The Call and Confronting Doubts with Limited Knowledge

Question:
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. May Allah reward our honorable Shaykh Salih with the best reward, and we ask Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, to place that in the scales of his deeds. My question, Honorable Shaykh, as you know, and as my colleague mentioned, there are many deviant Islamic groups in Western countries. Of course, a Muslim must not stand as a bystander, for he bears the responsibility of calling to Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He. But the problem we may face, for example, is when a person wants to call people there, he will inevitably face many doubts that he may be unable to answer. For instance, calling here within the country is easy, because the person you are calling knows the ruling; when you call a person to a ruling, it is meant as a reminder, because he knows the ruling. But in Western countries, the Muslim, for example, may be on a deviant belief, or the disbeliever may be ignorant. Consequently, he enters with doubts, misguidance, and many questions that a person is unable to answer, because the stock of knowledge he carries is small. Does this mean that a person should stop, meaning stop from knowledge or from the call, until he carries the amount of knowledge by which he can confront these things?

Answer:
You have spoken well, yes. A person will face what you mentioned. He will see violations. He will see various schools of thought. And sects and parties, all of which, unfortunately, claim affiliation to Islam.
So the brother who is sent out, who faces such matters, should look at whether the person who is in disagreement is close to the truth, and if he hopes for his guidance and hopes for his acceptance, then he enters into understanding with him and clarifies the correct path to him, perhaps Allah will guide him.
But if the person who is in disagreement does not accept the truth, but rather wants you to come to him, and he does not want to come to you, then beware of him, and do not argue with him unless you have knowledge by which you can refute his doubts. But if you do not have knowledge, do not enter into argument with him, then he will dominate you and say, "I have won over him."
So this is the detail. The one who is in disagreement is of two types. One type disagrees with the truth not out of intent, but out of ignorance; he does not know the truth. So you enter into clarifying the truth with him, and you clarify it to him, with gentleness and wisdom, saying to him, "I am concerned for you, and I want good and correctness for you, my brother, such and such," with whatever you can do to convince him.
But if it is because you hope that he will come to the truth and accept the truth. But if this one who is in disagreement does not accept the truth and does not want to, meaning, accept the truth from you and come with you, but rather wants you to go with him to falsehood, and he throws doubts at you that you are unable to answer, then do not enter with him, and do not argue with him, because you do not have strength and you do not have knowledge by which you can refute his doubts and repel his fabrications, so do not enter into argument with him, leave him and stay away from him, yes.