Sunday, January 10, 2010

An Open Debate Challenge to Yahya Snow

Muslim Yahya Snow promotes several videos on his site that attack the Trinity and the deity of Christ. He also finds occasion to attack these doctrines when the subject at hand has nothing to do with them. These are sufficient reasons by themselves to openly challenge Yahya to a written debate on either one or both of these topics.

A further reason for such a challenge arises from the fact that Yahya thinks it is appropriate to censor people’s comments, as in the following post (*), even though I did little more in the combox than direct people to a link where they could view the entire debate on the Trinity in the Old Testament between brother Sam Shamoun and Muslim Farhan Qureshi, a debate that Yahya provides a severely edited version of on his blog. This edited version consists only of Farhan’s opening statement and completely excises what Brother Sam said in that debate. Yahya also only provides Farhan’s opening presentation in his debate on the deity of Christ with brother Nabeel Qureshi (*). (Nota Bene: Yahya’s actions should not be thought of as reflecting negatively on Farhan Qureshi.)

By accepting this debate challenge Yahya will have the opportunity to prove that he believes in the public defensibility of his (anti-)position, something his actions heretofore do not evince. It will give him the opportunity of demonstrating that the Trinity and deity of Christ are not taught in the Old Testament, and that such a demonstration does not require making sure that the Muslim side is the only one being heard.

Accordingly, here is my proposal for these two topics, both in the form of an interrogative:

Is the Trinity Taught in the Old Testament?

2,500 word opening statements
2,000 word rebuttals
1,500 word counter-rebuttals
1,000 word closing statements

Is the Deity of Christ Taught in the Old Testament?

2,500 word opening statements
2,000 word rebuttals
1,500 word counter-rebuttals
1,000 word closing statements

Should Yahya accept this challenge:

1) Each installment shall be posted on our respective blogs, mine on Answering Muslims and Yahya’s on The Facts About Islam.

2) Each installment shall be posted at a pre-agreed time that is convenient to both of us (i.e. not before or after). For example:

Opening Statements: 8pm on 1/15/10
Rebuttals: 8pm on 2/1/10
Counter Rebuttals: 8pm 2/15/10
Final Remarks: 8pm 3/1/10

3) Each installment shall include a link to the opening, rebuttal, counter-rebuttal, and final remarks of the other.

4) Each installment shall be limited to the agreed upon word-limit, which shall include footnotes.

Any violation of these rules will constitute a breach of the debate agreement and will result in forfeiture. For example, if one or the other of us fail to provide a link, do not post at the pre-agreed time, or go beyond the word limit, then such will be deemed an act of self-disqualification. The same would go of course if either one of us fail to respond at all.

Since Yahya has been banned from this blog for reason of bad conduct, he can post his acceptance at his blog. Exact details can be worked out in the comments section.

***It has come to my attention that the ban on Yahya may have been lifted. Since I have been busy the past little while and have only popped in periodically, I do not know. If that is the case, the details can be worked out right here.***


Fernando said...

Man... I'll certanly be tuuned to see this debate... not, I say, the outcome (we all know who and how is John Snow), butt the debate in itself...

my blessings are upon you both: those who search for the truth do not fear to pray to all the people: every small contribute (and iff this debate goes forward it will be a great contribute) shall bee a blessing to us all...

thankes, brother Semper, for this oportunity: may God bless you and your family...

Sydneysider said...

Why bother explaining. Islam is the only true religion so why bother (sarcasm detected)

OLJingoist said...

Five to one the muslim says it is sensless to debate a non believer and will hurridly exit, calling you an islamaphobe.

Unknown said...

Hey David,

First off I just wanted to say great show this weekend. Secondly I don't beleive that Yahya will accept your challenge because he is affraid to give the opposition a plateform so here are my predictions of his responce:

1.He will consider it a waste of time by saying, "I already know truth, and that truth is islam, so whatever a Christian says something about theology it is influenced by thier misleading and corrupt book"

and if he does accept then either:

1. He will not post it on his blog because by examining your debates and his debate it is clear he does not understand the diety of Christ thus clearing showing that you will be the winner of this text debate

2. He will edit your section but cutting parts of it and if you really do give him a good whipping he may add to it claiming they are your words, also he will add to his in the form of footnotes to try and get his point accoss with meaningless and illogical arguement that require the pressuposition that Islam is true in order to work for Islam...purely circular arguements which I see many of....especailly this weekends shows on ABN...

but not to fear muslims tell us to just beleive, just beleive without any investigate for your salvation. Just want to hear what you all have to say about this just it because many of them are uneducated and don't have any logical reasoning, or is it that they see thier arguements for islam are weak and since they are brainwashed from a very young age believe everything we say is misguiding and false?

God Bless

Ashur Prince

Unknown said...

My mistake I thought David posted this...Hopefully he accepts your challenge Semper giving us more of his arguements to expose lies and the lie of Islam while at the same time exaulting Jesus as God.

God Bless,

Ashur Prince

Adam said...

praise be God

I am waiting for this debate.

Anthony Rogers said...

Hey all, I am happy to see your interest in Yahya accepting this challenge and for one or the other or both of these debates to go forward. Thanks for your prayers as well. May the Name of the Lord be praised.

Anthony Rogers said...

Yahya, I am willing to bend over backwards and give you an insight into how I can be expected to argue. See the following articles:

Let Us Make Man: A Trinitarian Interpretation of Genesis 1:26

The "Heavenly" and "Earthly" Yahweh: A Trinitarian Interpretation of Genesis 19:24

Hear, O Muslims: The Shema and the Shahada

Happy reading.

Anonymous said...

Back in Indonesia and many muslims dominated countries the belief that sprang up was that none of Christian dares to challenge the truth of islam. They have this deep rooted biased belief that Islam is not challengeable. It is an absolute truth without the need of further examination.

Just a little observation will reveal that Muslims silence their opponent by oppression. Thus, the reason not so many open challenges to muslim in Indonesia, Pakistan, Arab countries are due to afraid of its reprisal.

Now in Malaysia if you read the news, 6 churches were firebombed due to the use of the word Allah for Christian's God. How ridiculous.. stopping the opponent by oppression. Is it wrong now to say Islam is established on the ground of barbaric acts and oppression?

However, in countries where Islam is not the majority, the challenge is so unbearable.

Just really wondering if Yahya Snow has got the gut to accept Semper's open challenge.

Would Dr coward Naik accept open challenge from David and Sam as well?

I doubt... I doubt....

Nakdimon said...


I doubt that Yahya will accept your challenge. But if he does, please demand citing of sources and references to any scholarly work he claims to quote or refer to. I cant stand the fact that Muslims will always make claims about scholar says this and scholar says that but in the end all they have heard is another muslim claim something about the scholar in question.


Unknown said...

Semper that doesn't bring you to a state of Dhimmitude does it? It is almost like you are "breast feeding" him with those....I kid, but now he must accept because he is now fully prepared to debate but I think anyone that truely believes what they follow is true must be able to stand up for it whenever a challenge arises especially in the field of Theology when it comes from an Apologist. Keep up the great work Semper,

May the Lord Bless you, your family and the readers of this blog. May they ask for truth and the Lord reveal to each and everyone of them the Spotless Lamb of God who came to take away the sins of the World.

Ahur Prince

minoria said...


I recall Mr.Kunde's remark in the debate that there is a contradiction between what Jesus DRANK at the cross.I believe it's not so,but first:


The ACADEMIC CONSENSUS or agreement of at least 95% of scholars ( in this case more ) is that MATTHEW and LUKE had a copy of MARK and copied from him. MATTHEW copied 90% of MARK, and LUKE about 50%. Plus MATT and LUKE share Q, or 230 verses common to both but absent in MARK. And also LUKE has material not in MATT or MARK, and the same for MATTHEW.

As for JOHN the scholars are divided 50/50 if he copied from the Synoptics.

It is very important to remember this when one makes claims about supposed gospel contradictions. Because they show when MATT or LUKE simply add details to what is already in MARK. And they also omit details found in Mark.




MARK 15:23 says " they gave him WINE mixed MYRRH to drink, which he refused " and MATT 27:34 says " they gave him WINE mixed with CHOLE ( the ORIGINAL Greek word used ) to drink, but when he tasted it, he did not want to drink it. "

Remember that MATT copied from MARK, yet he changed the word MYRRH to CHOLE. The question is WHY? He also added that Jesus first tasted and then refused. There is nothing wrong with that. MARK just gave the FINAL ACT, the rejection of the wine, and MATT added HOW it came about ( he added information to Mark ).

minoria said...



It is a substance that has THREE characteristics:

1. It is an AROMATIC ( it smells good, used as a perfume ).
2. It has a BITTER taste. The word MYRRH comes from the Arabic MURR, which means " BITTER ". For checking, see:

3. It has a certain use as a NARCOTIC, a PAIN-KILLER. For checking, see:


1. It means GALL ( also called BILE ), a liquid secreted by the liver. To verifiy, read:

2. It means BITTER. In ACTS 8:20-23 we have:

" Peter answered: " May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord. Perhaps he will forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of CHOLE and captive to sin. "

Check ACTS 8:23, it is always translated as BITTERNESS.


Because GALL or BILE is a BITTER substance, just like MYRRH, another BITTER substance. The link given confirms it.

So CHOLE can be translated either way. Now they did not mix real GALL or BILE into WINE. So the CHOLE in MATT 27:34 would mean BITTER or BITTER SUBSTANCE ( and myrrh is bitter ), not real gall.


MATT copied from MARK. He knew MYRRH was a BITTER substance. He knew CHOLE in Greek meant BITTER. It was natural for him to used CHOLE to refer to myrrh.

Adam said...

Would Dr coward Naik accept open challenge from David and Sam as well?

No Never ...... He and his associates like AR Green, Yousaf Estes may all go out of multi million islamic entertainment business.

However, in countries where Islam is not the majority, like India. Muslim (population) are bigger minority. Indian politician thrive on them, as muslims are potential vote bank.

The Berean Search said...

Greeting all,

I have posted the following comment on Yahya Snow's youtube page:

"Greeting YahyaSnow,

I wonder if you will be accepting the written debate challenge from from Anthony Rogers (aka Semper Paratus) of and

The open challenge can be viewed at:"

All comments are 'pending approval' on his page. It will be interesting to see if he even approves my comment let alone accepts the challenge.

Yahya's YouTube page can be found here

May the peace of the Lord Jesus Christ bless you all.

Fernando said...

Hi The Berean Search... glade to see you arounde here... please: do continue to bless us with your participation... may God bless you and your family...

Fernando said...

Has Yahya Snow agreed onn this debate? Does anyone knows his contact? I send him some emails encouraging him to accept this chance to prove his knowledge to the emails he has on his blog, butt it looks like they're not working... lets hoppe he'll accept this debate...

Anonymous said...

Would the challenge finally remain unanswered? Supposed this were a challenge from muslim, they would have trumpeted on their rooftops that the white Christian missionary ran away from the challenge..

Too bad, I must accept the disappointment of not going to read a good debate.. My dream fades away as muslim Yahya Snow would not dare to accept the challenge...

The unexamined belief is not worth following.


Anthony Rogers said...

Yahya has (sort of) accepted the debate challenge. I will update everyone soon.

aussie christian said...

I have read a lot of what yahya snow has posted, and sadly he is so buried in his own lack of knowledge that he is another osama sad sack of not much besides unbacked statements, non existant universities and accidemecs out right lies and well a whole heap of fairy tales.

I would be more prepared to believe in santy claus, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy (which I never will) than anything most muslims vomit up from the spirit of their god aka satan.

but I do look forward to something from this joker as I really need a good belly laugh.

Peace and Love.

Anthony Rogers said...

News Flash: