Error in bible

[islamis4u]

really? we've never said that. why should G!D's Will be easy to understand? why on earth should that be true?

Then you say it is not the God's Word???

how about this one? it's not exactly clear.

here, it's mightily unclear what the Qur'an is saying. who are "they"? what "signs of G!D" did they disobey? which prophets did they "slay unrightfully"? and, more importantly, what did the "burden of G!D's anger" involve and is G!D still angry? these things are surely unclear in both the arabic and the translation. perhaps you'd like to enlighten us?

Why you try to mislead us you Qouted out of Quran out of context okay!!!

Th e whole is like this and this will clear it i do not have to put points to clear any thing Quran clear it ownself by it Self:

002.059 But the transgressors changed the word from that which had been given them; so We sent on the transgressors a plague from heaven, for that they infringed (Our command) repeatedly.
002.060 And remember Moses prayed for water for his people; We said: "Strike the rock with thy staff." Then gushed forth therefrom twelve springs. Each group knew its own place for water. So eat and drink of the sustenance provided by Allah, and do no evil nor mischief on the (face of the) earth.
002.061 And remember ye said: "O Moses! we cannot endure one kind of food (always); so beseech thy Lord for us to produce for us of what the earth groweth, -its pot-herbs, and cucumbers, Its garlic, lentils, and onions." He said: "Will ye exchange the better for the worse? Go ye down to any town, and ye shall find what ye want!" They were covered with humiliation and misery; they drew on themselves the wrath of Allah. This because they went on rejecting the Signs of Allah and slaying His Messengers without just cause. This because they rebelled and went on transgressing.
002.062 Those who believe (in the Qur’an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

because leviticus isn't talking about hygiene here. the word translated as "unclean" is rendered incorrectly. the concepts of tuma and tahara are highly complicated and are better compared to positive/negative polarity in electricity, or north/south polarity in magnetism. it's not about how clean pr dirty someone may be. you seem insistent on interpreting Torah literally in order to wilfully distort what it means. in this you are actually using a favourite tack of atheist fundamentalists such as christopher hitchens or richard dawkins - and one could do exactly the same to the Qur'an.

It is clear in their it is nothing like what you say and Quran do not have like that okay i qoute you whole Leviticus her:

1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. 3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. 4 Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. 5 If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. 6 " 'When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. 7 He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.
" 'These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. 8 If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.' "

Its clear it do not need your own interpretation.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by islamis4u

It is mentioned in the book of Leveticus, Ch. No.12, Verse No.1 to 5, and we know medically, that after a mother gives birth to a child, the post-partal period, it is unhygienic. To say it is ‘unclean’, Religiously - I have got no objection. But Leviticus, Ch. No.12 Verse No.1 to 5, says that… ‘After a woman gives birth to a male child, she will be unclean for 7 days, and the period of uncleanliness will continue for 33 days more. It she give birth to a female child, she will be unclean for two weeks, and the period of uncleanliness will continue for 66 days. In short, if a woman gives birth to a male child… ‘a son’, she is unclean for 40 days. If she gives birth to a female child… ‘a daughter’, she is unclean for 80 days. I would like Dr. William Campbell to explain to me scientifically, how come a woman remains unclean for double the period, if she gives birth to a female child, as compared to a male child. The Bible also has a very good test for adultery - How to come to know a woman has committed adultery, in the book of Numbers, Ch. no.5 Verse No..11 to 31. I’ll just say in brief. It says that… ‘The priest should take holy water in a vessel, take dust from the floor, and put it into the vessel - And that is the bitter water ‘And after cursing it, give it to the woman And if the woman has committed adultery, after she drinks it, the curse will enter her body, the stomach will swell, the thigh will rot, and she shall be cursed by the people. If the woman has not committed adultery, she will remain clean and she will bear the seed. A novel method of identifying whether a woman has committed adultery or not. You know today in the world, there are thousands of cases pending in different parts of the world, in different courts of law - only on the assumption that someone has alleged that a woman has committed adultery. I had read in the newspapers, and I came to know from the media, that the President of this great country Mr. Bill Clinton, he was involved in a sex scandal about 2 years back. I wonder, that why did not the American court use this ‘bitter water test’ for adultery? He would have gone scot-free immediately. Why did not the Christian missionaries of this great country, specially those who are in the medical field like my respected Dr. William Campbell, use this bitter water test to bail out their President, immediately.

We do not know exactly what "bitter water is". It could have been a solution that forced the body to reject as a foreign body the DNA from the semen of a male that the woman's body had not become accustomed to (e.g. that of her husband). A lot of knowledge has be lost to us through the millenia. But we do understand that the body of a wife of a man, becomes accustomed to his DNA (seed) as time goes by. And more often than not, if she suddenly has foreign DNA in her, she can develop rashes or infections. Like wise a man's body becomes accustomed to his wife's DNA, and if he suddenly encounters foreign DNA, he too develops irritation where contact was made, for a time. Bitter water, may have been capable of exacerbating the irritation.

As far as the American court not using the bitter water test, American law is not Sharia law. It is based on English common law, with judeao/christian priciples as a base, however the justice system in the US is "blind" in that evidence of fact determines the judgement, not personal or religious opinion. In short, all are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. The other point you forget is that, back then, only the woman could be found guilty of adultery. Men were not. Hence President Clinton would not have ever been considered as an adulterer.

And as an after thought, the bitter water test sounds alot like a culture swab, which is used to identify the rape victim's perpetrator. But that can only be used in criminal court, and here, adultery is a civil matter, where the right to privacy is sacresanct.

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by islamis4u

It is little off-topic but i just want to ask you that of which religion you belong

That shouldn't matter my brother.

Ma salama.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by islamis4u

If there are scientific points mentioned in the Bible

I think this is probably the source of your error. The Bible is not, nor does it claim to be, a scientific text, nor was it written by scientists. Nor was it composed under the rigorous procedures that govern scientific texts.

The Bible is far more than something as mundane as that.

Originally Posted by islamis4u

The purpose of my presentation on ‘Bible and science’ is not to hurt any Christian’s feeling.

OK. I hope you see it is not my intention to hurt your feelings, when I say you've got this wrong.

Originally Posted by islamis4u

The purpose is only to point out, that a God’s Revelation cannot contain scientific errors.

No it cannot ... but then God's Revelation transcends science ... so where the two are in dispute, I suggest the scientist is probably more inclined to error than God.

Originally Posted by islamis4u

As Jesus Christ, peace be upon him said… ‘Search ye the truth, and the truth shall free you.’

Indeed it does ... and often from the restrictions of science ...

Originally Posted by islamis4u

We have the Old Testament, we have the New Testament -

Ah ... an error of emphasis here. We Christians have the Covenant with Israel, and the New Covenant in Christ, to which the Scriptures testify ... so you have missed the point and the object of the Christian sacra doctrina.

Originally Posted by islamis4u

Now you should follow the Last and Final Testament, which is the Glorious Qur’an.

We need no further testimony to the Love of God, nor is there any testimony in the Qur'an that contains anything that matches the Redemptive Sacrifice of the Son ... nor is there a Covenant in the Qur'an superior to the Covenant in Christ ... sorry.

Originally Posted by islamis4u

Let us analyse what the Bible says ... this is only one error i produce right now for you but their are so many.

Indeed. Th errors are yours my friend.

I would have thought, as Mohammed (pbuh) seemed to hold 'the people of the Book' in no little regard, that he, at least, displayed some reverence towards the sacra doctrina of the Jews and the Christians — even if he did not see eye-to-eye with them. Frankly I am surprised that you do not follow the example of your master.

For my part, I could identify teachings of Islam that attribute certain miraculous events to the life of Our Lord that are not only 'not scientific' (the turning of clay models into birds, for example), but furthermore that we Christians had identified as spurious and apocryphal long before Mohammed (pbuh) was born ... so let's not engage in this kind of exchange.

Thomas

[islamis4u]

Originally Posted by Thomas

I think this is probably the source of your error. The Bible is not, nor does it claim to be, a scientific text, nor was it written by scientists. Nor was it composed under the rigorous procedures that govern scientific texts.

The Bible is far more than something as mundane as that.


OK. I hope you see it is not my intention to hurt your feelings, when I say you've got this wrong.


No it cannot ... but then God's Revelation transcends science ... so where the two are in dispute, I suggest the scientist is probably more inclined to error than God.


Indeed it does ... and often from the restrictions of science ...


Ah ... an error of emphasis here. We Christians have the Covenant with Israel, and the New Covenant in Christ, to which the Scriptures testify ... so you have missed the point and the object of the Christian sacra doctrina.


We need no further testimony to the Love of God, nor is there any testimony in the Qur'an that contains anything that matches the Redemptive Sacrifice of the Son ... nor is there a Covenant in the Qur'an superior to the Covenant in Christ ... sorry.


Indeed. Th errors are yours my friend.

I would have thought, as Mohammed (pbuh) seemed to hold 'the people of the Book' in no little regard, that he, at least, displayed some reverence towards the sacra doctrina of the Jews and the Christians — even if he did not see eye-to-eye with them. Frankly I am surprised that you do not follow the example of your master.

For my part, I could identify teachings of Islam that attribute certain miraculous events to the life of Our Lord that are not only 'not scientific' (the turning of clay models into birds, for example), but furthermore that we Christians had identified as spurious and apocryphal long before Mohammed (pbuh) was born ... so let's not engage in this kind of exchange.

Thomas

Of all your explanation you havn't given me answer that not it speaks like this, i never said its book of science but this came here to deal with the people on this world okay, so it As you say bible is from God then God should know look i created the earth and everything and if their is something in the book regarding earth it should be correct, either science is correct or either your book simple. It does not say that its book of science but things which are related to earth should be correct. And that you did not answered me.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by islamis4u

Of all your explanation you havn't given me answer that not it speaks like this, i never said its book of science but this came here to deal with the people on this world okay, so it As you say bible is from God then God should know look i created the earth and everything and if their is something in the book regarding earth it should be correct, either science is correct or either your book simple. It does not say that its book of science but things which are related to earth should be correct. And that you did not answered me.

Hi,

The bible is simply the Word of God. Science is a tool man uses to try and understand the workings of God. God does not need science hence his word does not need to be scientifically expressed. It is just simple facts that he tells us. Yet we still refuse to, or can not understand him...

Christ, we can't even understand the inner workings of a "man" like Albert Einstein, or Stephen Hawking, let alone what they wrote...

God's message is much simpler to us than that...go figure...

[bananabrain]

Originally Posted by islamis4u

Then you say it is not the God's Word???

not at all. i just say that the Word of G!D may not be as easy to understand as you think - and, more to the point, if you think you have understood it you may actually be missing something rather important.

Why you try to mislead us you Qouted out of Quran out of context okay!!!

i'm not trying to mislead you. if my Qur'anic quote is out of context, then so is your quote from the Torah. that is my point. the context of the Written Torah is the Oral Torah. you don't know anything about the Oral Torah, which means you don't know a great deal about the Written Torah either.

It is clear in their it is nothing like what you say and Quran do not have like that okay

clearly it does have "like that", because your larger quote from the Qur'an isn't any more clear than the first one was. if anything it makes it less so. and i don't think you get to tell me that what i say is wrong. if you want to know how history or chemistry work and you ask a historian or a chemist, if the answer isn't what you are expecting it to be what is more likely, that you are mistaken or the historian or chemist is mistaken?

Its clear it do not need your own interpretation.

what nonsense. of course it needs interpretation. the translation itself is inherently an interpretation. if you want to know how Torah works, ask a jew. but if you don't like how judaism interprets the Torah, that is not judaism's problem, but yours. to you your religion, to me my religion, as i think Someone said.

Originally Posted by Thomas

We Christians have the Covenant with Israel, and the New Covenant in Christ, to which the Scriptures testify ...

although the jews, of course, do not agree with this! hehehe.

b'shalom

bananabrain