VVB, and any other christian, HarryW you can help them to..

i claim bible is corrupt (here i am not going to use my belief system)
and i am WILLING to listen to any of you to try and explain those contridictions to me
step one - first thing i think bible is corrupted is based on these so called contridictions

if you guyz can clean these up for me then we can go to the next level

so if you are going to explain them
state the so called contridiction, and the explaination

i will post them in 10's
========================

Contradiction #1
Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?

(a) God did (2 Samuel 24:1)

(b) Satan did (1 Chronicles 21:1).

Contradiction #2

In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?

(a) Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9).

(b) One million, one hundred thousand (1 Chronicles 21:5).



Contradiction #3

How many fighting men were found in Judah?

(a) Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9).

(b) Four hundred and seventy thousand (1 Chronicles 21:5).



Contradiction #4

God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?

(a) Seven (2 Samuel 24:13).

(b) Three (1 Chronicles 21:12).



Contradiction #5

How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

(a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26).

(b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2).



Contradiction #6

How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?

(a) Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8).

(b) Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9).



Contradiction #7

How long did he rule over Jerusalem?

(a) Three months (2 Kings 24:8).

(b) Three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:9).



Contradiction #8

The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear

and killed how many men at one time?

(a) Eight hundred (2 Samuel 23:8).

(b) Three hundred (1 Chronicles 11:11).



Contradiction #9

When did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem?

Before defeating the Philistines or after?

(a) After (2 Samuel 5 and 6).

(b) Before (1 Chronicles 13 and 14).



Contradiction #10

How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into

the Ark?

(a) Two (Genesis 6:19, 20).

(b) Seven (Genesis 7:2). But despite this last instruction

only two pairs went into the ark (Genesis 7:8, 9).

Mate, a couple of things.

Get out more.
Get over it.
Grow up.

Its getting tiresome.

The various biblical "chapters" were written by different authors, some writing three hundred years after the incident was meant to have taken place. Therefore you will get differences in accounts, try reading a Police witness scene report, to see how different people can see different things in the same incident.

I would have deep problems with an historic account, written by various authors, which contained the exact duplicate account of what happened.

This is not too support the "christians" on this site, who claim the bible is the work of god, which clearly it is not. God is all knowing and infalliable, therefore there would not be these inconsistencies.

Thank you kovan, you have just supported my arguement that the bible is a creation of man, not god.

i have been grown up
i brought up a VERY valid arguement


jethro
grow up :)
hehe
no wait

what ever

but on a serious note
what the hell, those are DIRECT from bible
its not like i am making them up

Err, guys,

To claim that the Bible is divinely inspired does not necessarily mean that a great bearded figure came down from on high and took up a quill...

Don't forget that much of the Old Testament is a religious history of the Jewish People. Attempting a synthesis between biblical accounts and Egyptian history leads to all sorts of anomalies which can only be explained in terms of our understanding of tiemlines and when various writings were first put together as being fundamentally flawed.

Remember also that the various books of the OT were not necessarily written by one person (there were at least four Isaiahs!)

Inconsistency in an (largely) historical account does not necessarily make that work 'corrupt'. Facts in the bible should not be taken too literally (whatever fundamentalists say - the earth was NOT created in seven days). That said, doesn't mean that there might not be some universal truths in there and whatever, there is some great poetry.

Anyways, that's my two bob's worth. Anyone else got a view or am I going to get a flaming as usual?

P.

P.S. Jethro, kovan, you're both pretty balanced, (even if you are both going straight to hell on gas mark 7) does this all sound a bit arrogant/pompous? My wife says I usually am when I get on my soapbox. I just think I'm being lucid:D, oh well...

If I remember right it wasn't actually God who incited them so I do believe that scripture is taken out of context but I'll double check. Its been a while since I have been through the Old Test. Also I have to remind you that you are most likely getting these from 1 of multiple translations. As with most translations, they use multiple translators which can come up with varying differences. I am hunting down a copy of the actual writing from the manuscripts to chase down these contradictions and find what it actually say. I would also like to note that God DID NOT create the earth in those 7 days. This is crearly stated in the first two verses of Genesis. This is a common misconception from the church.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was (or possibly became) empty, a formless mass cloaked in darkness. And the Spirit of God was hovering over its surface.

paulW
hehehe
me go to hell? hehe well you know what they say
make friends with the devil(jethro) you become the devil
so you got some what a valid point

then again you dont
:)

but on a serious note

Quote:

---

Inconsistency in an (largely) historical account does not necessarily make that work 'corrupt'

---

now lets look at what that word means

in·con·sis·tent (nkn-sstnt)
adj.

Displaying or marked by a lack of consistency, especially:
Not regular or predictable; erratic: inconsistent behavior.
Lacking in correct logical relation; contradictory: inconsistent statements.
Not in agreement or harmony; incompatible: an intersection inconsistent with the road map.
Mathematics. Not solvable for the unknowns by the same set of values. Used of two or more equations or inequalities.


now lets look at what corrupt means


cor·rupt (k-rpt)
adj.

Marked by immorality and perversion; depraved.
Venal; dishonest: a corrupt mayor.
Containing errors or alterations, as a text: a corrupt translation.
Archaic. Tainted; putrid.


source: http://www.dictionary.com

so if something is inconsistent, it means it contains errors
anyone disagree?
if something contains errors that means its NOT correct
agree?
if something not correct then its Corrupt because its true


PLEASE do not write in this thread (everyone) if its not related to the explaining the contridictions


jdavidson, have fun searching


i still am waiting for them to be explained...

kovan,

The differences don't need explaining. Inconsistencies do occur in the Bible. That fact alone does not mean it cannot be considered as an inspired religious document.

The inconsistencies are part of the 'bragging' inherent in the writing down of oral tradition.

Inconsistency does not necessarily imply that the facts were altered or are 'wrong'. Wrong is meaningless when you are being allegorical, and a lot of the bible is allegorical.

Corrupt and Inconsistent do not mean the same thing (that is why they are different words. Still, 'cos you're not English I'll forgive you for your inexactitude!)

the Bible is like Chinese Whispers, only not Chinese and nobody's whispering!

Cheers,

P.



[Edited by paulw on 11-20-2000 at 08:25 AM]

paulw
i dont know about you
but i surely would NOT devote my life or run my life according to something "inconsistent"

if its gods word it should be 100% accurate
without any mistakes, errors,

so then my arguement or my point STILL stands
that bible is NOT the word of god
if it is, since god is perfect then his word should be perfect

at least you agree that bible contains mistakes
not all christians would even admit that

oh and what does your wife think of that? hehe
jk man

ha ha you edited your message
how cute


and about the english
ehehe

i just gave you the dictionary version of what they meant
i diddnt wanna guess it out of the air

so according to defination i presented of the 2 words
corrupt means there is somethign wrong with the issue
consistency means there is something wrong with the issue
which means they are both almost identical, but used in different situations

again
and its not just one or two or three "inconsistencies"
i presented 10 (regardless of the previous posts)
and i am planning to post 200 or so

now a divine inspired book should NOT contain so many inconsistencies..

one more thing..
what if that "inconsistency" changed
"thou shall not kill" to "thou shall kill"
you see they are almost identical
but we know the right one..
and just ONE inconsistency turned the meaning around

kovan,

Are you being purposefully obtuse?

I edited it to point out the difference between the two words. The definitions are not exactly the same. The difference may be samll, but it is there and in this case semantics are important.

The word of God may be perfect, but when transmitted via Human agency, it becomes imperfect. Imperfection does not mean that you cannot use something, it just means that you have to be careful how you use it. That is why I am not a fundamentalist. I have never claimed that the Bible is self-consistent. Nor do I believe in its literal truth. However, there are some truths in there. The knowledge of God is the realm of Theology and the Bible can be understood within its proper context.

I do not have enough knowledge of Islamic sacred texts to offer an opinion on them, but I'll bet some human somewhere wrote them down.

Basically, we are arguing over something unprovable - it all comes down to Faith:) I actually think a lot of Christian sects put too much faith in the Bible. You have to be careful with it! Doesn't mean I can't find things in there and that God can't speak to me through it, but if He wanted too he could 'phone me up. He hasn't yet.;)

P.

i will pass your number to him :)

paulw
that is EXACTLY what i am saying
that the bible is not accurate
and that most christians rely on it too much to be the ABSOLUTE truth

and i dont think i am obtuse
not at all
my WHOLE point is to prove the bible is NOT ALL
word of God
and i believe you and i agree on that
so my work is done with you :)

now to all those christians believing bible is 100% accurate
i still need those contridictions explained :)

either admit bible is not accurate or explain

i think thats a very fair judgement or way of tackling the issue

paulw
i got a Call from god saying bible is not accurate
didn't you get one?
i guess your not on his list :)

He mis-dialled, guess He's just not so infallible afetr all:D

Final thought - if all of the Bible is divinely inspired then, however imperfect, it is the word of God.

I don't rule out that there might be a few words of Man thrown in there though. I wouldn't rule that out for ANY religious text.

P.

P.S. I don't think you're obtuse, but you're not being too subtle...

P.

dude give a man a break will ya?
you use hard words hehe
i had to look up word obtuse
now the word subtle

i will look that up in a second
i have to do some thing for boss

just agree or disagree to the following please :)
SOME of bible is word of god and some is men's word?

:)

All of it is Men's words, inspired by God.

That do ya.

I hope I haven't obfusticated the issue too much<grin>

P.

ya ya i know that already
what i meant is
throu the inspiration men messed up
:)

did i mention that makes it corrupt? hehe
ok enough with you
i still like to hear your opinion on the contridictions i posted weather they are mens mistakes or there is a explaination for them

but dont have to since you believe there is mistakes in the bible

Kovan,

Could you email me the list of all 100 contradictions. I'll check them out this weekend and try and give you some answers monday. I may come back a few months from now with some of them once I get my arabaic copy of the scriptures to see what may have possibly been a translation problem(if any). send them to [email protected]. My yahoo account likes to truncate long messages.

i will send them in html format or something if i put other stuff on a cd for ya
but i will give you links later to them as well

cool, thanks

Kovan is also claiming that the Quran is written by God and kovan doesn't accept the fact that mankind literally wrote both.

The only thing that I am remotely aware that Christians say God wrote was the 10 commandments in stone (but it could simply be from a movie I watched and not from the bible), although Personally I think Moses had enough time to carve them himself.

This is what you should be wary of...Just because Moses had the time to carve the commandments in stone himself, does not mean that God didn't do it. But I am not sure of the real claim (the movie said that God wrote with His own finger --fire or some such).

Just like other claims that could have been from something other than God, but could also be from God. You'll have to struggle with believing those on your own.

With that said, the more I learn, the more I believe there is a God and that it is the God of the Bible and that Jesus is the Christ and the One God which is confusing to those relying on their own understanding and frailties.

what is in the Qur'an is what god SAID
not what God inspired
there is a BIG difference
in the bible, which is interpertation of the word of god

i say "i saw earth fall out from its orbit"
thats DIRECTLY my word
now for argument sake
Harry comes along and says
"i heard kovan say earth fell from its orbit"
or
"kovan said earth fell from its orbit"

thats harry's interpertation of what i SAID

so there is a big difference
i dont wanna hear bout anything other than those contridictions explained

if you want to discuss Qur'an
please start a NEW thread
and stop hiding throu talking about something that totally not related to the TOPIC
the topic is
for you to explain THOSE 10 contridictions
if you cant do that please stay quite until someone does

thank you
and again i confirm that Gen X was 100% right regarding that you totally ignore the present issue and talk about something else

Why don't you post my replies to your apparent contradictions that I already addressed? They were less than 20, so you should still have 180+ "unresolved" in your mind.

I totally agree with you, the bible is a historic document, therefore inconsistencies between the various Authors tend to lend authority to the text, rather than if the facts were completely exact.

Go to your local bookshop and hunt throught the Classics section, you should find a book by a Jewish historian called Juventius, (a bit hazy on the spelling there). In this the book the guy mentions a person who can only Jesus. This is only mentioned in a couple of paragraphs and relates to the leader of a radical sect of Jews. This has been used by a number of open minded historians to point out the likely existence of a person called Jesus.

As l have stated before, any research into the origins of the christian faith would bring up many amazing facts, which don't support the fundamentalist christian arguements.

Hey Jethro,

I'm certainly not fundamentalist but I do think the Bible is more than just an historical document. Quite where the line lies is a matter of debate - and I am quite willing to enter into that without thinking that anyone who disagrees must, necessarily, be damned (it's likely, but not certain<grin>).

Cheers,

P.

Jethro,
you are many things but open minded isn't one of them. There are also tons more books written by non believer who went out to prove the bible invalid or a lie that couldn't and wrote more books on why they believe it. I don't suppose you read any of those. What I want to know is what happened in your life to make you so anti-christian? I haven't tried to convert anybody. I have held open discussion and I have been open to others faith and beliefs. What I will not stand for is the putting down of a persons beliefs and the outright and blatant hatred of those just because of what they believe.

I agree that the bible is a historical document in parts. Books like Exodus,samuel, Joshua, Kings, Chronicles, acts, and some others. Others are inspirational, like psalms, job. Some are instructional. They all have a different purpose.

VVB what you talking about?
i posted 10 contridictions
you havent even addressed ONE yet
there is 10 in this thread
answer them please

Actually I think he addressed them when you posted them the first time.

no he didn't
he addressed another set.. and he didn't explain all of the other set as well
i wanna start with these 10
if anyones gonna answer them go ahead,
so i can go on posting more

the seven pair was of animals approved for eating. In other words that was his food supply and was unrealated to the pairs of animals.

Gen 7:2
2 Take along seven pairs of each animal that I have approved for eating and for sacrifice, and take one pair of each of the others.

MUCH BETTER
when i get home i will have a look at Gen again
but thats what i am talking about
i provide the so called contridiction
you provide me with an explaination

Im trying, were is that list at anyway. I want to send the whole thing to my pastor to see what he has to say on them too. I'll have more time over the holiday to take a look through a couple of the translations to. That one just caught my attention. If you want you can go to
http://www.crosswalk.com
They have an online bible.

As an atheist, I am confused by this and certain other threads.

I thought that religion was based on faith, not truth, not logic, not science.

I actually addressed all of these when you first posted them in another thread.

How about doing some work and retrieve the answers I already gave. Most of these 10 I had put in your favor (or wouldn't put them in the bible's favor with my present understanding of them).

I think the one I really liked was commanding an odd number to walk in pairs. Like 7 to walk two-by-two.

I don't think you really are interested in replies.

Take an odd number of people and tell them to walk two-by-two. Do they or not? The technicality may damn you.

Cheers.

Guv
I wonder sometimes if there is a physics that if we were advanced enough, we too could do God's "miracles". It may be that rather than explaining everything in this finite time, it will be covered in Eternity 101.

Take one of my elementary thoughts on the Virgin Birth.

This woman conceived without "the assistance of a man" you ask? We call this a miracle.

If someday we can manifest a localized field within the seemingly closed womb of a virgin, which causes her to become impregnated, this won't be a "miracle" anymore; but could have been done by suchj a being.

As a reference to this God Technology, consider your "closed" house where you might watch TV without cable or satellite dish (or maybe I should include satellite dishes); a once "closed" room is no longer "closed" by varying definitions and a signal is received. This could be a sample to a higher technology that you would not describe to your child just learning how to speak and who doesn't posess the vocabulary for the conversation.

A remote controlled RF car would be controlled like a "miracle" decades ago. Maybe it would be considered demon-posessed.

Of course, these examples may insult God whose "technology" is far beyond my thoughts.

Believe it or not, my point is that many things may well be logical once we understand. As we are unlikely to understand all on this plane of existence, faith pleases God and demonstrates a reliance on Him.

"Him" being a gender reference in my language. But a reference for my finite mind none the less, to grasp the infinite.

Other languages capture the plurality of the name of God. There is enough for Eternity 101.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Guv
As an atheist, I am confused by this and certain other threads.

I thought that religion was based on faith, not truth, not logic, not science.

---

Guv flee like the wind, its too late for the rest of us. In total agreement with you, have tried to point out that the Bible is the work of man, not the work of god, and that a lot of it's content is based on the belief systems of previous religons or the political requirements of the early christian church...but its like hitting your head against the wall. Fundamental Christians believe in the Bible as the work of god, and no amount of arguement will sway them from this belief.

Generally when you get them down to basics they change the subject or go in for personnel attacks. Still am learning a bit from kovan in regards to Islam from these threads.

You stated that but have failed to list any proof to back up your statements. First of the bible was compiled later but the beginings of it started before any other religions I know. Genesis itself was simply a compilation of jewish history and finally compiled by moses to make the torah. Moses is not only listed in jewish history but in egyptian history along with the plagues. That is historical fact! Go look it up yourself. Was it just amazing timing that they all happened in that small period of time or was it God. I have never claimed that the bible was written by God and not men. It was inspired by God through men. Man wrote it. This was never denied.

jdavison
question is will you agree to the fact that during that inspiration that men have recorded gods word inaccurately?

I would only agree that some minor historical detail was recorded inacurately. I think that the main intent such as the teachings in the gospols, the torah, psalms, and most of the epicaples are the teching and instructions of god. and revelations too;). I'm not talking about the translated versions but the manuscripts. People in several different locations writing the story can't be that wrong in unison. I think in chronicles and kings and a few others that there may be some technical problems but for the most part the history should be fairly acurate.

Just a side not. I don't think the bible has all of gods inspired scriptures in it either.

so the bible(including old and new testiment)
contain errors due to human stupidity
and from your last post, that bible is not complete

you agree to the above?

Im say that certain parts not every part as I stated. I am not saying the whole old testament has errors. Only certain scriptures.

so in short
SOME of the bible (old and new testiment) have errors
and are SOME what incomplete

Kovan, you will rot in hell for all eternity because you were not chosen to be saved by the grace of God!

Those of us who are saved, are given God-inspired eyes which enable us to discern the truth in the Bible, which is the only God-inspired literature that has ever existed.

The God-inspired eyes of the saved are analogous to the miraculous glasses used by Joseph Smith to read the Book of Mormon from gold tablets.

Those who are not saved read the bible with tainted vision and see contradictions where none exist.

Because you are not saved, you will never understand, and no amount of explanation will make it clear to your heathen mind.

In additon to all the religious truths in the bible, those who are saved also see that Quantum physics and Relativity theory are explained in the Book of Revelations. They also see that Genesis explains Newton's almost correct theory of gravitation. Until the Christian Era, God decided that Newtonian physics was as much as the world could understand, leaving Einstein's & Bohr's works to be explained in the last book of the New Testament.

Recent developments in Israel show how all of the world's knowledge is coded into the Bible. Using a computer to analyze the codes, true believers have found predictions of almost all of the important events of the 20th century. When 2100 comes around, they will discover that all of the important events of the 21st century have also been encoded. I am sure that they will soon find a coded list of all the ones who have been chosen to be saved. Your name will not be there.

If somebody took the troubled to do it, a computer analysis of the King James version and other modern translations would also reveal the same encoded data. The Christian God is so powerful that translation of the bible does not hide its truth from those who are saved. We have God inspired eyes.

The real believers can even read the bible when translated into a language they do not know. This ability is only granted when a regular translation is not available in a dire emergency requiring revealed truth.

Guv, why did you place judgement on Kovan? That is not our place. We are here to love, not condem. Did Jesus condem anyone, no. Yet he was sinless. I agree with you but some of those contradictions are valid that he listed. He has valid questions and it is our Job to try and answer him explain things.

Luke 12:14
Jesus replied, "Friend, who made me a judge
over you to decide such things as that?"

jdavison
i think he was being sarcastic:)

guv - see you in hell then? i will look forward to it :)

He was definitely joking.

I give up. Why does somebody always have to be a jerk?

jdavison
lighten up man
reading too much bible is not good
reading to much of ANYTHING is not good (including watching porn)
:)
have a sense of humor
God gave it to you so that you can use it :)

even if he wasnt joking
i woudn't be offended by it :)
Guv is an old man.. and those dont usually offend me
:)

sorry Guv :)

I'm not offended just frustrated. I want this to be serious and openminded without out the BS. From the contradictions I believe it is possible there may be some minor errors in the bible at the moment. Like I said I will have to do some research on them, but I will admit there are some possibilities.

perfect
i passed to you the contridictions
post them on here as you find solutions/explainations

What Guv has said in jest may well be the truth.

I particularly like the idea that a person's name is written (encoded?) in "The Book of Life" (the bible?) and may be a dimensional "key" to unlock the the "letter of the law and the stroke of the letter". Kind of like how the movie "Contact" had a message in three dimensions and was misaligned when viewed in 2D. Each person's "key" could have been encoded to any dimension, to find out if his/her name was stricken (as they say some names have been "croosed-out" by the bible code) and as verses in the bible speak of being crossed-out.

Guv is a sharp fellow. I'd like you all to consider that just because a man could have done certain things said in the bible, does not mean that God didn't mean it to be so.

[b]All[b]
Good Luck in your search for truth.

jdavidson,

There's no such thing as an open minded religious discussion. It's an oxymoron.

Guv's little essay was the funniest thing I've read in ages.

I can't believe the number of religious threads in this forum - nodody is going to win, cos everybody is completely closed to the possibility that they are wrong. Nothing quite as embarrassing as being told your particular brand of god doesn't exist.

I would venture that there are errors, or contradictions, in both the quran and the various versions of the bible.

Those of you who have studied history (at a university level), will know about the introduction of bias and perceptions in documents. There is no such thing as historical fact. All history is subjective, tainted by the time that it was written in, and by the personal situation and beliefs of the person(s) who wrote a given document.

And all history is judged implicitly by ourselves based upon our current views, social ethics etc.

So in 100 years time, people will look back on us and judge us and our society based on their beliefs.

The same holds for both the bible and the quran - are judging these texts based on current views. I know a little about the quran, but not enough to really enter into a decent philosophical discussion about it. The bible I do know a bit about. The present King James version was written/translated a few hundred years ago, and those translations are tainted by the views of the people (monks probably) who wrote it. it would have been an early version of the "information is power" syndrome for them.

Somebody seemed to be arging earlier in this thread about how Moses existence was documented in Egyptian texts - the implication being that he must have existed, the plague must have happened, and therefore the bible is true in it's entirety.

Hate to break it to you, but no, that's not the case. The bible is essentially an historical document, interesting in so far as it seems to provide an interesting window into what life was like in palestine 2000 years ago, but really not much more than that.

Interesting to note that christianity was originally regarded as a cult - just think, in 2000 years, maybe Scientology will be the dominant religion, and everybody will look back on the quaint beliefs of the christians all those eons ago.

Enjoy your debate :)

- gaffa

gaffa
WELL put, very well put, bravo, wo hooooooooo, bravoooo
*calms down*

hehe

and dats all i got to say about THAT

kovan,

Don't get too excited :)

I would be inclined to think that the quran probably has similar inaccuracies in it, simply because I have never read any sort of non-fiction (and I'm beiong very, very generous here by including religious texts as non-fiction) that doesn't have some sort of bias, contradictions etc.

Mind you, that's not to say that either one is wrong or false, just to say that to accept ANY written work as being fact is problematic. All documents need to be looked at in context. Then the usual approach would be to look at other works by the same author, look at works by authors of the same period, and look at the period in which these documents were written etc.

Biggest problem here is that there isn't really much to compare it to (in so far as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Mohummed weren't exactly Dame Barbara Cartland regrarding output - yeah I know I spelt Mohummed wrong, but there's a million different ways of spelling it)

Kovan, is there an english translation of the quran on-line? I'd be interested to have a browse...

- gaffa

[Edited by gaffa on 11-24-2000 at 07:56 AM]

Kovan,

I was just reading the beconvinced.com site, and went to the bit about comparing christianity with islam. Found this about half way down.

The second coming of Jesus.

Christian view (-gaffa)

Accepted. Originally expected to happen during the lifetime of the first disciples, many predictions have been made later and he is still expected at any moment. He is currently anticipated to arrive around the turn of the century (2000 C.E.)

Islam view (-gaffa)

Accepted. Jesus did not die but was raised up into heaven by God. He shall return to earth just before the Day of Judgment in order to kill the "False Messiah" and to establish peace and justice on earth. He will kill the pigs, break the cross, and call all humanity to Islam

Well, kovan, there are going to be some very seriously pissed off christians if jesus decides to pop back for a vists to convert them all to islam. And they'll be pretty peeved if he starts going round breaking crosses too.

It's gonna be pretty funny :D

- gaffa

yap it will be PRETTY funny
and i aint kidding :)
and thats exactly what we believe as far as coming of jesus..

online version of qur'an's interpertation of the meaning

Qur'an

NOTE: that is interpertation of what God said,
so in essense that is "men" translation, and most certainly it contains errors

by the way
"islam" means peace,
but it also means "submission to God"
so jesus will basically call everyone to submit to GOD
not him, since we believe he is just a prophet

Kovan,

I had a look at that Science and the Quran link you posted in one of the other (now ubiquitous) relgion threads.

Some of the claims there seem to be a bit dodgy. Some stuff listed as coming from the quran first is interesting - the bit about how the sky is held up by "unseen pillars", and by some form of flawed logic can be read as being a reference to the concept of gravity is very Nostradamus-like (ie: easy to see the reference know that we know about gravity, but without knowing about gravity, it doesn't actually present the reader with any real insight. The reader can look outside, see some stars, presume something must hold them up, not see anything actually holding them up, therefore presume that "unseen pillars" are holding them up) I hope that last bit makes sense.

A large part of the science section is stating the blindingly obvious (eg. that the sun and moon aren't the same thing). The existence of sufficently advanced astronomy and cestial science would predate the quran by many centuries - the Aztec and Inca civilisations in particular had very good knowledge of the solar system, including rotation periods, cyclic periods etc.

To be honest beconvinced.com, far from convincing me, really strengthened the point that religion simply twists certain information to make it appear as though it was of divine inspiration.

Yours in atheism ( :D)

- gaffa

did you read the part on embryology?

again: Qur'an is NOT a book of science
just gives you certain information

and it has a lot to do with men's translation as well
i mean there are certian words in the Qur'an that there is absolutely no meaning in english or other languages

even as far as going that there is some words in the qur'an that NO arab literature person undrestands (not yet anyways)
like some of the major chapters start of with "ALIF LAM MIM"
3 words..
(if you read my previous posts, you probably see i said this befoe too)

one thing is certain thou
as time goes by and men advances in knowledge
Qur'an becomes more clear
at least its meaning and what its trying to say

if 1400 years ago
you told someone that EVERYTHING is made up from water
they would hang you
now we can conclude that most of our physical body is water..
and so on so forth
but the fact about it being more undrestood as time goes by is pretty open to me and a lot of other people
if you read history (i know its bias)
but you will see that not much of Qur'an was undrestood before..


in what perticular did you think beconvinced.com twisted what Qur'an said?
just interested