A listing of the contradictions and errors in the bible.

Great arsenal. Maybe I'll use some for the next missionary trying to convert me...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
WS: Only one thing guarantees a place in hell, and that is unbelief concerning the savior Jesus Christ. Other beliefs are merely indicators of a person's position with God concerning eternal destiny. Evolution theory belief in itself is not evil. It becomes evil when it is used to supplant the truth of the Word of God which defines who is condemned already for their unbelief. After all, the theory is but an explanation of how most scientists think life evolved from more primitive life forms. I know several Christians who I think are not condemned becaue of their belief in evolution, being 'theistic evolutionists' for lack of the probably proper term, each of them holding different views, as do most evolutionists among school teachers disagree on many points. But, those Christians have not compromised their biblical beliefs, holding onto evolution theory as a lesser belief they would doubtless discard if forced to choose between the two as absolute truth.

---

Talking 'bout salvation claims... Strangely, I happen to adhere to a view that someone can be sent to hell if he/she accepts any substitute for God. That includes Jesus. He's not God to us Muslims.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wordswordsman:

WS: You have opened the door to fair rebuttal. I am prepared for you. What is or is not god to Muslims has no weight with Christians or Jews. Abraham worshipped Jehovah, the Lord God. Islam insults Abraham. If any substitution, it was the adoption of the pagan Moon god "Allah", surely rolling Abraham over in his grave. It took the forgeries and myths of Muhammad to twist the truth, many cenuries after the Torah stood unchallenged. Where was "Allah" all those centuries, failing to reveal himself to Ishmael and to many generations of his sons?
Islam insults one of their very own prophets, Jesus, refusing to accept His words. Jesus and His disciples made claims which the muslims deny, therefore making their claim he is one of their prophets a lie, for any prophet offering untruth was a false prophet then and now. Can't Islam discern their prophets from the false? The truth is Jesus is NOT a prophet of Islam, for Jesus supported no false religion, but served the living God, His Father in heaven. He can't be a prophet of Islam since that would make Him a liar. He declines the offer, fellow. Find another prophet. Better advice, change religions. You are drawn to the false prophets. Listen to the true ones, those of the Holy Bible.

---

Should I pick up his challenge? Maybe.The prophet Abraham (Ibrahim) worships Allah. Whether you call Him Jehovah or anything, it's irrelevant. All those refers to the same God. FYI, the local Christians here used the word 'Allah' for God!(6:4)Qad kanat lakum oswatun hasanatun fee ibraheema waallatheena maAAahu ith qaloo liqawmihim inna buraao minkum wamimma taAAbudoona min dooni Allahi kafarna bikum wabada baynana wabaynakumu alAAadawatu waalbaghdao abadan hatta tu/minoo biAllahi wahdahu illa qawla ibraheema li-abeehi laastaghfiranna laka wama amliku laka mina Allahi min shay-in rabbana AAalayka tawakkalna wa-ilayka anabna wa-ilayka almaseeru
YusufAli: There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: 'We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone': But not when Abraham said to his father: 'I will pray for forgiveness for thee, though I have no power (to get) aught on thy behalf from Allah.' (They prayed): 'Our Lord! in Thee do we trust, and to Thee do we turn in repentance: to Thee is (our) Final Goal.Allah do reveals His word to the Children of Israel, through His prophets Moses, David, Solomon, Zachariah, John the Baptist, and Jesus. However, the Israelites refused to notice them. Take these Qur'anic verses (which comes with the original script):(61:5)Wa-ith qala Moosa liqawmihi ya qawmi lima tu/thoonanee waqad taAAlamoona annee rasoolu Allahi ilaykum falamma zaghoo azagha Allahu quloobahum waAllahu la yahdee alqawma alfasiqeena
YusufAli: And remember, Moses said to his people: 'O my people! why do ye vex and insult me, though ye know that I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you?' Then when they went wrong, Allah let their hearts go wrong. For Allah guides not those who are rebellious transgressors.Moses was the prophet sent to the Israelites; therefore this verse shows what the Israelites think of Allah's messenger. They are the ones doing the serious insult.(61:6)Wa-ith qala 'Iisaa ibnu Maryama ya Banee Isra-eela innee rasoolu Allahi ilaykum musaddiqan lima bayna yadayya mina alttawrati wamubashshiran birasoolin ya/tee min baAAdee ismuhu Ahmadu falamma jaahum bialbayyinati qaloo hatha sihrun mubeenun
YusufAli: And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: 'O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.' But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, 'this is evident sorcery!'The verse states that Jesus referred to himself as a messenger of Allah (rasool Allah) and he said that there will be another messenger after him, Ahmad (Muhammad). But the Israelites denied Allah's words, again. Muslims acknowledge Moses & Jesus as prophets. However, the highest authority is Allah and His word the Qur'an.Because of the Israelites' stubbornness, Allah then revealed His word to the Arabs via Prophet Muhammad. And He promised to keep His word in authenticity; the Qur'an's original text has not changed since its revelation, while the Bible underwent some evolution of sorts because of translation and retranslation and personal touches. It didn't even have an original text. Why should I prefer it?

Sword, maybe you'd like to check this article by Ahmed Deedat (Sorry for having to call back-up but Mr Deedat is the authority in this topic).http://www.themodernreligion.com/...ive/christ/bible_muh.htm

John 1:25 And they [[asked him, and] said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?If I'm not misquoting there, the verse is supposed to be about the Pharisees asking John the Baptist (Prophet Yahya to us), about his identity if he is not 1)Christ (he is clearly not Jesus Christ) 2)Elias (not sure who this is but I think John is not Elias) or 3) THAT PROPHET.Who could THAT PROPHET be? Prophet Muhammad?Maybe. In Isaiah 29:11--12 I found an interesting scene:
29:11
And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:29:12
And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.If I am not misquoting there, this verse is about Isaiah's vision of a sealed book which cannot be read. This scene is recorded in the history of Prophet Muhammad's life also.(from a hadith shahih, narrated by Al-Bukhari)
One day suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied, "I do not know how to read." The Prophet (peace be upon him) added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, "I do not know how to read." Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time until I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, "I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?" Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, "Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists), created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous.'"(96):1-3.You might also be interested in this link:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/aramaic_society.htm

Got original texts? Then we can discuss some of this. You see, it's this translation and retranslation of the Bible that caused this. Even you can't trust your own sacred texts because of that.As for the Answering Islam page about Allah (your reply to peter borger), it's a good monograph of His description. However, I fail to see why you think they're different... found no reason for it in the page. The page documents that the name 'Allah' was known before Prophet Muhammad's time. This is certainly what Muslims believe: Allah has revealed himself to humanity long before Prophet Muhammad's time, especially through prophets to the Children of Israel.*The OT prophesy: I agree with John[evc]'s stance. Jesus was not mentioned either in the OT. So it's a stalemate. Or you got evidence?btw, it's not that I don't respect your holy books, but I find their texts too variable to be a good reference to back my point. I was responding to Peter Borger.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RedVento:
Allah is in fact a different name for Yahweh, the war god, kept in the ark of the covenant, released to destroy the enemies of the jews.

​

The same god who in the old testemant was not quite the nice old man portrayed by Jesus and the Renessaince.

​

Much like angels who were originally the messangers of god, or soldiers of god when needed. In fact Jacob got the name Isreal(wrestles with god) beause he wrestled with god's messanger.

​

If you would really like to get down to it, the argument can be made that both Islam and Christianity are both perversions of judiusm. Neither ascribing to the original covenants(such as circumsiscion) and Judiusm originally had no notion of hell or heaven. Our time was solely here on earth, serving our god(one of many).

---

short commentIslam practises circumcision. Mine had.back to this later...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
"Got original texts?"

​

WS: Do you? How do you know what you have is "original" when your own cleric scholars dispute over that? It isn't necessary to referto any original texts. All the work is already done many times over. How many times must people pour over each word, bringing it into a modern language? You make the same case of clerics of old who refused to allow the Bible into the hands of average people, making it an intellectual exercise, couching it in Latin or French, allowing only portions let out in sermons. The fact is there is enough accuracy in translations to derive from them what the original message was.

​

"Then we can discuss some of this."

​

WS: Cop-out, pure and simple. Whatever version of Quran I get hold of will be denied, right?

---

I got mine. The Arabic text. I only use translations to explain them to the English-speaking audience here. I won't deny if you quote a verse AND its original text. Most Muslims know how to read Arabic; maybe not all are able to translate it, but we all agree that the Arabic text is the original revelation.You participate in debating Muslims before. Has somebody pointed this to you before?"Chikko mamtakeem, v'chulo MUCHAMADIM, ze DODEE v'ze RA'EE, bano Yarushalaym" [Hebrew transliteration of Shir Hashirim (Song of Songs) 5:16]
http://www.answering-christianity.com/song5_16.htmThere, Prophet Muhammad's name in a part of the Bible.

sigh... this is the problem using translations as backup. I cannot see what you are talking abouthttp://www.answering-christianity.com/song5_16.htm
"Chikko mamtakeem, v'chulo MUCHAMADIM, ze DODEE v'ze RA'EE, bano Yarushalaym" [Hebrew transliteration of Shir Hashirim (Song of Songs) 5:16]My brothers at Answering Christianity said that this is their preferred translation.
"His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is MUHAMMAD. This is my (paternal) UNCLE, and this is my COMRADE, O daughters of Jerusalem." [Correct translation of Shir Hashirim (Song of Songs) 5:16]And you offered you preferred translation, telling me that Jesus Christ was the one referred there. And you don't offer me the Hebrew. Again, you have original texts?

Thanks bro. Now I know what Christians are made of.

Sword, the reason I start to quote your so-called holy texts was because Peter Borger asked me to. [He slips away somehow, maybe locked in another flame throwing session vs SLPx]. I did, and I learned some valuable lessons from it.1. If your attitude is the usual attitude of Christians, then I'd sooner be an atheist then follow your ways. Do you expect people to convert by name-calling and such? You'd only get flames. Even nos482 can't stand you.2. [For myself] Never claim anything using Bible verses as reference. Not worth the trouble arguing and undefendable because the original texts are nonexistent. Only use empirical evidence for secular arguments and the Qur'an original text for religious arguments (if necessary).Arguing with you has been a hard lesson to swallow, but I now understand what Christians really think. There goes my respect to you.

Sword,

quote:

---

I find your direct assault on the core of Christianity, openly denying the claim of Jesus Christ as God indeed, to be akin to Jihad, a clear announcement of religious war. Few Muslims do that, knowing they can't support that statement. You can't support your statement, but opened yourself up to a very embarasing predicament. How will you rescue Muhammad now? In most discussions it has not been necessary to disparage Muhammad, coming to the real problems of Islam long before name calling might be resorted to. But right away you jumped to the last resort, requiring the correct extreme contrast in rebuttal. You brought that upon yourself. You departed from simply thinking there is some error in the Bible to challenging the central point of my faith. Most Christians would be left speechless, but not this one. There is no wet spagetti response appropriate to your published claim. Yuor own religion claims Jesus a prophet, then you say his claim is bogus. Jesus is therefore to you a false prophet. Islam esteems Him in part, therefore esteems false prophets if any are esteemed.

---

So I touched a sensitive religious nerve there. Vice versa. Your claims about the divinity of Jesus also touched mine. I now don't feel like arguing about these anymore. I believe that there is no god but Allah, and you believe that I will go to hell for that. You believe that acceptance of Jesus as savior is crucial to everybody's salvation, while I believe that accepting other substitutes besides Allah is an unforgivable offense. All of them are the central part of our religious experience, and one should have argued fiercely if those beliefs are attacked. However, argue as we may, I doubt that we can get anything worth out of it. My source is my religious text and you with yours. Our arguments are all based on things only we believe and not others believe.I never claimed that Jesus is a false prophet. The Islamic creed only considered him to be a prophet, no more than that. I have supplied some Qur'anic verses to back my claim. Of course you don't believe them. Then I have no other way of making you see my point except to wait for the afterlife. Only then will our disagreements can be settled. It's just a matter of who's going to heaven or hell, after all. Outsiders (atheists especially) would see it as ridiculous.About the original texts, I could claim that Muslims took great care to preserve the original texts of the Qur'an since Prophet Muhammad's death by means of Qur'an memorizers and written copies, but you perhaps already know that. There is only one version of the original text. Ask any Muslim you're currently debating right now; even the splinter groups Shiah and Ahmadiyah uses the same Arabic text.Unlike you, I am not quite fundamentalistic in my views. I might not be as zealous as some of my brothers whose dayjob is debating Christians; therefore I should restrain myself to scientific debates. Thats my main motive to stay in EvC.