இதன் தமிழாக்கம் விரைவில் வெளியிடப்படும்
From: SAN (INDIA) < sakshi.apologeticsnetwork@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:34 AM
Subject: SAN Reply to TNTJ
To: TNTJ Head Office < tntjho5@gmail.com>, TNTJ Head Office < tntjho@gmail.com>, TNTJ Head Office < tntjho6@gmail.com>, pjtntj@gmail.com
Cc: “S.JOSHUA VENKATESAN” < mycoimbatore@gmail.com>, Ajoy Varghese < dajoyv@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 glorified forever and ever. Amen.
Dear Friends at TNTJ,
We are in receipt of your email dated March 20, 2012. We are amused by your blatant shamelessness in your continual attempts to evade the debate on Quran while at the same time pretending to be ready for the debate. You should always remember that we are trying to host the debate in Kochi only because you continue to refuse to abide by the signed agreement and you continue to refuse to have a private recorded debate (means without live telecast). If you really wanted this debate to take place, you should have kept all the legally viable options open. SAN has kept all the options (approaching Chennai police as per the signed agreement, private recorded debate as per the agreement over email and hosting it in another place) open; but TNTJ REFUSES TWO OF OTHER OPTIONS and IS NOW TRYING TO CLOSE THE THIRD OPTION as well but still pretends of being ready. When you are not ready for the other two legally viable options, what right you have even to claim of being ready? Your pretensions of being ready to debate on Quran are laughable.
Further, it is very clear as to why you do not want to debate with us on Quran though you pretend otherwise. As we refuted you in the debate on the Holy Bible exposing your double standard, you know for sure that you will be thoroughly exposed of your shallow arguments on Quran and we would beyond any doubt prove that Quran can never be the God’s word. Was that not the reason for violating even the agreement on private recorded debate by purposely advertising about online telecast? Were you not trying to provoke us and thereby escape from the debate by pasting posters and banners by violating the signed agreement? We overlooked your provocations because we wanted the debate to take place and expose your empty boastings and shallow arguments. We only objected when your actions went against the police order. Moreover, not only that you were and are afraid to debate with us on the topic of Quran, you seem to be even scared to release the video of your drama of January 28. If you provide us a copy or upload a video of good quality in public, you know that we would refute and expose every single so-called argument of yours, which would completely destroy the intellectual credibility of TNTJ, if anything is left. Whenever you muster some courage and provide us a video copy of your drama of January 28, you can be well assured that your shallow arguments would be once more exposed and refuted.
When we suggested the modification to two-day debate or mentioned about the debate on the Holy Bible, we have not written anything which you disagree. Both SAN & TNTJ agree that a two-day debate on the Holy Bible has taken place in Chennai. The only disagreement is whether one should consider your drama on January 28 as a debate, which no one in the world, except TNTJ, considers as a debate. Now, for our modification that “A two-day debate has already been conducted in Chennai peacefully,” you have suggested to change to debate for some days have been conducted in Chennai peacefully. We think that even your proposal to change two-days to some days carry a connotation of more than two days. However, since we do not want you to escape by citing this, we suggest that both SAN & TNTJ should drop all reference to number of days (whether two or some) and simply write as ‘SAN and TNTJ have already conducted similar debate in Chennai peacefully.”
We are open to your suggestions and modifications and we are proposing reasonable alternatives because TNTJ is going to provide the letter in TNTJ letterhead and SAN in SAN’s letterhead. However, since SAN representative is going to submit the letter to the Kochi police, the content should be something which SAN representative can explain to police. If police asks about some statement in TNTJ letter, SAN representative cannot say that SAN does not agree with that statement. If we say that, police would ask us why we are submitting a letter which we ourselves does not agree with.
Now, we feel pity your delirious attempts to make an entire planet out of an ant-hill of a minor editorial oversight of the word private in the subject line of draft of the letter to Kochi police. Anyone who reads our previous emails can easily understand what we intended as our emails are clearer than the book which claims to be clear but have “allegorical” ayats whose meaning which none knows except the all-knowing pretender who revealed it.
Further, how can you, who are trying every means to evade from the debate on Quran (not even being ready for the other options and even making silly excuses in matters such as letter to Kochi police), still mock the Holy God of all the true prophets? Don’t you know that your fabricated Wali has left you in your current pathetic situation that you have to devise means to evade from the debate on Quran? Further, what right does TNTJ has to make an issue out of one minor editorial oversight? Did not the hadith collectors such as Sheikh Bukhari and Sheikh Muslim commit many errors in hadith collection as per you? Did not the hadith narrators commit errors in narrating hadiths as per you? Are not the Muslims across the last 1400 years commit errors in accepting those hadiths as genuine as per you? Are you not the same group who accepts one hadith today and throws it to the dustbin tomorrow by even using biddah methodologies such ‘impracticality’ (or lack of trust???) as a test for genuine hadiths? When you commit blunders day in and day out even on matters of utmost importance such as your faith, what right do you have to even speak one sentence against others?
The letter to the Kochi police cannot have the word private in any part of the letter and we suggest it be replaced by ‘indoor debate.’ Further, when you are not ready for a private recorded debate, why do you want to add the word private to an indoor debate which would be publicly live telecasted? Is it to hide the fact from people that you are not even ready for a private recorded debate? If you are ready for the private recorded debate, do let us know and we can have it without the police permission. If you want the debate to be live telecasted (which is what you insist), the word private cannot be there in any part of the letter to the Kochi police. Once you make this amendment, do let us know when we can come and collect the letter to be handed over to Kochi police. It would be difficult get suitable venues on April 28 & 29 if any further delay happens and the dates would have to be accordingly changed. We also remind you that other two options are still open and you have to abide by the signed agreement.
Awaiting your letter to the Kochi police and the debate on Quran.
Thanks and regards,
SAN
Leave a Reply