Jewels for u but u dnt know about them

sallam
thanks for the great topic
Allha bless u

salam hussian and h ru ?
welcome anytime
please make duaa for me to get well
allah bless all of us

Hiye becks and all

you know its funny part a lot musilm come to me as i live in the muslim world tells you know Quaran foretold science many years before these westerner get hold of it today i just tell this that if that would be the true then we wont have so much illetercy rate so much high in muslim country or for e,g if Quaran foretold science so long that it give them such a little hint that on which they are residing underneath there is black gold(oil) hhha halol.x. while at the same time the arabs where hitting by huge poverty and dying it could have saved them but any ways things which couldn't been told by Allah has been told by some white skin westerner and brought a lavish and good living to these arab's which Islam was unable to give and pumped more money into in the search feild of Islam

it is nothing else then a myths

arpheel u know quran its the truth
and quran is the true word of god
quran is the miracles of the miracles
and here lets see sum of VERSES THAT CONTRADICT THEMSELVES

Genesis 6:3 and Genesis 11:11 - Life limited to 120 years?
Genesis 32:30 and Exodus 33:20 - Jacob's life was preserved?
Exodus 4:22 and Jeremiah 31:9 - Who was God's firstborn?
Numbers 23:19 and Genesis 6:6-7 - Does God repent or not?
2 Samuel 6:23 and 2 Samuel 21:8 - Did Michael have children?
2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4 - 700 or 7000 horsemen?
2 Samuel 8:9-10 and 1 Chronicles 18:9-10 - Toi or Tou? Hadadezer or Hadarezer? Joram or Hadoram?
2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18 - 700 or 7000 charioteers? 40,000 horsemen or footmen? Captain's name?
2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 - Who provoked David?
2 Samuel 24:9 and 1 Chronicles 21:5 - 800,000 or 100,000?
2 Samuel 24:13 and 1 Chronicles 21:11-12 - 7 or 3 years?
1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 - 40,000 or 4,000 stalls?
1 Kings 5:15-16 and 2 Chronicles 2:2 - 3300 or 3600?
1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 - 2000 or 3000 baths?
2 Kings 8:26 and 2 Chronicles 22:2 - 22 or 42 years old?
2 Kings 24:8 and 2 Chronicles 36:9 - 18 or 8 years old? 3 months or 3 months and 10 days?
Ezra 2:65 and Nehemiah 7:67 - 200 or 245 singers?
Matthew 1:12 and Luke 3:27 - Who was Salathiel's father?
Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23 - Who was Joseph's father?
Matthew 9:18 and Mark 5:22-23 - Dead or not?
Matthew 10:5-10 and Mark 6:7-8 - Bring a staff or not?
Matthew 15:21-22 and Mark 7:24-26 - The woman was of Canaan or Greece?
Matthew 20:29-30 and Mark 10:46-47 - One or two beggars?
Matthew 21:1-2 and Mark 11:1-2 - What happened to the ass?
Matthew 26:74-75 and Mark 14:72 - Before the cock crow once or twice?
Matthew 27:5 and Acts 1:18 - How did Judas die?
John 3:16 and Psalms 2:7 - Only begotten son?
John 5:31 and John 8:14 - Was Jesus' record true or not?

hiye becks
the only prob that i have with you is that you never ans what i made a accusation well i wish you gave me a good instead of posting a copy paste article well that's much easy to do any ways i told you that i live along Muslim community my next door neighbors are all Muslims i studied there mind faith and ways and all i come to know that Islam in its own self is a myth

we had gone out of the topic but let me give you the answer for your above said so called contradiction which is from a very famous pamphlet by Shahbir Ally haha ol.xx.x

your ans is below

1. Adam lived 930 years (Gen. 5:5) - "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died."
2. Seth lived 912 years (Gen. 5:8) - "And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died."
3. Methuselah lived 969 years (Gen. 5:27) - "And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died."

After the fall, the genetic line of Adam and his descendents was very pure, so their health would have been incredible. Living that long would not have been a problem. Also, some theologians think that there was a canopy of water that engulfed the entire earth and that it was released at the time of the flood. "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life , in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened," (Gen. 7:11). The "floodgates of the sky" are sometimes alluded to as great amounts of water suspended in the sky. Also, no rain is recorded in the Bible until after the flood which seems to support this idea. This canopy, if it is true, might have provided some sort of protection from the sun's harmful rays. We can't know for sure and it is only a theory. Nevertheless, after the flood, the lifespan of people on earth was drastically reduced. "Then the LORD said, 'My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years,'" (Gen. 6:3). Whether or not this reduced canopy had any affect on human lifespan may never be known.

11. Did David capture 1,700 of King Zobah's horsemen (2 Samuel 8:4), or was it 7,000 (1 Chronicles 18:4)?

(Category: copyist error)

There are two possible solutions to these differing figures. The first by Keil and Delitzsh (page 360) is a most convincing solution. They maintain that the word for chariotry (rekeb) was inadvertently omitted by the scribe in copying 2 Samuel 8:4, and that the second figure, 7,000 (for the parasim "cavalrymen"), was necessarily reduced to 700 from the 7,000 he saw in his Vorlage for the simple reason that no one would write 7,000 after he had written 1,000 in the recording the one and the same figure. The omission of rekeb might have occurred with an earlier scribe, and a reduction from 7,000 to 700 would have then continued with the successive copies by later scribes. But in all probability the Chronicles figure is right and the Samuel numbers should be corrected to agree with that.

A second solution starts from the premise that the number had been reduced to 700 as it refers to 700 rows, each consisting of 10 horse men, making a total of 7,000.

(Archer 1982:184: Keil & Delitzsch 1949:360; Light of Life II 1992:182)

2 Sam. 6:23-2 Samuel 21:8

This one's pretty simple: The second verse should have Merab instead of Michal. This change is attested to by two Hebrew manuscripts, some Septuagint manuscripts, and the Syriac version. We are also clued in by 1 Samuel 18:19, where it is noted that Merab was married to Adriel. (For general background, see foundation essay on copyist errors.)

-JPH

12. Did Solomon have 40,000 stalls for his horses (1 Kings 4:26), or 4,000 stalls (2 Chronicles 9:25)?

(Category: copyist error, or misunderstood the historical context)

There are a number of ways to answer these puzzling differences. The most plausible is analogous to what we found earlier in challenge numbers five and six above, where the decadal number has been rubbed out or distorted due to constant use.

Others believe that the stalls mentioned in 2 Chronicles were large ones that housed 10 horses each (that is, a row of ten stalls). Therefore 4,000 of these large stalls would be equivalent to 40,000 small ones.

Another commentator maintains that the number of stalls recorded in 1 Kings was the number at the beginning of Solomon's reign, whereas the number recorded in 2 Chronicles was the number of stalls at the end of his reign. We know that Solomon reigned for 40 years; no doubt, many changes occurred during this period. It is quite likely that he reduced the size of the military machine his father David had left him.

(Light of Life II 1992:191)


1. Does God incite David to conduct the census of his people (2 Samuel 4:1), or does Satan (1 Chronicles 21:1)?

(Category: misunderstood how God works in history)

This seems an apparent discrepancy unless of course both statements are true. It was towards the end of David's reign, and David was looking back over his brilliant conquests, which had brought the Canaanite, Syrian, and Phoenician kingdoms into a state of vassalage and dependency on Israel. He had an attitude of pride and self-admiration for his achievements, and was thinking more in terms of armaments and troops than in terms of the mercies of God.

The Lord therefore decided that it was time that David be brought to his knees, where he would once again be cast back onto the mercy of God. So he let him go ahead with his census, in order to find out just how much good it would do him, as the only thing this census would accomplish would be to inflate the national ego (intimated in Joab's warning against carrying out the census in 1 Chronicles 21:3). As soon as the numbering was completed, God intended to chasten the nation with a disastrous plague which would bring about an enormous loss of life (in fact the lives of 70,000 Israelites according to 2 Samuel 24:15).

What about Satan? Why would he get himself involved in this affair (according to 1 Chronicles 21:1) if God had already prompted David to commit the folly he had in mind? It seems his reasons were entirely malicious, knowing that a census would displease the Lord (1 Chronicles 21:7-8), and so he also incited David to carry it through.

Yet this is nothing new, for there are a number of other occurrences in the Bible where both the Lord and Satan were involved in soul-searching testings and trials:

1.

In the book of Job, chapters one and two we find a challenge to Satan from God allowing Satan to bring upon Job his calamities. God's purpose was to purify Job's faith, and to strengthen his character by means of discipline through adversity, whereas Satan's purpose was purely malicious, wishing Job as much harm as possible so that he would recant his faith in his God.
2.

Similarly both God and Satan are involved in the sufferings of persecuted Christians according to 1 Peter 4:19 and 5:8. God's purpose is to strengthen their faith and to enable them to share in the sufferings of Christ in this life, that they may rejoice with Him in the glories of heaven to come (1 Peter 4:13-14), whereas Satan's purpose is to 'devour' them (1 Peter 5:8), or rather to draw them into self-pity and bitterness, and down to his level.
3.

Both God and Satan allowed Jesus the three temptations during his ministry on earth. God's purpose for these temptations was for him to triumph completely over the very tempter who had lured the first Adam to his fall, whereas Satan's purpose was to deflect the saviour from his messianic mission.
4.

In the case of Peter's three denials of Jesus in the court of the high priest, it was Jesus himself who points out the purposes of both parties involvement when he says in Luke 22:31-32, "Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
5.

And finally the crucifixion itself bears out yet another example where both God and Satan are involved. Satan exposed his purpose when he had the heart of Judas filled with treachery and hate (John 13:27), causing him to betray Jesus. The Lord's reasoning behind the crucifixion, however, was that Jesus, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world should give his life as a ransom for many, so that once again sinful man could relish in the relationship lost at the very beginning, in the garden of Eden, and thereby enter into a relationship which is now eternal.

Thus we have five other examples where both the Lord and Satan were involved together though with entirely different motives. Satan's motive in all these examples, including the census by David was driven by malicious intent, while the Lord in all these cases showed an entirely different motive. His was a benevolent motive with a view to eventual victory, while simultaneously increasing the usefulness of the person tested. In every case Satan's success was limited and transient; while in the end God's purpose was well served furthering His cause substantially.

(Archer 1982:186-188)

5. Did Solomon build a facility containing 2,000 baths (1 Kings 7:26), or over 3,000 baths (2 Chronicles 4:5)?

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent, or copyist error)

The Hebrew verb rendered "contained" and "held" is different from that translated "received"; and the meaning may be that the sea ordinarily contained 2,000 baths. But when filled to its utmost capacity it received and held 3,000 baths. Thus the chronicler simply mentions the amount of water that would make the sea like a flowing spring rather than a still pool. This informs us that 3,000 gallons of water were required to completely fill the sea which usually held 2,000 gallons.

Another solution follows a theme mentioned earlier, that the number in Hebrew lettering for 2000 has been confounded by the scribe with a similar alphabetical number for the number 3,000.

It should be noted that Shabbir (in his debate on 25th February 1998 against Jay Smith in Birmingham, UK) quoted this "contradiction" and added to it saying that if the bath had a diameter of 10 cubits it cannot possibly have had a circumference of 30 cubits as the text says (since 'pi' dictates that it would have a circumference of 31.416 or a 9.549 diameter).

Shabbir made the humorous comment "Find me a bath like that and I will get baptized in it!" But Shabbir did not read the text properly or was just going for a cheap, displaced laugh. Why? Because the text says that it was about 8cm thick and had a rim shaped like a lily. Therefore it depends on where you measure from. The top or bottom of the rim or the inside or outside for the vessel would all give a different diameter; and depending on whether you measure at the top of the rim or at the narrower point, you would get a different circumference.

In other words, Shabbir may well be getting baptized if someone can be bothered to make a replica!

(Haley pg. 382; Light of Life II 1992:192)

14. Did Solomon appoint 3,600 overseers (2 Chronicles 2:2) for the work of building the temple, or was it only 3,300 (1 Kings 5:16)?

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent)

This is not too great a problem. The most likely solution is that the author of 2 Chronicles included the 300 men who were selected as reservists to take the place of any supervisors who would become ill or who had died, while the author of the 1 Kings 5:16 passage includes only the supervisory force. With the group as large as the 3,300, sickness and death certainly did occur, requiring reserves who would be called up as the need arose.

(Light of Life II 1992:192)

5. Was Ahaziah 22 (2 Kings 8:26) or 42 (2 Chronicles 22:2) when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

(Category: copyist error)

Because we are dealing with accounts which were written thousands of years ago, we would not expect to have the originals in our possession today, as they would have disintegrated long ago. We are therefore dependent on the copies taken from copies of those originals, which were in turn continually copied out over a period of centuries. Those who did the copying were prone to making two types of scribal errors. One concerned the spelling of proper names, and the other had to do with numbers.

The two examples of numerical discrepancy here have to do with a decade in the number given. Ahaziah is said to have been 22 in 2 Kings 8:26; while in 2 Chronicles 22:2 Ahaziah is said to have been 42. Fortunately there is enough additional information in the Biblical text to show that the correct number is 22. Earlier in 2 Kings 8:17 the author mentions that Ahaziah's father Joram ben Ahab was 32 when he became King, and he died eight years later, at the age of 40. Therefore Ahaziah could not have been 42 at the time of his father's death at age 40! Such scribal errors do not change Jewish or Christian beliefs in the least. In such a case, another portion of scripture often corrects the mistake (2 Kings 8:26 in this instance). We must also remember that the scribes who were responsible for the copies were meticulously honest in handling Biblical texts. They delivered them as they received them, without changing even obvious mistakes, which are few indeed.

(Refer to the next question for a more in-depth presentation on how scribes could misconstrue numbers within manuscripts)

(Archer 1982:206 and Light of Life II 1992:201)

hey arpheel n h ru ?
so what u gonna to say about that VERSES THAT in the bible CONTRADICT THE TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE AND/OR THE DIVINITY OF JESUS:

Exodus 33:20, John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:16 - No one saw God.
Isaiah 42:8 - Do not praise and worship images.
Isaiah 45:1 - "Anointed" does not mean "God".
Matthew 14:23, 19:13, 26:39, 27:46, 26:42-44 - Jesus prayed.
Matthew 24:36 - Jesus was not all-knowing.
Matthew 26:39 - Jesus and God had different wills.
Matthew 28:18 - All power was given to Jesus.
Mark 1:35, 6:46, 14:35-36 - Jesus prayed.
Mark 10:17-18 and Luke 18:18-19 - Jesus denied divinity.
Mark 12:28-29 - God is one.
Mark 13:32 - Jesus was not all-knowing.
Mark 16:19 and Luke 22:69 - Jesus at the right hand of God.
Luke 3:21, 5:16, 6:12, 9:18, 9:28, 11:1-4, 22:41 - Jesus prayed.
Luke 4:18, 9:48, 10:16 - Jesus was from God.
Luke 7:16, 13:33, 24:18-19 - Jesus was a prophet.
Luke 10:21 - Jesus gave thanks.
Luke 23:46 - The spirit of Jesus was commended to God.
John 4:19 - Jesus was a prophet.
John 4:23-24 - Worship in spirit and truth.
John 14:28 - One was greater than the other.
John 5:19, 5:30, 7:28, 8:28 - Jesus was helpless.
John 5:20 - The Father showed the son.
John 5:30 and 6:38 - Jesus and God had different wills.
John 5:31-32 - Jesus' witness was not true.
John 6:11 and 11:41-42 - Jesus gave thanks.
John 6:32 - The Father was the provider, not the son.
John 7:29, 16:5, 16:28 - Jesus was from God.
John 7:16, 12:49, 14:24, 17:14 - Jesus' words were not his.
John 8:42 - Jesus did not come of himself.
John 10:29 - "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all."
John 14:1 - Jesus said, "...believe also in me."
John 14:16, 17:1, 17:9, 17:11, 17:15 - Jesus prayed.
John 14:31 and 15:10 - Jesus followed commands.
John 17:6-8 - "I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me."
John 20:17 - Jesus had a God.
Acts 2:22 - Jesus was "a man approved of God."
Romans 8:34 - Jesus was an intercessor.
1 Timothy 2:5 - Jesus was the mediator between God and humans.

Incidentally, these are really only some selections of contradictions and inaccuracies found in the modern versions of the Bible. There are many more but for the sake of time and space we have limited ourselves to those listed above.

Again I would like to repeat, the Muslim must believe in all original texts coming from Almighty God. The only subject being discussed here is whether or not the Bible being offered today in the English language is in fact, the real "Bible".

23. Did 200 singers (Ezra 2:65) or 245 singers (Nehemiah 7:67) accompany the assembly?

(Category: copyist error)

As in question number 7, this is a copyist error, where a scribe copying the numbers in the Ezra account simply rounded off the figure of 245 to 200.

28. Was Jechoniah (Matthew 1:12) or Neri (Luke 3:27) the father of Shealtiel?

(Category: misunderstood the Hebrew usage)

Once again, this problem disappears when it is understood that two different genealogies are given from David to Jesus, those of both Mary and Joseph (see #26). Two different genealogies mean two different men named Shealtiel, a common Hebrew name. Therefore, it is not surprising to recognize that they both had different fathers!

29. Which son of Zerubbabel was an ancestor of Jesus Christ, Abiud (Matthew 1:13) or Rhesa (Luke 3:27), and what about Zerubbabel in (1 Chronicles 3:19-20)?

(Category: misunderstood the Hebrew usage)

As with #28, two different Shealtiels necessitates two different Zerubbabels, so it is no problem that their sons had different names.

It should not surprise us that there was a Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel in both Mary's and Joseph's ancestry. Matthew tells us that Joseph's father was named Jacob. Of course, the Bible records another Joseph son of Jacob, who rose to become the second most powerful ruler in Egypt (Genesis 37-47). We see no need to suggest that these two men are one and the same, so we should have no problem with two men named Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel.

The Zerubbabel mentioned in 1 Chronicles 3:19,20 could easily be a third. Again, this causes no problem: there are several Marys mentioned in the Gospels, because it was a common name. The same may be true here. This Zerubbabel would then be a cousin of the one mentioned in Matthew 1:12,13. A comparison of Matthew and 1 Chronicles gives the following possible family tree:

Jehoiachin
|
Shealtiel----Malkiram----Pedaiah----Shenazzar----Jekamiah----Hoshama----Nedabiah----...
| |
Zerubbabel Zerubbabel----Shimei----...
| |
Abiud 7 sons
| (1 Ch. 3:19,20)
|
Joseph

50. Did Jesus die before (Matthew 27:50-51; Mark 15:37-38), or after (Luke 23:45-46) the curtain of the temple was torn?

(Category: misread the text)

After reading the three passages Matthew 27:50-51, Mark 15:37-38 and Luke 23:45-46, it is not clear where the apparent contradictions are that Shabbir has pointed out. All three passages point to the fact that at the time of Jesus' death the curtain in the temple was torn. It does not stand to reason that because both Matthew and Mark mention the event of Christ's death before mentioning the curtain tearing, while Luke mentions it in reverse order, that they are therefore in contradiction, as Matthew states that the two events happened, 'At that moment', and the other two passages nowhere deny this.

They all agree that these two events happened simultaneously for a very good reason; for the curtain was there as a barrier between God and man. Its destruction coincides with the death of the Messiah, thereby allowing man the opportunity for the first time since Adam's expulsion from God's presence at the garden of Eden, to once again be reunited with Him.

61. Did Judas die by hanging himself (Matthew 27:5) or by falling headlong and bursting open with all his bowels gushing out (Acts 1:18)?

(Category: the texts are compatible with a little thought)

This alleged contradiction is related to the fact that Matthew in his Gospel speaks of Judas hanging himself but in Acts 1:18 Luke speaks about Judas falling headlong and his innards gushing out. However both of these statements are true.

Matthew 27:1-10 mentioned the fact that Judas died by hanging himself in order to be strictly factual. Luke, however in his report in Acts1:18-19 wants to cause the feeling of revulsion among his readers, for the field spoken about and for Judas, and nowhere denies that Judas died by hanging. According to tradition, it would seem that Judas hanged himself on the edge of a cliff, above the Valley of Hinnom. Eventually the rope snapped, was cut or untied and Judas fell upon the field below as described by Luke.

4. Is all scripture profitable (2 Timothy 3:16) or not profitable (Hebrews 7:18)?

(Category: misunderstood how God works in history)

The accusation is that the Bible says all scripture is profitable as well as stating that a former commandment is weak and useless, and therein lies the contradiction. This is a contextual problem and arises through ignorance of what God promised to do speaking through the Prophets, concerning the two covenants which He instituted.

Due to space this wonderful issue cannot be looked at in depth here. However, some background information will have to be given in order for a reader, unfamiliar with the Bible, to understand what we are saying here. In order to illustrate I will draw a parallel from question #92 which speaks of the wealth behind many of the Hebrew words used in the Bible; in that particular case the ability we have to interpret the word 'niham' as either changing one's mind, repenting, or to be aggrieved (refer to the question for a further understanding of the context).

God's word obviously originates from Him alone, and is indeed useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training as 2 Timothy states. That is a general statement which refers to all that which comes from God.

Hebrews chapter 7 speaks of a particular commandment given to a particular people at a specific time; the sacrificial system in the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God established in His covenant with His people Israel a system where they would offer sacrifices, animals to be killed, in order for God to forgive them of their sins; particularly what God calls in Leviticus chapters 4 to 6, the "sin offering" and the "guilt offering".

This concept of substitutional death is foreign to Islam, but is fundamental to Biblical Judaism and Christianity. Atonement must take place for sin. The penalty of sin is death, and someone has to pay that price. There is no forgiveness for sin without the shedding of blood, for God demands justice. He cannot just ignore it for that would not be just.

God indeed established this system of atonement as the Old Testament shows by referring to the need for atonement 79 times! However, it also records God saying "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand and led them out of Egypt" [i.e. at Mount Sinai where He gave the first covenant to the people of Israel just after God saved them from Egypt] (Jeremiah 31:31-33). The reason God gives is that the people did not remain faithful to it. Thus the new covenant will be different as God says, "I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts" (vs. 33). He says also that this new covenant will necessitate a once-for-all payment for their sins, unlike the previous covenant (Jeremiah 31:34, Daniel 9:24-25).

God also speaks in the Old Testament of the Messiah who would bring this about. A Messiah not from the Levitical priesthood, but a perfect man from the tribe of Judah who would be a priest unto God. He, the Messiah would be the sacrifice that would pay for all sin in one go, and approach God not on the merit of his ancestry (as with the Levitical priests), but on his own merit, being like God, perfect. If people follow this Messiah and accept his payment of the penalty for sin for them, then God will write the law on their minds and hearts, and God can be merciful to them as His justice has been satisfied. Then they too can draw near to God, for God wants to be in relationship with His creation (Genesis 3:8-11) and it is only sin which stops that.

Obviously this is quite involved and only a comprehensive reading of the Old Testament will explain it adequately. All scripture is profitable, including that concerning the sacrificial system. However, God also promised in the Bible to make a renewed covenant with His people. In this the original system was replaced with the perfect sacrifice of the Messiah, Jesus.

Many scriptures describe this Messiah who would bring about this new covenant. In this God "makes his life a guilt offering" and we are told "Surely he took up our infirmities [sins] and carried our sorrows, he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace [with God] was upon him." See Isaiah chapter 53.

You can pay the price for your sin if you wish - it will cost you your life eternally. You will die for your own sin and go to hell. Or, because of the love of God, the Messiah can pay that price for you, and be "pierced" in substitution for you, which will bring you peace with God. Then God will permit you to enter heaven for eternity as His justice is satisfied. For as John the Baptist when seeing Jesus mentioned, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the word!" He also said, "Whoever believes in the Son [Jesus] has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him." John 1:29, 3:36.

God teaches that He will do this. It was fulfilled in the death and resurrection of the Messiah, Jesus, EXACTLY as the Old Testament said it would happen, and the new covenant was established. Sin was paid for once for all by the "Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world" as John the Baptist announced upon seeing Jesus (see #34 and #44). He is the one God promised. So through his death the old system of sacrifices, offering animals over and over again, became unnecessary. God's alternative, which is vastly superior and comprehensive, rendered by God himself the previous system useless (Hebrews 8:7-13).

So, like clarification #92, God did not change His mind on His plan for enabling people to be right with Him. God is not a man that He should change His mind. It was His intention and plan all along to bring in this new covenant as a fulfilment of the old, as the Old Testament shows. A further point needs to be addressed a here. These ceremonial laws were required of the Israelites alone, as they were the ones who operating within the stipulations, ordinances and decrees of the Mosaic covenant. Any Gentile, or non-Israelite, who wished to convert to Judaism, was obligated to observe these covenantal ordinances as well. But Christians are not converts to Judaism. They are believers in Jesus, God's Messiah, the Savior. They operate within the context of a "new covenant," the one established in Jesus' blood by his atoning sacrifice, not the old covenant which God made with Israel at Sinai. Within this new covenant, Christians too have commandments, and in one manner or another they all relate to what was written in the Old Testament, but now in an entirely new context, that of fulfilment. So there is a clear line of continuity, revelation and renewal between the covenants, new and old - because both Israel and Christianity have the Messiah in common, and it was the Hebrew Scriptures that he fulfilled. Therefore all those Scriptures are profitable for studying, to know where we have come from, and where we are going. But not every commandment, ordinance or decree in the Old Testament is applicable to Christians in the same way it was (or is) to Israel. Though we have much in common, we have distinct covenants, a new covenant, which present Jews need to read about and acquiesce to, as it fulfills all that they look for and continue to hope for.

Note: a parallel to this, although an imperfect one, can be draw for the Muslim from the Qur'an. Sura 3:49-50. Jesus comes and says to the people of Israel "I have come to you to affirm the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you what was before forbidden to you", or "to make halal what was haram". According to this he came and confirmed the law which God had given to them, but he made some things permissible for them which God had previously prohibited. This is not true according to the Bible in the context of this "contradiction" and cannot be said for Judaism and Christianity. It is just a parallel to show that the Qur'an testifies of such things too.

onclusion:

In conclusion, once we have weighed the evidence, many if not all of the seeming contradictions posed by Shabbir Ally can be adequately explained.

When we look over the 101 supposed contradictions we find that they fall into 15 broad categories or genres of errors. Listed below are those categories, each explaining in one sentence the errors behind Shabbir's contradictions. Alongside each category is a number informing us how many times he could be blamed for each category. You will note that when you add up the totals they are larger than 101. The reason is that, as you may have already noticed, Shabbir many times makes more than one error in a given question.

Categories of the errors evidenced by Shabbir in his pamphlet:

-he misunderstood the historical context - 25 times
-he misread the text - 15 times
-he misunderstood the Hebrew usage - 13 times
-the texts are compatible with a little thought - 13 times
-he misunderstood the author's intent - 12 times
-these were merely copyist error - 9 times
-he misunderstood how God works in history - 6 times
-he misunderstood the Greek usage - 4 times
-he didn't read the entire text - 4 times
-he misquoted the text - 4 times
-he misunderstood the wording - 3 times
-he had too literalistic an interpretation - 3 times
-he imposed his own agenda - 3 times
-he confused an incident with another - 1 time
-we now have discovered an earlier manuscript - 1 time

It must be admitted that we have in certain places followed explanations or interpretations that are not specifically stated in the text. This is entirely permissible, as the explanations must merely be plausible. It is clear that the gospel authors are writing from different points of view, adding and leaving out different details. This is entirely to be expected when four authors write independently. Far from casting doubt on their accounts, it gives added credibility, as those details which at first appear to be in conflict can be resolved with some thought, yet are free from the hallmarks of obvious collusion, either by the original authors or any subsequent editors.

This testifies to the honesty and openness of the scribes and translators (both Jewish and Christian). Although it would be easy to change this recognized error, this has not been done in favour of remaining true to the manuscripts. Although it leaves the passage open to shallow criticism as Shabbir Ally has shown, it is criticism which we are not afraid of.

In Shabbir's booklet, he puts two verses on the bottom of each page. It would seem appropriate that we give an answer to these quotes, which are:

1.

"God is not the author of confusion..." (1 Corinthians 14:33)

True, God is not the author of confusion. There is very little that is confusing in the Bible. When we understand all the original readings and the context behind them, the confusion virtually

disappears. Of course we need scholarship to understand everything in there, as we are 2,000 - 3,500 years and a translation removed from the original hearers.

But this is no different to the Qur'an. On first (and tenth) readings of the Qur'an there are many things which are not apparent. Take the mysterious letters at the beginning of the suras. It seems that after 1,400 years of scholarship, people can only take a good guess at what on earth they might be there for. Or take the many historical Biblical characters whose stories do not parallel the Bible but seem to originate in second century Talmudic apocryphal writings. This is indeed confusing. However, it is because we can go to the historical context of those writings that we now know that they could not have been authored by God, but were created by men, centuries after the authentic revelation of God had been canonized.
2.

"...A house divided against itself falls" (Luke 11:17)

The Bible is not divided against itself. Jesus was talking about a major division, i.e. Satan destroying his own demons. This is far removed from the Bible. A book four times the size of the Qur'an, with the remaining problems able to be counted on your fingers and toes, a 99.999% agreement! That indeed is remarkable!

We conclude with two quotes of our own:

"The first to present his case seems right... till another comes forward and questions him" (Proverbs 18:17)

"...our dear brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom that God gave him....His letters contain some things that are hard to understand which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:15-16)

Bibliography:

Archer, Gleason, L., Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, 1994 Revised Edition, 1982, Zondervan Publishing House
Bivin, David, & Blizzard, Roy, Jr., Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, Revised Edition, Destiny Image Publishers, 1994
Blomberg, Craig, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, IVP, Leicester, 1987
France, R.T., Matthew, Tyndale IVP, 1985
Fruchtenbaum, A. 'The Genealogy of the Messiah'. The Vineyard, November 1993, pp.10-13.
Geisler, Norman & Howe, Thomas, When Critics Ask, Victor Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 1992
Haley, John, W., Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania
Harrison, R.K., Old Testament Introduction, Tyndale Press, London, 1970
Keil, C.F., and Delitzsch, F., Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament, 20 vols. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949
McDowell, Josh, Christianity; A Ready Defence, Harpendon, Scripture Press Foundation, 1990
Morris, Leon, Luke, Tyndale Press, 1974 (1986 reprint)
The True Guidance, Part Two, ('False Charges against the Old Testament'), Light of Life, Austria, 1992
The True Guidance, Part Three, ('False Charges against the New Testament'), Light of Life, Austria, 1992

source:http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm

Who is The God of The Bible?

"ONE" - SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LITERALLY

[Mark 10:6-9 and John 14:20, 15:1-7, 17:11, 17:18-23, 17:26]


There are many verses in the Bible that speak of Jesus and God as being "one".
But does this necessarily mean that Jesus is God? If you read the six selections above then you will see that we cannot take the word "one" so literally. If we do, then we are God, as Jesus said, "...they also may be one in us" and "...they may be one, even as we are one." What the Bible means when it says that Jesus is "one" with God is that he is extremely close to god, "as if" they are one. John 17:18-23 tells how we normal human beings can attain this "oneness" (or "closeness") with God by being "sanctified through the truth." Aside from this, neither the word "trinity" appears anywhere in the Bible nor any explanation of such a thing.

"LORD" DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN "GOD"

[Matthew 18:23-34, Luke 19:11-21, and John 20:26-29]


Many of Jesus' disciples referred to Jesus as "Lord". Even Jesus himself said that he is their Lord. But does this mean that he is their God? If you read the three short stories above then you will realize that back in the Biblical time period most servants referred to their masters as "lord". This was a common practice because it showed honor and respect for a person of such high stature.

"LORD" - A LOFTY TITLE

Even today in many countries around the world such as England, "lord" is used in referring to kings, princes, and others who deserve such a lofty title. The disciples and followers of Jesus viewed him as their earthy master and themselves as his servants. He was a man from God who brought them God's message of truth, justice, and peace. Who could be more deserving of the title "lord" than Jesus Christ? Besides, "lord" is defined by Webster in many curious ways.

A few of them are as follows:

A man of high rank in a feudal society.
A king.
A general masculine title of nobility or rank.
A man of renowned power.
A man who has mastery in a given activity or field.

Commenting on the word's history, Webster says that "lord" literally means 'guardian of the bread'. He continues, "Since such a position would be the dominant one in the household, lord came to denote a man of authority and rank in society at large."

The Noble Quran also uses "lord" in the same context (see 12:23 and 12:41-42). This was simply the language of the time.

The word "lord" does not render the person which it is being applied to as God. If this were the case, then many human beings in the Bible would have to be considered God.

well for the full answers log on to
http://www.answering-islam.org/Bible/Contra/index.html

i hope you will find it helpfull

well let me show you how Allah and Prophet contradicts them self's

# Who suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong? Sura 34:50 commands Muhammad to say, "If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss," which is a severe factual error in the Qur'an as well as contradicting the teaching of the Qur'an in a number of other verses.

# Allah, Adam, and the Angels. There are a great number of problems and inconsistencies between the several accounts of Adam's creation, Allah's command to prostrate before Adam, Satans refusal, etc.

# Who Was the First Muslim? Muhammad [6:14, 163], Moses [7:143], some Egyptians [26:51], or Abraham [2:127-133, 3:67] or Adam, the first man who also received inspiration from Allah [2:37]?

# Can Allah be seen and did Muhammad see his Lord? Yes [S. 53:1-18, 81:15-29], No [6:102-103, 42:51].

# Were Warners Sent to All Mankind Before Muhammad? Allah had supposedly sent warners to every people [10:47, 16:35-36, 35:24], Abraham and Ishmael are specifically claimed to have visited Mecca and built the Kaaba [2:125-129]. Yet, Muhammad supposedly is sent to a people who never had a messenger before [28:46, 32:3, 34:44, 36:2-6]. This article also raises other issues: What about Hud and Salih who supposedly were sent to the Arabs? What about the Book that was supposedly given to Ishmael? Etc.

# What will be the food for the people in Hell? The food for the people in Hell will be only "Dhari" [Sura 88:6], or only foul pus from the washing of wounds [S. 69:36], or will they also get to eat from the tree of Zaqqum [S. 37:66]?
Together, these verses constitute three contradictions.

# Can Angels Cause the Death of People? The Qur'an
attacks those who worship anyone besides God (e.g. angels or prophets) because those can neither create, nor give life, nor cause anyone to die. Yet, the Qur'an explicitly states that one angel or several angels are causing certain people to die [Sura 4:97, 16:28, 32, 32:11].

# How many mothers does a Muslim have? Only one [58:2, the woman who gave birth and none else], or two [4:23, including the mother who nursed him], or at least ten [33:6]?

# And it just doesn't add up: Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur'anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property.

# How many angels were talking to Mary? When the Qur'an speaks about the announciation of the birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary, Sura 3:42,45 speaks about (several) angels while it is only one in Sura 19:17-21. (This article has received many Muslim responses which are quoted or linked and/or discussed at the end of the article.)

# Further numerical discrepancies Does Allah's day equal to 1,000 human years (Sura 22:47, 32:5) or 50,000 human years (Sura 70:4)? --- According to Sura 56:7 there will be THREE distinct groups of people at the Last Judgement, but 90:18-19, 99:6-8, etc. mention only TWO groups. --- There are conflicting views on who takes the souls at death: THE Angel of Death [32:11], THE angels (plural) [47:27] but also "It is Allah that takes the souls (of men) at death." [39:42] Angels have 2, 3, or 4 pairs of wings [35:1]; but Gabriel had 600 wings. [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 455]

# How many days did Allah need to destroy the people of Aad? One day [54:19] or several days [41:16; 69:6,7]

# Six or eight days of creation? Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 clearly state that God created "the heavens and the earth" in six days. But in 41:9-12 the detailed description of the creation procedure adds up to eight days. (This topic also includes many Muslim responses and further discussion.)

# Quick or Slow Creation? Allah creates the heavens and the earth in six days [7:54] and many Muslims want to be modern and scientific, and make that six eons, but then again, He creates instantaneously [2:117], "Be! And it is".

# Heavens or Earth? Which was created first? First earth and then heaven [2:29], heaven and after that earth [79:27-30].

# Calling together or ripping apart? In the process of creation heaven and earth were first apart and are called to come together [41:11], while 21:30 states that they were originally one piece and then ripped apart.

# What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], "sounding" (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37]

Let's examine some of the contradictions in the Quran.

The Quran differs whether a day is 1000 years, or 50,000 years see sura 32:4, and 70:4.

On the day of Judgment the infidels attempt to conceal something from God Sura 6:22-23. But in Sura 4"45 we see that the infidels don't attempt to conceal anything.

In sura 56 the people who follow Muhammad will be "a crowd of the former, and few of the latter generations" verse 14. But in verse 39 it says that the people of Muhammad will be "a crowd of the latter generations." Other translations have "multitude" as the word instead of "crowd." so which one is it, a few of the latter, or a crowd?

Commenting on the Exodus, God told the Israelites, "And it was said to them, "Dwell in this city, and eat therefrom what ye will, and say "Hittat" (forgiveness) and enter the gate with prostration's; then we will pardon your offences, we will give increase to the doers of good" (7"162).

Now look at this verse about the same subject: "And when we said, 'Enter this city, and eat therefrom plentiful at your will, and enter the gate with prostration's, and say, "Forgiveness," and we will pardon you your sins, and give an increase to the doers of good:' (sura 2:55). Now if the Quran is without error how do you explain the difference of these two statements? This is god talking to the Israelites, and both times God is quoted wrong. One could understand if this was two people witnessing what was going on and wrote it down, but this is not the case. the Quran is dictating what happened in the past.

. To drink wine (sura 16:67; 2:219:4:43), or not to drink wine, (sura 5:92)?

. Did Jesus die (Sura 19:33; 3:55), or not? (Sura 4:157-158).

.One part in the Koran God says that you need a mediator to talk to him (Sura 42:51-52), and that it "biffitteth not a
man," meaning all men. In another place it says that Moses spoke directly to God, (Sura 7:143; 4:164).

. In one place it says that Abraham was not an idolater (Sura 3:67; 6:62). but in another place you see Abraham committing idolatry (Sura 6:75-78).

sources http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/index.html

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/index.html

http://www.british-israel.ca/Islam.htm

hope you find them helpful in exposing this Book

Can we Prove Quran is From God?

Muslims have something that offers the clearest proof of all - The Holy Quran. There is no other book like it anywhere on earth. It is absolutely perfect in the Arabic language. It has no mistakes in grammar, meanings or context. The scientific evidences are well known around the entire world, even amongst non-Muslim scholars. Predictions in the Quran have come true; and its teachings are clearly for all people, all places and all times.

Surprisingly enough, the Quran itself provides us with the test of authenticity and offers challenges against itself to prove its veracity. Allah tells us in the Quran:

Haven't the unbelievers considered if this was from other than Allah, they would find within it many contradictions?

[Noble Quran 4:82]


Another amazing challenge from Allah's Book:

If you are in doubt about it, bring a chapter like it.

[Noble Quran 2:23]


And Allah challenges us with:

Bring ten chapters like it.
[Noble Quran 11:13]


And finally:

Bring one chapter like it.
[Noble Quran 10:38]


No one has been able to produce a book like it, nor ten chapters like it, nor even one chapter like it. It was memorized by thousands of people during the lifetime of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and then this memorization was passed down from teacher to student for generation after generation, from mouth to ear and from one nation to another. Today every single Muslim has memorized some part of the Quran in the original Arabic language that it was revealed in over 1,400 years ago, even though most of them are not Arabs. There are over nine million (9,000,000) Muslims living on the earth today who have totally memorized the entire Quran, word for word, and can recite the entire Quran, in Arabic just as Muhammad (peace be upon him) did 14 centuries ago.

peace on u man
i like ur answer he won't be able to answer this he only washed mind
Allha cure u soon inshallah