50,000 Errors in the Bible...Is Bible God's Word??

And so to the Koran is full of contradictions and errors.

There is Nobody interested in Just Mere propagandas

Generally Muslims and Christians agree that whatever emanates from God, whether through in inspiration or by revelation, must serve one of four purposes:-

1. DOCTRINE?

2. REPROOF?

3. CORRECTION? or

4. INSTRUCTION INTO RIGHTEOUSNESS?

But when a BOOK of GOD has as many as 50,000 Errors, Then everybody will NEVER believe it again,

Mrs. Ellen G. White, a "prophetess" of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, in her Bible Commentary Vol. 1, page 14, has this confession to make about the fallibility of the "Holy Bible."

Quote:

"THE BIBLE WE READ TODAY IS THE WORK OF MANY COPYISTS WHO HAVE IN MOST INSTANCES DONE THEIR WORK WITH MARVELLOUS ACCURACY. BUT COPYISTS HAVE NOT BEEN INFALLIBLE, AND GOD MOST EVIDENTLY HAS NOT SEEN FIT TO PRESERVE THEM ALTOGETHER FROM ERROR IN TRANSCRIBING."

Please see the 50,000 Errors that is in the Bible,

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/AwakeArticle(1957).html

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible1-3.html

Quote:

THE BOOK CHRISTENED "THE NEW TESTAMENT"

WHY "ACCORDING TO?"

Why does every Gospel in the NEW TESTAMENT begin with the introduction ?- ACCORDING TO ... ACCORDING TO ...

Why "according to?" Because not a single one of the vaunted four thousand copies extant carries its author's autograph! Hence the supposition "according to!" Even the internal evidence proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name.

Quote:

"And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (JESUS) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (JESUS) saith unto HIM (MATTHEW), follow ME (JESUS) And HE (MATTHEW) arose, and followed HIM (JESUS)." (Matthew 9:9)

The more The "Holy Bible" lends itself to all kinds of contradictory interpretations, the more many christians agree That:

Quote:

" THAT BIBLICAL PASSAGES HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY MISUSED AND MISAPPROPRIATED TO JUSTIFY ALMOST EVERY EVIL KNOWN TO MAN" (An extract From: "The Plain Truth" an American-based Christian Journal under the heading: "THE BIBLE ?- World's Most Controversial Book." (July 1975).

But now Surely, as a man/woman who believes in God, The mighty, are these the attributes and qualities of God,

THE BIRTH OF "GOD"

Quote:

"God" was created from the seed of David: "Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the SEED of David according to the flesh." (Romans, 1:3)

THE FAMILY OF "GOD"

Quote:

"God" Was the Son of Joseph: "Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, we have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph" (John, 1:45)

Brothers and Brothers-in-law of "God":

Quote:

"And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, in somuch that they were astonished, and said, whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence hath this man all these things? (Matthew, 13:54-56)

Read about

THE DEVELOPMENT OF "GOD"
THE TEMPTING OF "GOD"
THE MISSION OF "GOD"
THE RACIAL "GOD"
A "GOD" UNLIKE THE GOD
A Hungry "God":
A Sleepy "God": "He was asleep." (Matthew, 8:24),
A Weary "God": Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well." (John, 4:6)

From this Link... The God That NEVER was

Still,

Who are the AUTHORS OF BIBLE

Quote:

Who is the author of:

1ST SAMUEL?............ Answer: Author "Unknown"

2ND SAMUEL........... Answer: Author "Unknown"

1ST KING?................. Answer: Author "Unknown"

2ND KING?............... Answer: Author "Unknown"

1st CHRONICLES? …. Answer: Author "Unknown, probably …"

2st CHRONICLES? …. Answer: Author "Likely collected …"

and a host of more other theories and stories.

I am sure you will never Get convinced....So let them say the best about ISLAM

Do U want the Truth anyways?

Get specific.

Let's look one at a time at the passages your links allege to be erroneous.

You pick one and be ready to show why you believe your link is correct in identifying this specific passage as an error. Go.

Quote:

There is Nobody interested in Just Mere propagandas

Like your propaganda?

real life wrote:

Get specific.

Let's look one at a time at the passages your links allege to be erroneous.

You pick one and be ready to show why you believe your link is correct in identifying this specific passage as an error. Go.

I agree.

Here is a misconception I have about the Bible:

Would any devout Christian help me understand the following verses:
"And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lays hands on the sick, and they shall recover." Mark 16:17-18

Now, scientifically, drinking deadly poison kills or dangerously hurts. How can then a Christian believer not be harmed at all?
I am convinced that there are many true Christian believers here in AB2K, can anyone then pass the test mentioned in the above verses (Mark 16:17-18)?



PS: Let me be clear about one thing: we Muslims believe that the original Bible was revealed by Almighty God. However, we believe that the Bible we have today is not exactly the original one. It may contain the Word of God, but it also contains words of Prophets, Apostles, Historians, internal contradictions and a number of scientific errors.

and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them:

It is my opinion that this phrase Quote:
and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them:


is meant to describe the protection that God gives to those under persecution, not as some sort of presumptious 'test' that you may be mistaking it for (i.e. Drink this poison on purpose to prove that you have great faith...) I don't think that's the intended meaning.

There are instances in church history of some who were forced to drink poison and had no ill effect.

Or try this for an explanation. It's a parable. The problem with some Christians and non-Christians is they interrupt parables literally.

http://pleaseconsider.info/articles/mark_16/mark_16_intro.htm

Or try this for an explanation. It's a parable. The problem with some Christians and non-Christians is they interrupt parables literally.

http://pleaseconsider.info/articles/mark_16/mark_16_intro.htm

Thank you real life for your reply,

Let's analyze your answer regarding the "deadly poison" issue:

real life wrote:

It is my opinion that this phrase Quote:
and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them:


is meant to describe the protection that God gives to those under persecution, not as some sort of presumptious 'test' that you may be mistaking it for (i.e. Drink this poison on purpose to prove that you have great faith...) I don't think that's the intended meaning.

1) Note that the verse says:"shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them ". So the verse sets a number (not only one) of characteristics specific to be "the believers". If we suppose that, as you wrote, the "deadly poison" is only applicable to those under persecution, then what about "speaking new tongues", "casting out the devil" and "taking up serpents", are they also related to people under persecution?

2) You wrote that "It is my opinion that this phrase... is meant..". What about the opinions of other Christians, especially the Scholars?

3) The verse clearly states that the immunity is against any deadly thing. There are nowadays, some chemical products that can, within seconds, damage the digestive system and therefore kill any person, whether Christian or not, whether under persecution or not. Does not this rise questions about the compatibility of the verse with modern science?

real life wrote:

There are instances in church history of some who were forced to drink poison and had no ill effect.

If possible, would you mind giving me examples of those instances (names, dates...)?

xingu wrote:

Or try this for an explanation. It's a parable. The problem with some Christians and non-Christians is they interrupt parables literally.

http://pleaseconsider.info/articles/mark_16/mark_16_intro.htm

Thank you xingu for the explanation you mentioned.

If you consider the above verse to be a parable, then what is the moral behind it?

Personally, the majority of Christians with whom I had discussions interpret those verses literally. Then my question is: what are the criteria that determine whether a verse in the Bible is a parable or not?


And Allah knows best.

Do you mean interpret?

If you consider the above verse to be a parable, then what is the moral behind it

Personally, the majority of Christians with whom I had discussions interpret those verses literally. Then my question is: what are the criteria that determine whether a verse in the Bible is a parable or not?