50,000 Errors in the Bible

Cyril's statement:
I am sorry I did not provide the verses because I assumed that most Muslims know the Quran. The verses about the heart are in different places, and already to be found in Baqara. Here some of them:

2:7) God has sealed their hearts and their ears, and on their eyes is a veil...

7:179) We have made for hell a great number of jinns and men. They have hearts with which they do not understand, they have eyes with which they do not see, and they have ears with which they do not hear...

22:46) Haven't... they hearts to understand or ears to hear? ...

My response: From the dictionary we find that the meaning of heart is (1) the organ that maintains the flow of blood (2)the seat of intellect etc.

 If we study the Quranic verses above we will find that heart as the seat of intellect is the most suitable for the verses above. If we insert heart as an organ that maintain the flow of blood into the Quranic verses we will find that it will not fit the meaning of the verses!

------------------------------------------------------------ ------

Your quote:"Why didn't apes develop into intelligent creatures?:"

Cyril's statement: because God decided it like that. If you are not satisfied with God's work, this forum is not the place to settle your questioning him.

My response: I am not questioning God for I believe that Eve and Adam are human beings. I am questioning you for you have claimed that the ancestors of man were apes! You  have apes as your ancestors. I am lucky to have Eve and Adam who were human beings as my ancestors. You are degrading them by calling them apes!

_______________________________________________________
Cyril's statement: I am not a scientist so I cannot provide you with the proofs you are asking for. But I am not dumb and I have noticed that the theory of evolution is the only one taught in schools, that the creation story according to the Quran is not taught in schools, that new discoveries are always corroborating evolution and never the contrary. Which theory do you put forward instead of evolution? Every time I asked that question I got no answer. And tell me why the creation story according to the Quran is not taught in universities and schools.

I cannot provide you with the proofs that you require, except the proof that nearly every educated person on earth believes in it.

My response: I am not against the theory of evolution. I am against the statement of Charles Darwin who says that apes are the ancestors of man. It is an irony that he and the scientists who support him have no proofs to support their claim!  What are your proofs to support them?

------------------------------------------------------------ -----

Cyril's statement: Can you provide me the proofs that Adam and Eve existed, in which place on earth and at which time?

My response: Adam and Eve existed because we are their descendants! Please read Quran Chapter 2:30-39 and Chapter 7:11-25

Can you provide me the proofs that Moses had splitted the Red Sea into two parts... which part of the sea and at which time?Do you know the exact spot where Moses had beaten the sea? Do you have any digital pictures showing Moses splitting the sea?   As a Muslim I believe that Moses was a prophet of Allah and he had splitted the Red Sea into two parts to save the Israelites!

------------------------------------------------------------ ---
Cyril's statement: I asked you also to tell me the relevant biological differences between an ape and a human being if you find any.

My response: You did not ask me to tell you about the biological differences! I quote your own word 'Could you tell me what is the physical difference between an ape and a man that could show that one of them could not be descended from the other, or better from a common ancestor? '

 My answer: Apes have 24 pairs of chromosomes but we have 23 pairs of chromosomes so man and ape are different creatures! Apes need to have 23 pairs of chromosones to become a man! And you Cyril need to add a pair of chromosones to yourself if you wish to become an ape! 

Hey, George, thanks for all that information about the reliability of the New Testament manuscripts.  I'm going to share that with my Bible Study class.  Great info.  I've always been amazed when people question the authenticity of the New Testament writings - there's a good book to read on the subject by F.  Bruce.  Also, I used this site as a study guide:

http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm

George, from you to Salman:

"The Christian New Testament is exceptional in its reliability and trustworthiness and survival down through history.  It is unrivaled in manuscript authority.  There is more documentary evidence for the reliability of the New Testament than for any other book from the ancient world!!"

The Bhagvad and Geeta of the Hindus are there for 5,000 years and there hasn't been a single change. How would you rate the 3,000 year-old Jewish Bible or the Jewish Scriptures from whom the Christians got an Old Testament Old Testament? Would you consider that Book more reliable than the New Testament?  

From you, George: "There are some variant readings, the vast majority of which are strictly grammatical." What ado you think about the variants expressed by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in reporting various events?  

The doctrine is unaffected because it was written by others specifically to teach something on which there is no word or teaching of Jesus available.

For example, the triune or tri-unity was never taught by Jesus, the great teacher, the greatest Rabbi but that was added on by the gospel writers. The accounts of arrest differ and the accounts of killing and finding the empty tomb also differ.

Do you understand now?

bmzsp wrote: George, from you to Salman: "The Christian New Testament is exceptional in its reliability and trustworthiness and survival down through history.  It is unrivaled in manuscript authority.  There is more documentary evidence for the reliability of the New Testament than for any other book from the ancient world!!" The Bhagvad and Geeta of the Hindus are there for 5,000 years and there hasn't been a single change. How would you rate the 3,000 year-old Jewish Bible or the Jewish Scriptures from whom the Christians got an Old Testament Old Testament? Would you consider that Book more reliable than the New Testament?   From you, George: "There are some variant readings, the vast majority of which are strictly grammatical." What ado you think about the variants expressed by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in reporting various events?     The doctrine is unaffected because it was written by others specifically to teach something on which there is no word or teaching of Jesus available.   For example, the triune or tri-unity was never taught by Jesus, the great teacher, the greatest Rabbi but that was added on by the gospel writers. The accounts of arrest differ and the accounts of killing and finding the empty tomb also differ.   Do you understand now?

How do explain that the great teacher, the greatest Rabbi, taught that there was a Father, He was the Son, and that there is the Holy Spirit of God?

Peace