Sunday, October 5, 2008

On the Deception of Sami Zaatari, Part One

One of the most frustrating things about dealing with Muslim apologists such as Nadir Ahmed or Sami Zaatari is that they will not admit defeat, even when the evidence conclusively proves them wrong. They often speak without knowing what they are talking about; yet, when they are corrected with clear evidence, they will continue to make their false claims. When they continue making these false claims, despite the evidence, they have entered into the realm of deception. This is so common when dealing with Sami Zaatari that I can easily do an entire series on him. I'll begin with a recent comment by Sami. He said:

gospel of Luke has a parable.

this parable is a nice way of explaining Jesus' second return, when he is in power.

when Jesus comes back in power he will be the king and judge.

he will order his followers, Christians to kill his enemies.

hence Christians will be ordered to kill.

case closed.

Here Sami refers to Luke 19:11-27, where Jesus gives the "Parable of the Ten Minas." Jesus tells a story about a king who goes away, then returns, and orders that those who have rebelled against him should be killed. According to Sami, the ones doing the killing are Christians. Hence, Christians are going to kill lots of people. The implication is that Christians will ultimately shed a lot of blood. Presumably, this should distract us from the fact that Muslims are commanded to kill people in the world today, and that they're doing so around the world.

But there's a problem with Sami's claim--he simply has no clue what he's talking about. He obviously hasn't read the New Testament, apart from verses contained in the arguments he steals from other people's websites. How do I know this? Well, anyone who has studied the Gospels at all knows that Jesus' servants who will carry out his judgement are the angels, not human beings. I proved this in my response to Sami.


You appealed to the parable in Luke to show that Christians will be commanded to kill. "Case closed," you say. The amazing thing here is that I've been criticizing you for mishandling the Bible, and here you're doing exactly what I say!

If you check the parables, Jesus' "servants" who judge are the angels. He even tells us this in Matthew 13:39. And yet you proclaim your completely false statement, and say "case closed." So we only have two possibilities here. Either (1) you simply don't know the New Testament at all (in which case, why should we listen to what you're saying about the New Testament?), or (2) you do know what the New Testament teaches, but you're being deliberately deceptive (in which case, why should we believe anything you say?). So which is it, Sami? Are you ignorant or deceptive? It must be one or the other, because your claims, as usual, are completely false, and can be shown to be false by anyone who's so much as glanced at the Bible.

In the verse I cited, Jesus is explaining the "Parable of the Tares." In the Parable, Jesus says that the reapers will be commanded to gather up the tares and burn them (13:30). Then, in verse 39, Jesus declares, perfectly clearly, that "the reapers are angels." So who, according to Jesus, will carry out the judgment against those who rebel against Him? The angels. And there are other passages we can go to as well. Jesus states in the "Parable of the Dragnet" that "the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, and will throw them into the furnace of fire" (Matthew 13:49-50). Who will judge? The angels. This is also the teaching of the rest of the New Testament. Paul, for instance, refers to the time "when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus" (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9).

The teaching of the New Testament is completely clear. Thus Sami was simply wrong, and I had corrected him. But watch how he responds.

lol lol lol his believers are angels, David i like you, but that just made me laughhhhhhhhhhhhhh, even you dont believe that! everyone knows those believers mentioned in Luke are HUMANS, your giving your view, which isnt agreed upon by other scholars. sorry.

Notice that Sami, despite the fact that the evidence conclusively refutes his claim, says that "everyone knows" that the parable refers to humans (i.e. Christians who will go around killing people). One would think that by "everyone" he means his Muslim friends who, like him, know next to nothing about the Bible. But he even claims that scholars agree with him!

Well, we've seen what the evidence shows. So who, I ask Sami, are the scholars who agree with you? There are scholars who believe that the parable refers to the judgment of the Jews in 70 AD. But this had nothing to do with Christians. The Romans carried out the judgment. The only alternative is that this refers to the end times, which is what Sami believes. And according to Jesus, it's the angels that will carry out this retribution.

So what do we have? Sami completely misrepresents what the Bible says (this is almost always the case when Sami talks about the Bible). The text utterly refutes his claim. At this point, people of greater integrity would admit their mistake and apologize. But not Sami. When he is conclusively refuted, he simply says that everyone knows he's right and that scholars agree with him!

Several things are worthy of note. First, we can see how desperate Sami is to come up with something--anything--that implies that Christians are called to violence. But all he can do is twist and distort the Bible in his pitiful attempt to make the teachings of Christianity sound as violent as the teachings of Islam. Second, notice that there is absolutely no concern for truth or accuracy anywhere in Sami's claims. Indeed, he shows exactly the opposite--that he is perfectly willing to deceive his readers in his desperation. Third, it seems that Sami is taking the path of Nadir Ahmed. Instead of attempting to build up his credibility in an effort to become a respected debater, he's choosing to revel in ignorance and deception. If Sami continues, I predict that his career will be over within a year. Fourth, notice that Sami's fellow Muslims will not rebuke him for his atrocious behavior. Instead, they will rush to his defense. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see Yahya and Bassam agreeing with Sami's absurd interpretation. Fifth, if I know Sami, he'll claim that I'm misrepresenting his words. Well, I posted his words, so I'm not sure how he'll be able to make his favorite claim this time.

Welcome to the wild and wonderful world of Muslim apologetics my friends. Can a religion that relies so heavily on deception and distortion really be the true religion?


Nakdimon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nakdimon said...

David, you make me laughhhhhhhhhhhhhh!


I just changed my mind about debating Sami Zaatari. I see that it will be of nou use. This guy will continue to lie and discredit himself and his “peaceful” religion no matter what.

He has nor egard for truth whatsoever. But, that goes for his prophet too. How can you be a religion of trut hor “the true religion” if your representatives are allowed to lie to other people without being held accountable for it?

El-Cid said...

Why on earth should we expect Sami to have exegetical integrity with the Bible, when he doesn't even show it for the Quran!?

He falls to vain interpretations that contradict the bulk of orthodox Islamic theology, so of course he will apply the same treatment to the Bible.

The first time I saw Sami debate was with you Mr. Wood (which I viewed recently right here on your blog). I had a shred of hope telling me, "This young man seems to have an honest and open desire to tackle issues and present his faith". That shred of hope has been erased. Yet another in a long series of let-downs by the apologists of Islam. Sami is forked tongued, and I find him lacking in all manifestations of apologetic integrity.

I score him 2 notches up from Nadir Ahmed and 1 notch up from Osama Abdullah (that is not a compliment by the way). Who knows? Maybe if Sami works really hard he can supplant Nadir. Anything is possible.

Nakdimon said...

One thing I have noticed since I started paying attention to Islamic teachings and apologetics:

Muslims will present all the noble things in their faith and hide the destructive things (which outweigh the noble things by far!) from others. Once those destructive things become known to the public, they will try to re-interpret them. (Qur'an, Bukhari, Muslim, Dawwud, etc.) If they can't re-interpret them, they try to discredit them and claim they are "weak" narrations, or "fabricated" or "apocripha". (Ishaq, Tabari)

This is nonsensical. Apocriphal writers shouldn't get the light of day, since they misrepresent the faith. And since Tabari and Ishaq are revered muslim scholars, and have been so for centuries, it make no sense to disregard them now, because they make your prophet look bad. Tabari, for instance, has written a Tafsir that is widely used today by Muslims. It is simply untenable to claim that these men misrepresented Allah, Muhammad and Islam for centuries and they are still being regarded as pious and faithful Muslims.

It will be only a matter of time before Bukhari and Muslim will be bumrushed by Islamic apologists as well. Since these have no context, they are the darlings of the apologists now. But because Tabari and Ishaq DO give us the right context and are utterly repulsive, they are being trampled upon.

Javier said...

I say Circus of Islamic Apologia. Historically speaking, I'm not sure Christians have ever encountered arguments more scandalous, foolish, and plainly stupid. The 20th century Christian apologists saw liberalism, the 21st got it easy with the Muslims. Lol.

Bfoali said...

Please visit
to see a full responses to the claims of david wood.