Obscure Christian Demagogue, Sam Shamoun refuses to deny the Bible DOES have forgeries

I recently made a post mentioning how Sam Shamoun quoted a forged verse from the Bible in trying to make a point against Islam:

http://thedebateinitiative.com/2011/12/18/sam-shamoun-quotes-a-biblical-forgery/

The posting obviously rattled the missionary’s cage as we are about to see, as he left the following message in response:

Sam Shamoun Hey folks, that troll Sami Zaatari posted this article in response to this blog spot: http://thedebateinitiative.com/2011/12/18/sam-shamoun-quotes-a-biblical-forgery/. He thinks that I posted this verse, which is fine since this will come to backfire against him. He doesn’t realize that whenever the other admins post something here, the same picture shows up. This is typical behavior of Muslim dwagandists since they are following the example of Allah and his false prophet whom he shamed and humiliated (http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2011/10/who-killed-muhammad.html). However, the admins and Christians need to learn from these Christophobes and start studying up on textual criticism since a comparison of the Bible’s textual transmission with the Quran’s shows that Allah again lied to Muhammad when he said he would preserve his unholy deception from corruption… Now Sami make sure you mention this post as well. (http://www.facebook.com/SamShamoun)

I hope Sam Shamoun is happy I mentioned his post? Shamoun is complaining that it wasn’t him who made the posting, even though the facebook page is named after him, links to his articles, links to his videos, links to his events, and even speaks like him when posting a message! So forgive me if I assumed it was Sam Shamoun making a posting on a facebook page titled Sam Shamoun.

Now having said all of that I want everybody to remember the main point of my original post, which was to merely point out that a BIBLICAL FORGERY WAS USED. Now does Shamoun refute that argument? No, instead all he does is argue that the text of the Quran is corrupt! Well as Shamoun’s colleague David Wood often likes to say, this is known as the tu quoque fallacy. So for example if person A accuses person B of being a liar, person B will merely respond back by telling person A  you’re a liar as well! Shamoun has committed that very fallacy here, instead of defending his Bible; he merely says oh well the Quran is corrupt as well! Yet that doesn’t change the fact that the Bible does have a forgery in it, namely in John 8 about the story of the adulteress. So even if we grant Shamoun’s argument, all he has shown is that both the Quran and his Bible are textually corrupted, good job Sam!

Imagine you were a Christian hoping for a response from Sam Shamoun, a response to defend his Bible, and all he can muster up is throwing the accusation back against the Quran! That Christian still expects an answer regarding the accusation against the Bible, okay the Quran is corrupt, but what about my own Holy Book is there an actual forgery in it? Sadly if you are a Christian the hard truth is that the story of the adulteress is UNAMIOUSLY accepted as a forgery by textual critics of the Bible. Virtually all academics in this field accept this conclusion.

As for the supposed corruption of the Quran, please visit the following links that discusses the history, preservation, and textual integrity of the Holy Quran:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/

http://ilovemuhammed.com/multimedia/videos/viewvideo/32/about-the-quran/-2-preservation-of-the-quran-the-proof-that-islam-is-the-truth-abdur-raheem-green

http://ilovemuhammed.com/multimedia/videos/viewvideo/33/about-the-quran/-3-oral-transmission-of-the-quran-the-proof-that-islam-is-the-truth-abdur-raheem-green

http://ilovemuhammed.com/multimedia/videos/viewvideo/68/about-the-quran/quloom-al-quran-compilation-of-the-quranq-by-navaid-aziz

http://ilovemuhammed.com/multimedia/videos/viewvideo/69/about-the-quran/quloom-al-quran-the-basmallah-and-how-the-quran-was-preservedq-navaid-aziz

In conclusion all I will say is the following: Sam Shamoun agrees that there are Biblical forgeries, and with missionaries like him, who needs non-believing critics?!