4-Christ-Alone
Senior Member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 5
hi mate welcome, i see its your first post.
If you make a point, it will be better if you give refferences or reasons for it to back it up.
God bless
SOME of the ERRORS in the HOLY BIBLE
- Thread starter selma1
- Start date
- Replies 101
- Views 21K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
hi mate welcome, i see its your first post.
If you make a point, it will be better if you give refferences or reasons for it to back it up.
God bless
Muezzin
Bat-Mod
- Messages
- 10,763
- Reaction score
- 2,056
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Last edited:
Some further contradictions include:
* No one has ever seen God, John 1:18 versus Jacob saw God's face, Genesis 32:30 and Moses saw God's back, Exodus 33:23
* Jesus carries his own cross, John 19:17 versus Simon carries Jesus's cross, Mark 15:21-22
* Earth will exist forever, Ecclesiastes 1:4 versus Earth will end at Armageddon, 2 Peter 3:10
* If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters — yes, even his own life — he cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26
* Love your enemies versus But to bring a sword.
In addition, its comon knowledge that Bible is incompatible with science.
The Bible supports inferior treatment of women, inequality, beating of slaves, and violence. Unlike the Koran though, nothing is taken out of context.
I am currently writing a book exposing the truth of Christianity, through Biblical and historical contexts.
Peace.
* No one has ever seen God, John 1:18 versus Jacob saw God's face, Genesis 32:30 and Moses saw God's back, Exodus 33:23
* Jesus carries his own cross, John 19:17 versus Simon carries Jesus's cross, Mark 15:21-22
* Earth will exist forever, Ecclesiastes 1:4 versus Earth will end at Armageddon, 2 Peter 3:10
* If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters — yes, even his own life — he cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26
* Love your enemies versus But to bring a sword.
In addition, its comon knowledge that Bible is incompatible with science.
The Bible supports inferior treatment of women, inequality, beating of slaves, and violence. Unlike the Koran though, nothing is taken out of context.
I am currently writing a book exposing the truth of Christianity, through Biblical and historical contexts.
Peace.
4-Christ-Alone
Senior Member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 5
Because the Bible seemingly contains errors therefore the Bible is not God's word. The Qur'an on the other hand is free from discrepancies and this is proof that the Qur'an is from God since Sura 4:82 states:
Do they not ponder on the Qur'an?
Had it been from other than Allah,
they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
But reality is not as simple as many would want us believe.
There are three basic categories of contradictions in the Qur'an
I will go on to name these contradictions if any muslim, or even christian wishes me to.
Do they not ponder on the Qur'an?
Had it been from other than Allah,
they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
But reality is not as simple as many would want us believe.
There are three basic categories of contradictions in the Qur'an
I will go on to name these contradictions if any muslim, or even christian wishes me to.
Ghazi
IB Expert
- Messages
- 2,497
- Reaction score
- 158
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
4-Christ-Alone
Senior Member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 5
In Sura 34:50, Muhammad is commanded to say the following:
Say: ‘If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss; if I am guided, it is by what my Lord reveals to me. He is All-hearing, Ever-nigh.’ Arberry
Say: "If (even) I go astray, I shall stray only to my own loss. But if I remain guided, it is because of the Inspiration of my Lord to me. Truly, He is AllHearer, Ever Near (to all things)." Hilali & Khan
The error in this verse should be obvious to anyone pondering this statement for a little bit. The issue here is not whether, objectively, Muhammad went astray or was guided; Muslims and non-Muslims will continue to disagree about that. This verse is logically wrong, independent of whether Muhammad was guided or not.
The Error
Who suffered and still suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong?
The first point is somewhat trivial. Muslims are commanded in the Qur'an to take Muhammad as their model, and therefore many Muslims imitate him in the smallest details of life. They dress like Muhammad, they use a miswak to brush their teeth like Muhammad did, etc. If Muhammad was wrong, then this would mean a life of unnecessary inconvenience for millions of Muslims.
I will leave you this one and let you comment, by the way i am not taking these from the top of my head, i am copying as i read them.
So i will give yous time to comment on each one, instead of writing a bundle as some of you do to us
God bless
Say: ‘If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss; if I am guided, it is by what my Lord reveals to me. He is All-hearing, Ever-nigh.’ Arberry
Say: "If (even) I go astray, I shall stray only to my own loss. But if I remain guided, it is because of the Inspiration of my Lord to me. Truly, He is AllHearer, Ever Near (to all things)." Hilali & Khan
The error in this verse should be obvious to anyone pondering this statement for a little bit. The issue here is not whether, objectively, Muhammad went astray or was guided; Muslims and non-Muslims will continue to disagree about that. This verse is logically wrong, independent of whether Muhammad was guided or not.
The Error
Who suffered and still suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong?
The first point is somewhat trivial. Muslims are commanded in the Qur'an to take Muhammad as their model, and therefore many Muslims imitate him in the smallest details of life. They dress like Muhammad, they use a miswak to brush their teeth like Muhammad did, etc. If Muhammad was wrong, then this would mean a life of unnecessary inconvenience for millions of Muslims.
I will leave you this one and let you comment, by the way i am not taking these from the top of my head, i am copying as i read them.
So i will give yous time to comment on each one, instead of writing a bundle as some of you do to us
God bless
Skillganon
Skillganon
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 206
- Gender
- Male
I think such thread does not do any benefit to anyone.
4-Christ-Alone
Senior Member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 5
Ok, here is the link to a list of contradictions, it explains each one in full.
http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/#internal
http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/#internal
4-Christ-Alone said:
That is a crappy website. Maybe YOU should read this instead:
www.answering-christianity.org
btw, everything in the site you posted has been refuted numerous times. Its up to you to do the research.
The quotes I've provided (regarding Earth is flat and the contradictions) have not been answered by any of your belived Christian websites.
Since you cannot explain them, do you acknowledge that the contradictions and that the world is flat?
I can literally post hundreds of problems in the Bible, but its not somthing worth my time right now.
4-Christ-Alone
Senior Member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 5
lol yous cease to amaze me.
And immunity, i havnt read all that about the flat earth, but i will.
And this conversation is pointless, theres nothing u can say that will make me doubt the bible is Gods word, many times have i been questioned about it and every time God have given me an answer. Besides, it isnt the bible that saved me, or it wasnt reading it that convinced me that it was the truth, it was asking Jesus into my life as Lord and saviour that turned my mess of a life around in an instince, and that my friends, no1 can take away.
But its late,
I dare you to ask Jesus who he really is
God bless
And immunity, i havnt read all that about the flat earth, but i will.
And this conversation is pointless, theres nothing u can say that will make me doubt the bible is Gods word, many times have i been questioned about it and every time God have given me an answer. Besides, it isnt the bible that saved me, or it wasnt reading it that convinced me that it was the truth, it was asking Jesus into my life as Lord and saviour that turned my mess of a life around in an instince, and that my friends, no1 can take away.
But its late,
I dare you to ask Jesus who he really is
God bless
Skillganon
Skillganon
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 206
- Gender
- Male
and I know Where you got this info from. answering-Islam.
You can search this proposition in the "christian forum" in the "non-christian religion" section, and you will find my explanation of it. It might be burried under other threads.
but let me point out the type of argument proposed.
i.e. the error in the author's argument itself.
Stating sentence like the "error should be obviouse" is not an argument as the author has failed to show where the error is, neither have you.
Another proposition he make's by saying that "muslim and non-muslim disagree over this. This is also not an argument or evidence for the error as the author has failed to show and reasoning behind it. Although I admit it is a clever way to fool people especially a lay non-muslim, by setting in their mind their is somekind of phantom error.
This either show's the author is either perplex, he does not understand or making a phantom argument out of nothing but importantly it has not shown so far where the error is in the quote itself.
Now the the author is making a seperate argument, and applying it to the first quote from the "translation of the quran". The athour has clearly failed to show where in the above statement Muhhamed(pbuh) was wrong (which the word he clearly does not use) or more importantly in error?
Next the author has failed to show where a normal muslim who does not "exactly dressing like" or "brushes teeth with a miswak" is in error?
Neither has the author stated where and how this constitute as straying.
The argument itself is illogical since the author has failed to show any evidence, for his statement as how the statement itself is in error.
This type of argument is weak and bear's the mentally of the author behind it.
"Bring something better."
Peace Skillganon.
Last edited:
Jesus Is A Prophet He Is Not To Be Worshipped
from www.serenityfountain.org
http://www.hizmetbooks.org/Could_not_Answer/16.htm
ISA 'alaihis-salam[JESUS] IS A PROPHET HE IS NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED
Imam-i Fakhr-ud-din Razi 'rahmatullahi alaih', a great Islamic 'Alim, and the author of the book (Tafsir-i kabir) and many other valuable books, gives the following account in his interpretation of the sixty-first ayat al-karima of Al-i-'imran sura:
I was in the city of Harazm. I heard that a priest had come to the city and was trying to spread Christianity. I went to him. We began to talk. He asked me, "What is the evidence showing that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is the Prophet?" ' gave the following answer:
Fakhr-ud-din Razi - As there are narratives reporting that Musa, Isa and other Prophets 'alaihimus- salam' display wonders and miracles, so it has been reported that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' displayed miracles. These reports are in forms of narratives. You either accept or refuse reports coming in forms of narratives. If you refuse them and say that a miracle does not prove a person's prophethood, then you should also deny the other Prophets whose miracles have been reported to us through narratives. If you admit the truth of the reports coming through narratives and believe that a person who has displayed miracles is a Prophet, then you should accept also that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is a Prophet. For Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' displayed miracles, which have been reported to us through authentic narratives called (Tawatur). Since you believe other Prophets' prophethood because of the miracles reported through narratives, you should believe that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is the Prophet!
The priest - I believe that Isa 'alaihis-salam' is a god, not a Prophet.
[God means mabud (that which, or who, is, or is to be, worshipped). Anything which is worshipped is called a god. The name of Allahu ta'ala is Allah, not God. There is no ilah (god) besides Allahu ta'ala. It would be a very vile mistake to say 'God' instead of 'Allah'].
Fakhr-ud-din Razi - We are talking about prophethood now. We have to settle the question of prophethood before passing on to divinity. Moreover, you are wrong to say that Isa 'alaihis-salam' is a god. For a god has to exist always. Material beings, objects, things that occupy spaces cannot be gods. And Isa 'alaihis-salam' was matter, human. He came into existence from nonexistence and was, according to you, killed. He was a child and grew up. He ate and drank. He spoke as we do. He would go to bed, sleep, wake up, and walk. Like any other human being, he needed a number of things to live. Could a person in need ever be Ghani (who is in possession of everything)? Could something that came into existence from nothing, exist eternally? Could something that changes be everlasting, eternal?
You say that Isa 'alaihis-salam' ran away and hid himself but the Jews arrested him and hanged him. You say that Isa 'alaihis-salam' was very sad then and had recourse to various ways to escape. If he had been a god or if a piece of God had entered him, would not he have defended himself against the Jews and even destroyed them? Why did he feel sad and look for a place to hide himself? I would swear on the name of Allah that this paradox appalls me. How could a reasonable person make or believe these statements? Reason testifies against these statements.
You have three different assertions:
1 - You say that he is a visible, substantial god. To say that the god of the universe is Isa 'alaihis-salam', the substantial god incarnate, would mean to say that the Jews killed the god of the universe, since (you believe that) they killed him (Isa 'alaihis-salam'). In that case the universe must have been deprived of its god, which is impossible. Furthermore, is it possible for a weakling whom the Jews arrested and killed unjustly to have been the god of the universe?
Another fact reported through narratives is that Isa 'alaihis-salam' worshipped Allahu ta'ala very much and was very much fond of praying. If Isa 'alaihis-salam' were a god, he would not worship or pray. For a god will never worship himself. [On the contrary, others will worship him].
This is another evidence showing that the priest is wrong.
2 - You say that God has entered him completely and (therefore) he is the Son of God. This belief is wrong. For God cannot be an object or an attribute. It is impossible for God to enter an object. If God were an object He would enter another object. When something enters an object it will become an object and the components of the two objects will be mixed with each other. And this, in its turn, will mean God's being broken. If God were an attribute, then He would need a space, a place, which would mean God's needing something. And he who needs something cannot be a god. [What was the reason for God's entering Isa 'alaihis-salam'? His entering Isa 'alaihis-salam' without any reason to do so would mean tarjih-i-bi-la murej-jih, which, as we have explained while proving the unity of Allahu ta'ala, is out of the question].
3 - You say that he is not a god but a part of God has entered him and settled in him. If the part which (is supposed to have) entered him were a component part of God, then God should have completely lost His capacity of being God with the departure of that component part. If that part did not have any function in God's being God, then it should not have been a part from God. Hence, God has not entered him.
Now, what is your other evidence to prove that Isa 'alaihis-salam' was a god?
The priest - He is a god because he resuscitated the dead, opened the eyes of people who were blind from birth, and cured the disease called leprosy resulting in itchy patches on the skin. Only God could make such things.
Fakhr-ur-din Razi - Could it be asserted that when there is no evidence for the existence of something it must be nonexistent? If you say that absence of evidence proves non-existence of the thing whose existence would otherwise be inferred from the evidence, it will mean to say that the Creator of the universe did not exist before creating the universe, that is, in the eternal past. And this inference, in its turn, is quite wrong. For the universe [all creatures] is an evidence for the existence of the Creator.
If you say that absence of evidence does not necessarily mean nonexistence of the thing whose existence were to be inferred from the evidence, you will have accepted the existence of the Creator in eternity, when creatures did not exist yet. On the other hand, if you say that God entered Isa 'alaihis-salam' in eternity, when he was nonexistent, you will need evidence to prove it. Otherwise, you will have accepted it without evidence. For Isa 'alaihis-salam' was created afterwards. His nonexistence in eternity shows nonexistence of evidence. Since you believe without evidence that God entered Isa 'alaihis-salam', how do you know He did not enter me, you, animals, plants, stones? Why don't you believe without evidence that He entered all these things?
The priest - It is obvious that God entered Isa 'alaihis-salam' and He did not enter you, me, or other beings. You, I, or other beings did not display such wonders. We infer from this that He entered him, and not us or other beings.
Fakhr-ud-din Razi - You assert that Isa's 'alaihis-salam' displaying miracles is an evidence for God's having entered him. Why do you say that absence of evidence, that is, not displaying miracles, shows that God should not have entered. You cannot say that God will not enter you, me, or other creatures because we do not have wonders or miracles. For we have already proved that absence of evidence does not necessarily mean that something does not exist. Accordingly, God's entering something does not have to do with the appearing of wonders and miracles. Then, you will have to believe also that God has entered me, you, cats, dogs, mice. Now, could a religious system which leads to believing that God has entered these humble creatures ever be a true religion?
It is more difficult to make a viper or a serpent from a rod than it is to resuscitate a dead person. For a rod and a serpent are in no way similar. You believe that Musa 'alaihis-salam' transformed the rod into a viper and yet do not call him 'God' or 'Son of God.' Why do you call Isa 'alaihis-salam' 'God' or ascribe divinity to him?
Unable to find an answer to this argumentation of mine, the priest had to remain silent. This chapter has been translated from the (Turkish) book (Se'adet-i Ebediyye). O priest! We wish that you explain the belief systems of these two religions to philosophers who do not belong to either religion or to other wise and reasonable people, ask them which of these two religions they find logical, factual and beautiful, and be true to your advice, "One should compare the two religions, and then accept the one which is beautiful," which you suggest in your book (Ghada-ul-mulahazat).
Allahu ta'ala, alone, will grant guidance and assistance.
In order to mislead Muslims and Christianize them, priests wrote many books. The Islamic 'Ulama wrote answers to the lies in these books, and thus protected Muslims from falling into the pit of Christianity. One of these answers is the Turkish book (Izah-ul-Maram), which was written by Abdullah Abdi bin Destan Mustafa 'rahmatullahi alaihima' and was published in Istanbul in 1288 [A.D. 1871]. He was from Manastir (Bitolj), and passed away in 1303 [A.D. 1896].
from www.serenityfountain.org
http://www.hizmetbooks.org/Could_not_Answer/16.htm
ISA 'alaihis-salam[JESUS] IS A PROPHET HE IS NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED
Imam-i Fakhr-ud-din Razi 'rahmatullahi alaih', a great Islamic 'Alim, and the author of the book (Tafsir-i kabir) and many other valuable books, gives the following account in his interpretation of the sixty-first ayat al-karima of Al-i-'imran sura:
I was in the city of Harazm. I heard that a priest had come to the city and was trying to spread Christianity. I went to him. We began to talk. He asked me, "What is the evidence showing that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is the Prophet?" ' gave the following answer:
Fakhr-ud-din Razi - As there are narratives reporting that Musa, Isa and other Prophets 'alaihimus- salam' display wonders and miracles, so it has been reported that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' displayed miracles. These reports are in forms of narratives. You either accept or refuse reports coming in forms of narratives. If you refuse them and say that a miracle does not prove a person's prophethood, then you should also deny the other Prophets whose miracles have been reported to us through narratives. If you admit the truth of the reports coming through narratives and believe that a person who has displayed miracles is a Prophet, then you should accept also that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is a Prophet. For Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' displayed miracles, which have been reported to us through authentic narratives called (Tawatur). Since you believe other Prophets' prophethood because of the miracles reported through narratives, you should believe that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is the Prophet!
The priest - I believe that Isa 'alaihis-salam' is a god, not a Prophet.
[God means mabud (that which, or who, is, or is to be, worshipped). Anything which is worshipped is called a god. The name of Allahu ta'ala is Allah, not God. There is no ilah (god) besides Allahu ta'ala. It would be a very vile mistake to say 'God' instead of 'Allah'].
Fakhr-ud-din Razi - We are talking about prophethood now. We have to settle the question of prophethood before passing on to divinity. Moreover, you are wrong to say that Isa 'alaihis-salam' is a god. For a god has to exist always. Material beings, objects, things that occupy spaces cannot be gods. And Isa 'alaihis-salam' was matter, human. He came into existence from nonexistence and was, according to you, killed. He was a child and grew up. He ate and drank. He spoke as we do. He would go to bed, sleep, wake up, and walk. Like any other human being, he needed a number of things to live. Could a person in need ever be Ghani (who is in possession of everything)? Could something that came into existence from nothing, exist eternally? Could something that changes be everlasting, eternal?
You say that Isa 'alaihis-salam' ran away and hid himself but the Jews arrested him and hanged him. You say that Isa 'alaihis-salam' was very sad then and had recourse to various ways to escape. If he had been a god or if a piece of God had entered him, would not he have defended himself against the Jews and even destroyed them? Why did he feel sad and look for a place to hide himself? I would swear on the name of Allah that this paradox appalls me. How could a reasonable person make or believe these statements? Reason testifies against these statements.
You have three different assertions:
1 - You say that he is a visible, substantial god. To say that the god of the universe is Isa 'alaihis-salam', the substantial god incarnate, would mean to say that the Jews killed the god of the universe, since (you believe that) they killed him (Isa 'alaihis-salam'). In that case the universe must have been deprived of its god, which is impossible. Furthermore, is it possible for a weakling whom the Jews arrested and killed unjustly to have been the god of the universe?
Another fact reported through narratives is that Isa 'alaihis-salam' worshipped Allahu ta'ala very much and was very much fond of praying. If Isa 'alaihis-salam' were a god, he would not worship or pray. For a god will never worship himself. [On the contrary, others will worship him].
This is another evidence showing that the priest is wrong.
2 - You say that God has entered him completely and (therefore) he is the Son of God. This belief is wrong. For God cannot be an object or an attribute. It is impossible for God to enter an object. If God were an object He would enter another object. When something enters an object it will become an object and the components of the two objects will be mixed with each other. And this, in its turn, will mean God's being broken. If God were an attribute, then He would need a space, a place, which would mean God's needing something. And he who needs something cannot be a god. [What was the reason for God's entering Isa 'alaihis-salam'? His entering Isa 'alaihis-salam' without any reason to do so would mean tarjih-i-bi-la murej-jih, which, as we have explained while proving the unity of Allahu ta'ala, is out of the question].
3 - You say that he is not a god but a part of God has entered him and settled in him. If the part which (is supposed to have) entered him were a component part of God, then God should have completely lost His capacity of being God with the departure of that component part. If that part did not have any function in God's being God, then it should not have been a part from God. Hence, God has not entered him.
Now, what is your other evidence to prove that Isa 'alaihis-salam' was a god?
The priest - He is a god because he resuscitated the dead, opened the eyes of people who were blind from birth, and cured the disease called leprosy resulting in itchy patches on the skin. Only God could make such things.
Fakhr-ur-din Razi - Could it be asserted that when there is no evidence for the existence of something it must be nonexistent? If you say that absence of evidence proves non-existence of the thing whose existence would otherwise be inferred from the evidence, it will mean to say that the Creator of the universe did not exist before creating the universe, that is, in the eternal past. And this inference, in its turn, is quite wrong. For the universe [all creatures] is an evidence for the existence of the Creator.
If you say that absence of evidence does not necessarily mean nonexistence of the thing whose existence were to be inferred from the evidence, you will have accepted the existence of the Creator in eternity, when creatures did not exist yet. On the other hand, if you say that God entered Isa 'alaihis-salam' in eternity, when he was nonexistent, you will need evidence to prove it. Otherwise, you will have accepted it without evidence. For Isa 'alaihis-salam' was created afterwards. His nonexistence in eternity shows nonexistence of evidence. Since you believe without evidence that God entered Isa 'alaihis-salam', how do you know He did not enter me, you, animals, plants, stones? Why don't you believe without evidence that He entered all these things?
The priest - It is obvious that God entered Isa 'alaihis-salam' and He did not enter you, me, or other beings. You, I, or other beings did not display such wonders. We infer from this that He entered him, and not us or other beings.
Fakhr-ud-din Razi - You assert that Isa's 'alaihis-salam' displaying miracles is an evidence for God's having entered him. Why do you say that absence of evidence, that is, not displaying miracles, shows that God should not have entered. You cannot say that God will not enter you, me, or other creatures because we do not have wonders or miracles. For we have already proved that absence of evidence does not necessarily mean that something does not exist. Accordingly, God's entering something does not have to do with the appearing of wonders and miracles. Then, you will have to believe also that God has entered me, you, cats, dogs, mice. Now, could a religious system which leads to believing that God has entered these humble creatures ever be a true religion?
It is more difficult to make a viper or a serpent from a rod than it is to resuscitate a dead person. For a rod and a serpent are in no way similar. You believe that Musa 'alaihis-salam' transformed the rod into a viper and yet do not call him 'God' or 'Son of God.' Why do you call Isa 'alaihis-salam' 'God' or ascribe divinity to him?
Unable to find an answer to this argumentation of mine, the priest had to remain silent. This chapter has been translated from the (Turkish) book (Se'adet-i Ebediyye). O priest! We wish that you explain the belief systems of these two religions to philosophers who do not belong to either religion or to other wise and reasonable people, ask them which of these two religions they find logical, factual and beautiful, and be true to your advice, "One should compare the two religions, and then accept the one which is beautiful," which you suggest in your book (Ghada-ul-mulahazat).
Allahu ta'ala, alone, will grant guidance and assistance.
In order to mislead Muslims and Christianize them, priests wrote many books. The Islamic 'Ulama wrote answers to the lies in these books, and thus protected Muslims from falling into the pit of Christianity. One of these answers is the Turkish book (Izah-ul-Maram), which was written by Abdullah Abdi bin Destan Mustafa 'rahmatullahi alaihima' and was published in Istanbul in 1288 [A.D. 1871]. He was from Manastir (Bitolj), and passed away in 1303 [A.D. 1896].
Thanks for the explanation, skillganon. Again, such random quotes have been refuted numerous times.
There are numerous scientific errors, that is just one
I am not trying to influence your beliefs. However, the Bible is very ambiguous in describing Jesus's relation to God.
He is a prophet of God. Nothing more.
4-Christ-Alone said:
There are numerous scientific errors, that is just one
4-Christ-Alone said:
I am not trying to influence your beliefs. However, the Bible is very ambiguous in describing Jesus's relation to God.
4-Christ-Alone said:
He is a prophet of God. Nothing more.
4-Christ-Alone
Senior Member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 5
I dare you.
good night
good night