Dr. Pepper

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@abuatiyyah_ Imām Ibn majah was upon Ahlul Sunnah, ofc we will be happy. It will refute the jahmiyyah (asharis)

[Abdul Rahman (TAP) @abdul_now]

𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐃𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐍𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐄𝐧𝐝𝐬

If you've been following the endless back-and-forths between Daniel @Haqiqatjou and the likes of @MMetaphysician, @Farid_0v, and @provingislam, you might be wondering why this conversation keeps going in circles.

It’s not because the issues are complicated. It’s because Daniel has no interest in resolving them. Let me explain what that means.

Daniel’s goal is to flood the discussion, stay vague, and disappear when he's cornered—only to return later as if nothing happened. And this isn’t just something he does in public, because as I’ll explain below, I’ve seen him do the exact same thing in private discussions.

𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐇𝐞 𝐊𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐆𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠:

𝟏) 𝐊𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐀𝐬𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐀𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲’𝐯𝐞 𝐁𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐀𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝

Daniel keeps bringing up things that have already been answered—word for word. Some of these things have been explained to him multiple times, yet he acts like no answer was given and asks again a few days or weeks later.

He does this because he knows most people 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧’𝐭 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐤. They see him still asking the question and assume that no proper answer was given.

No one is saying that he has to agree with the answers. The issue is that he refuses to honestly engage with them, even when his opponent provides a response that clearly deserves proper consideration.

𝟐) 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐲 𝐕𝐚𝐠𝐮𝐞 𝐒𝐨 𝐇𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐭 𝐏𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬

Instead of stating his beliefs clearly, Daniel keeps things just blurry enough to avoid accountability.

Take his stance on istighatha: First he says, "I’d be 99% sure that it is shirk, but not certain."

This answer makes no sense because he’s confusing two things:

a) The ruling on the act itself (which is either shirk or not).

b) Judging an individual who does the act (which depends on certain factors).

The general question is clearly about the act itself—but Daniel keeps giving answers that blur the lines between the two. Then we find out he simply follows the istiqlali position..So why not just say from the start: "I hold the istiqlali view"??

Two reasons:

a) He doesn’t actually understand these categories well enough to articulate his own stance properly.

b) He deliberately keeps things murky so he can change his position depending on the criticism he faces.

What makes this worse is that for months, he kept throwing around the term "shirk" as if he was talking about shirk akbar. But much later, when debating brother Adnan, he finally admitted he only meant shirk asghar.

This is a pattern: Keep things vague, let people assume one thing, and only clarify when he has no choice.

𝟑) 𝐄𝐯𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞

This isn’t just something Daniel does in public debates—it’s exactly how he behaves in private discussions too.

There have been multiple times where he stops replying as soon as he gets a direct, clear answer that decisively responds to one of his criticisms. Then later, he either returns with a completely new topic or responds to something else while pretending the previous point was never made.

And it’s not just me—this has happened privately with other very reputable individuals too.

This is exactly why I took the discussion public. When Daniel realizes he has no way out, he just disappears and waits for the topic to die down. Then, if it's a public discussion, he usually repeats the same question again as if it were never answered (because he knows no one is keeping track). In private discussions, he'd either move the goalpost to another topic or wait until the other person does.

For Daniel, it’s a game of flood, confuse, evade, and repeat. Exposing this harmful and misleading behavior is necessary, specifically when it comes from someone with so many followers.

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@CharlesLemming @my_names_zainab @Fx1Jonny So ironic, you’re doing the same thing😂😂

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@MMetaphysician @RaadTheShepherd Bro nobody asked

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@nesmudawah @kokealot @ibnalqayyim_ @ibntaymiyyah661

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@HarounKanj @Youssef22314390 Why not just answer it?

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@K1Pichu @InspiringPhilos So Moses must be a false prophet then right?

Just using your same standards 🤪

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@Luqman_255 @Sarahahbut @DawahWise @Themostdread @engels_marx5 But if your “God-given intellect” is being used to deny what the Quran & Sunnah affirm (that Jesus is alive and will return) then it’s an indication it is not sound intellect

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@Luqman_255 @DawahWise He’s absolutely correct. Especially when your so called “logic” is not a sound argument and it’s being used to deny clear affirmations in the revelation

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@tjs683 @othmanafandy @InspiringPhilos The fact you think that this terrible response morally justifies God ordering the death of INFANTS at all is appalling and what is wrong with Christianity.

Horrifying. Maybe sensible Christians like @InspiringPhilos would use a little more common sense. Do you agree with him?

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@InspiringPhilos Lol called it https://t.co/M3eWoHP9gv

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@Haqiqatjou Incoming “hyperbole”

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@Haqiqatjou Incoming “hyperbole”

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@shouldhavebaby @NBMUIG2 @Samiul_1003 @Haqiqatjou @jaydyer @InspiringPhilos @Acts17David Most Christians don’t know their own Bible

[Dr. Pepper @DoctorPepperPhD]

@NBMUIG2 @Haqiqatjou @jaydyer @InspiringPhilos @Acts17David You have to be delusional to think either of them won against Daniel.

Daniel washed them both and it’s clear to anyone who isn’t blind