interested in a panel debate (preferably for two days or as mutually agreed) in Telugu for any two sided topics (i.e. of both Christianity and Islam).

As we noted, if the invitation through Mr. Abdul Qadeer is an official invite and if you are willing for a panel debate, please respond with:

(a)    An official invite from official email id

(b)   A list of two sided topics which you want to debate

(c)    Any other suggestions, in terms of format etc

Looking forward for your reply.

Regards,
SAN Team

 

Subscribe to Comments RSS Feed in this post

4 Responses

  1. assalamualikum for san why can you make a new agrement tamil nadu thoweed jamath this topic……

  2. assalamualikum for san why can you make a new agrement with tamil nadu thoweed jamath on this topic & why cannot make a further topics with TNTJ as you singe on agreement….

  3. why not you make debate with Imam Hussain Makki on same topic …dear already your people have got defeated with me ….check facebook ……

  4. HI Fazul,

    SAn already contacted TNTJ for proposed debated i mean furthe topics but they refused to do debate ..i dont why ..but i guess PJ is suffring from Cancer

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*
*