To those who personally know me.
Some of you may have heard about a possible debate between me (Elijah Hagbard) and a Shia Muslim named Yahya Seymor.
The debate has unfortunately been cancelled.
It's long story. I met Yayhy in London in his debate with a Christian apologist David Wood. Me and Yahya had our conversation after the debate.
Since then I have occasionally communicated with Yahya on the blog: http://www.answering-muslim.org/.
Due to recent rumour spreading it was suggested that Yahya was posting under multiple names, such as Ibn.
I asked about this matter. Unfortunately I did not realise that Yahya answered my question,
and I pointed out on a later occasion a second time that Yahya and Ibn might be the same persons.
Yahya did not take this lightly and accussed me of calling him a liar, and has refused organize the debate later this year.
I have notified him that I was not aware of his answer to my question. I have also notified him that I have not even considered him a liar, but merely suggested that the two (yahya and Ibn) were the same, which I am perfectly fine with.
So are Yahya and Ibn the same persons? Honestly I don't know and I don't care, but I have to take his word for it, that he is not.
Did Yahya refuse to debate me because of the alleged accusation? Or is he backing out for other reasons? Again I don't know.
But as I said, the debate is cancelled.
7 comments:
Well Hogan,
I had mainly chosen not to entertain a debate with you because I was under the impression you were accusing me of using a psuedo second identity, and there are two things I do not entertain:
1) The Taqiyyah Fallacy
2) Being accused of being a liar,
both of which merit no response in dialogue. If you however are asserting this is not the case, we can indeed organise a debate at some point.
Now I need to think carefully.
One reason being, I am planning another debate, and I need seriouly consider, whether I can manage an additional debate this year.
But if we did, which topic would you suggest?
Oh by the way
Welcome to my humble blog Yahya
Oh I forget the second reason, I am not too keen deciding a debate, then cancelling and then get back to it.
It seems too much of a confusion to me. Especially if the reason is the one we just witnessed, I take it that individuals such as David Wood have offended you more aggressively than I have, and further that you have offended Wood more aggressively than I offended you.
I guess what I am saying is, if one word from me that appears offencive means cancelling a future event, while you can launch any accusation or attack on me or my brother David Wood, (and you know my view of the London debate), then I am literally out of it.
It has to go both ways, otherwise, this dialogue is useless.
Hogan,
Can you show me where I have "offended" your Brother Professor Wood recently?
If I offend him, he tells me, I generally apologise that's how it works.
As for uncertainty, Professor Wood and such apologists know that my aim is to get "Religious Apologetics", religious once more. This would entail me disagreeing to debate with Christians who act contrary to basic moral values, and disagreeing to share a platform with Muslims who do such.
Seeing as I thought you had belied me, I was under the impression you were guilty of the former. Since I was wrong, I retracted the refusal.
However it is entirely upto you, however I would request you make that clear to your friends who you had initially wrote the response for.
As for your opinion of the London debate between myself and David, thanks for that, I did take it onboard and actually apologised to David at the end if he thought I came across as overly harsh. I don't see what else can really be achieved from us raising the issue further, well aside from me keeping it as a constant remembrance.
Oh and for the record, David has never once insinuated that I am ibn or accused me of lying, the only offense he causes to me is attacking the truth with petty claims.
LOL, btw this is my gmail account for work (my name is still legally Sean till I change it in June) so don't be too confused.
Ok
if we just leave all that stuff behind us (it is pointless anyway, as you say, there is no pointing bringing stuff up again).
What would be a reasonable topic, if we were to debate in future?
Post a Comment