Category Archives: Bible

How To Treat Your Wife - From the Bible

How To Treat Your Wife – From the Bible

1. Don’t shout at your
wife when you are
talking. It really
hurts her.
Proverbs 15:1

2. Do not speak evil
of her to anyone.
Your wife will become
who you call her.
Gen. 2:19

3. Do not share her love
or affection with another
woman.
It is called Adultery.
Matt. 5:28

4. Never compare your
wife to another woman.
If the other woman was
good for you, God would
have given her to you.
2 Cor. 10:12

5. Be gentle and
accommodating. She
has sacrificed so much
to be with you.
It hurts her deeply
when you are hash
and irritating.
Be tender.
Eph. 4:2

6. Hide nothing from her.
You are now one and
she’s your helpmate.
Let there be no secret
you are keeping
from her.
Gen. 2:25

7. Do not make negative
comment about her
body. She risked her
life and beauty to carry
your babies. She is a
living soul not just
flesh and blood.
Proverbs 18:22

8. Do not let her body
determine her worth.
Cherish and appreciate
her even till old age.
Eph. 5:29

9. Never shout at her
in the public and in
private. If you have
an issue to sort with
her, do it in the privacy
of your room.
Matt. 1:19

10. Thank and appreciate
her for taking good
care of you, the kids
and the house. It is
a great sacrifice she
is making.
1 Thesso. 5:18

11. All women cannot
cook the same way;
appreciate your
wife’s food.
It is not easy to cook
three meals a day,
365 days a year
for several years.
Pro. 31:14

12. Never place your
siblings before her.
She is your wife.
She is one with you.
She must come
before your family.
Gen. 2:24

13. Invest seriously in
her spiritual growth.
Buy books, tapes and
any material that will
edify her & strengthen
her walk with God.
That’s the best thing
you can do for her.
Eph. 5:26

14. Spend time with her
to do Bible study
and pray.
James 5:16

15. Make time to play
with her and enjoy
her company.
Remember when you
are dead, she’s gonna
be by your grave but
your friends may be
too busy to attend
your funeral.
Ecc. 9:9

16. Never use money
to manipulate or
control her. All your
money belongs to
her. She is a joint heir
with you of the
grace of God.
1 Pet. 3:7

17. Do not expose her
weakness. You will be
exposing yourself too.
Be a shield around her.
Eph. 5:30

18. Honour her parents
and be kind to her
siblings.
. 8:2

19. Never cease to tell
her how much you
love her all the days
of her life. Women
are never tired of
hearing that.
Eph. 5:25

20. Grow to be like Jesus.
That’s the only way
you can be a good
and godly husband.
Rom. 8:29

Genesis 11-12 - Where was Abraham's Ur

Genesis 11-12 – Where was Abraham’s Ur

Genesis 11-12 – Where was Abraham’s Ur?

Abraham was from the city of Ur according to Genesis 11:31. The problem is that there are several places called Ur. It is identified as “Ur of the Chaldeans.” The problem with “Chaldeans” is that it is a late word used in the Neo-Babylonian times. It is either anachronistic, or this part of Genesis was written after the Exile.

There is no debate over where Haran is located, 10 miles north of the Syrian border in Turkey along the Balikh River, a tributary of the Euphrates River. Haran is an important Hurrian center, mentioned in the Nuzi tablets. The moon god, Sin was worshiped here. If Ur were located in Southern Iraq, why would Abraham travel 60 miles way out of his way to go to Haran?

There are two cities not far from Haran; Ura and Urfa. Local tradition says that Abraham was born in Urfa. Northern Ur is mentioned in tablets at Ugarit, Nuzi, and Ebla, which refers to Ur, URA, and Urau (See BAR January 2000, page 16).

The names of several of Abraham’s relatives like Peleg, Serug, Nahor and Terah, appear as names of cities in the region of Haran (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, page 373). Abraham sent his servant back to the region of Haran to find a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24:10).

After working for Laban, Jacob fled across the Euphrates River back to Canaan (Genesis 31:21). If Ur were in Southern Mesopotamia, then Jacob would not need to cross the Euphrates. Laban is said to live in Paddan-Aram, which is in the region of Haran (Genesis 28:5-7), which seems to be the same area as Aram-Naharaim, Abraham’s homeland (Genesis 24:10).

All this evidence taken together seems to indicate that the Ur of Abraham was in the same region as Haran in Northern Mesopotamia, and not the famous Ur in Southern Mesopotamia.

Greek Word for Bible

Greek Word for Bible

It might seem strange that the word “Bible” is not in the Bible but the inference of the Bible is there when the words “Scripture,” “The Word of the Lord” or “Thus says the Lord” occur and that is over one thousand times. By this enormous amount of references to Scripture as the Word of God, we know that all Scripture is God-breathed (2 Tim3:16) and its source is from the Spirit of God (2 Pet 1:21). The English word “Bible” is from the Greek word “Byblos” and the Latin “biblia” and both mean “books.” These “books” are a collection of writings constituting the sacred text of Scripture. These books are collectively referred to as the Bible and include the Book of Genesis all the way to the Book of Revelation. These books of the Bible are what God calls “the Word of God” or “Scripture” and include “Thus says the Lord.”

Do rabbits chew their cud

Do rabbits chew their cud

The Bible beats the skeptics (again)

by Jonathan Sarfati

The book of Leviticus contains a number of food laws that the ancient Israelites were to obey. Modern medicine has shown that many of them had very good health benefits for people in that time and place. As the Law of Moses was our tutor to lead people to Christ (Galatians 3:24), many of the individual commands are no longer applicable after Christ’s death for our sins and His bodily resurrection from the dead. In particular, the Lord Jesus and His Apostles declared that all foods are now ‘clean’ (Mark 7:18″19, Acts 10:10″15, Colossians 2:16).

Some of the food laws have been attacked by sceptics as ‘proof’ that the Bible makes mistakes, meaning it could not be God’s written word. For example, Leviticus 11:3″6 says:

‘Whatever divides the hoof, and is cloven-footed, chewing the cud, among the animals, that you shall eat.
‘Only, you shall not eat these of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: the camel, for he chews the cud but does not divide the hoof; he is unclean to you.
‘And the rock badger, because he chews the cud, but does not divide the hoof; he is unclean to you.
‘And the hare, because he chews the cud but does not divide the hoof; he is unclean to you.’

We showed a photo of the camel’s hoof in Creation 19(4):29, 1997, proving that the Leviticus 11:4 assertion was right that the camel did not completely ‘divide the hoof’, despite what some sceptics claim. Other sceptics have claimed that the coney (KJV; Hebrew שָּׁפָ֗ן shāphān, = hyrax, rock badger) and hare (Hebrew אַרְנֶ֗’ֶת ’arnebet = hare/rabbit) don’t chew the cud.

In modern English, animals that ‘chew the cud’ are called ruminants. They hardly chew their food when first eaten, but swallow it into a special stomach where the food is partially digested. Then it is regurgitated, chewed again, and swallowed into a different stomach. Animals which do this include cows, sheep and goats, and they all have four stomachs.1 Rock badgers and rabbits are not ruminants in this modern sense.
It is not an error of Scripture that ‘chewing the cud’ now has a more restrictive meaning than it did in Moses’ day.

However, the Hebrew phrase for ‘chew the cud’ simply means ‘raising up what has been swallowed’. Coneys and rabbits go through such similar motions to ruminants that Linnaeus, the father of modern classification (and a creationist), at first classified them as ruminants.

Also, rabbits and hares practise refection, which is essentially the same principle as rumination, and does indeed ‘raise up what has been swallowed’. The food goes right through the rabbit and is passed out as a special type of dropping. These are re-eaten, and can now nourish the rabbit as they have already been partly digested.

In particular, another name for this process is called cecotrophy, because the material is taken in a pouch at the beginning of the large intestine called the cecum or ‘blind gut’ (Latin caecus = blind). In the cecum, a process called ‘hindgut fermentation’ occurs, where bacteria help digest the food by breaking down cellulose into simple sugars. Then the special dropping, called a cecotrope, is expelled and re-eaten. This cecotrope is very different from normal feces, thus cecotrophy is very different from other forms of coprophagy (eating dung) practised by animals such as pigs and dogs.

It is not an error of Scripture that ‘chewing the cud’ now has a more restrictive meaning than it did in Moses’ day. Indeed, rabbits and hares do ‘chew the cud’ in an even more specific sense. Once again, the Bible is right and the sceptics are wrong.

God, through Moses, was giving instructions that any Israelite could follow. It is inconceivable that someone familiar with Middle-Eastern animal life would make an easily corrected mistake about rabbits, and also inconceivable that the Israelites would have accepted a book as Scripture if it were contrary to observation, which it is not.
Addendum

After my article (above) was published in Creation magazine, I came across an article on the Internet with more detail than was possible in a family magazine. This article vindicates what I claimed, and backs it up with detailed lexical analysis. The relevant section is below:

13. Rabbits do not chew their cud

LEV 11:6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

[An obscure bibliosceptic called Meritt claims:]

Gerāh [‘ֵרָ”֙], the term which appears in the MT means (chewed) cud, and also perhaps grain, or berry (also a 20th of a sheckel, but I think that we can agree that that is irrelevant here). It does not mean dung, and there is a perfectly adequate Hebrew word for that, which could have been used. Furthermore, the phrase translated ‘chew the cud’ in the KJV is more exactly ‘bring up the cud’. Rabbits do not bring up anything; they let it go all the way through, then eat it again. The description given in Leviticus is inaccurate, and that’s that. Rabbits do eat their own dung; they do not bring anything up and chew on it.

[Response by J.P. Holding:]

‘MT’ is the Masoretic text, which is a late Hebrew transmission of the OT.

Meritt is apparently quite proud of himself here, having gone”for the one and only time”to the original Hebrew for answers. (Guess translation issues are important after all.) Too bad he didn’t dig a little further.

Two issues are at hand: the definition of ‘cud’ and that of ‘chewing’. Let’s take a close look at the Hebrew version of both. Cuds first, chewies afterwards.

First, gerah is indeed the word used here, and”this is important”it is used nowhere in the Old Testament besides these verses in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. We have only this context to help us decide what it means in terms of the Mosaic law.
Two issues are at hand: the definition of ‘cud’ and that of ‘chewing’.

Second, the process rabbits go through is called refection, and it is not just ‘dung’ that the rabbits are eating, which is probably why the Hebrew word for ‘dung’ was not used here. Indeed, contrary to Meritt’s assertion, that the word gerah also means 1/20th of a shekel actually gives us a hint here! 1/20th of a shekel is of little worth, but it does have worth. Where the word for ‘dung’ is used in the Bible, it implies something defiled, unclean, or useless. But in lapine terms, ‘dung’ is not useless: It contains pellets of partially digested food, which rabbits chew on (along with the waste material”UGH!) in order to give their stomachs another go at getting the nutrients out. (It’s an efficient way of getting more vitamins and nutrients, we’re told, but I think I’ll stick with my Flintstones chewables, thank you very much.) The pellets have some minute value, much as 1/20th of a shekel has some value.

Contrast this with what cows and some other animals do, rumination, which is what we moderns call ‘chewing the cud’. They regurgitate partially digested food in little clumps called cuds, and chew it a little more after while mixing it with saliva. (This also, presumably, helps them get the most out of their food, but I’m not trying it.)

So, let’s see … partially digested food. Partially digested food. Seems to be a common element here. Could it be that the Hebrew word simply refers to any partially digested food? Could it be that the process is not the issue, just the object?

Our other key word provides us with some hints. Meritt is partially correct when he says that the phrase translated ‘chew the cud’ in the KJV is more exactly ‘bring up the cud’. (The full phrase is ‘maketh the cud to come up’.) By leaving it at that, he apparently wishes for us to believe that ‘bring up’ means, in an exclusive sense, regurgitation. Whoooooa, horsey. Back up. Let’s check those hooves for Hebrew words! The word here is עָלָ” ‘alah, and it is found in some grammatical form on literally (well, almost literally) every page of the OT! This is because it is a word that encompasses many concepts other than ‘bring up’. It also can mean ascend up, carry up, cast up, fetch up, get up, recover, restore, take up, and much more. It is a catch-all verb form describing the moving of something to another place. (‘maketh the gerah to ‘alah’)

Now in the verses in question, ‘alah is used as a participle. Let’s look at the other verses where it is used this way (NIV only implies some of these phrases; where in parentheses, the phrase is in the original, sometimes in the KJV):

Joshua 24:17 It was the Lord our God himself who brought us and our fathers up out of Egypt. …
Isaiah 8:7 … therefore the Lord is about to bring (up) the burnt offering …
Nahum 3:3 Charging cavalry, flashing swords (lifted up), and glittering spears!
Isaiah 8:7 … therefore the Lord is about to bring (up) against them the mighty floodwaters of the River …
2 Chronicles 24:14 When they had finished, they brought (up) the rest of the money …
Psalm 135:7 He makes clouds rise (up) from the ends of the earth …
2 Samuel 6:15 … while he and the entire house of Israel brought up the ark of the Lord with shouts and the sound of trumpets. (Similar quote, 1 Chronicles 15:28)

OUCH! That last one would hurt if the word meant regurgitation. No wonder people were shouting …

So what have we learned? The Hebrew word in question is NOT specific to the process of regurgitation; it is a phrase of general movement. And related to the specific issue at hand, the rabbit is an animal that does ‘maketh’ the previously digested material to ‘come up’ out of the body (though in a different way than a ruminant does”as Meritt says, with rabbits, it comes all the way through; but again, the word is not specific for regurgitation!) and thereafter does chew ‘predigested material’! The mistake is in our applying of the scientific terms of rumination to something that does not require it.

Does The Bible Need Defending

Does The Bible Need Defending

Sometimes when someone witnesses to an unbeliever by appealing to arguments and evidence that point to the truth of Christianity, some believers will tell the Christian that The Bible does not need them to defend it. “The Truth does not need to be defended. It is like a lion. All you need to do is let it out of its cage” they will say. A Lion can defend itself. It is ferocious; it has sharp, powerful jaws and razor-sharp claws. Its roar strikes fear into its prey. Its roar carries authority. Why would you need to defend such an animal? You don’t. So these Christians will say that The Bible is the same way. This is supposed to be an argument that Christian Apologetics is a pointless exercise.

Does The Bible Need Defending_

There are several problems with this argument.

Regardless of whether scripture actually needs defending, scripture commands us to defend it nevertheless.

The Bible commands us to do apologetics. 1 Peter 3:15 says “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be ready to give a defence to anyone who asks for the reason for the hope that you have, yet do this with gentleness and respect”. This verse of The Bible is clear and unequivocal. Always be prepared to defend your faith whenever anyone asks you to give the reasons for why you have placed your hope in Jesus Christ. So even if we concede the premise that the Christian faith doesn’t need to be defended, we are still commanded to defend it. Ignoring this command would, therefore, be sinful.

The Apostle Paul said in his second letter to the church in Corinth “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5). This is what apologetics is all about. We need to “demolish arguments” like the problem of evil & suffering, the hiddenness of God, supposed contradictions people think they have found in scripture, or simply the claim “There is no evidence for God’s existence.” These are arguments that set “itself up against the knowledge of God” that we need to “demolish.” If we do, then we
might be able to “take every thought captive and make it obedient to Christ.”

In Philippians 1:7 Paul speaks of his mission as “defending and confirming the gospel.” Then he says in Philippians 1:16, “I am put here for the defense of the gospel.” This implies that God placed Paul on this planet to be a defender of the Christian faith, which he was. When you read Acts 17, you see that when Paul and his companions had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue (Acts 17:1), and then it says that as was his custom, he “reasoned with them from the Scriptures …” (verse 2), “explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead.” (verse 3) and then after he explained and proved to the Jews that the Messiah had to suffer and rise, “Some of the Jews were persuaded and joined Paul and
Silas, as did a large number of God-fearing Greeks and quite a few prominent women.” This is important because often you will hear some Christians say that no one comes to faith through arguments. But we have an example of some of the people coming to faith after hearing Paul’s arguments. Acts 17:4 refutes that notion.

Then several verses later, Paul was in Athens witnessing to the Athenians. And Acts 17:17 says “he reasoned in the synagogue with both Jews and God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there.” Other translations say he “disputed” with them, or he “debated” them. Now, he was able to reason from the scriptures with the Jews, but he couldn’t do that with the Athenians. Why? Because the Athenians didn’t accept the Jewish
scriptures as divinely inspired. So he appealed to natural revelation instead (see Acts 17:22-31).

Jude 3 says, “Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.” The people Jude addressed had been assaulted by false teachers, and he needed to encourage them to protect (literally agonize for) the faith as it had been revealed through Christ. Jude makes a significant statement about our attitude in verse 22, which we “have mercy on some, who are doubting.”

So, does The Bible need defending? I think the answer to the question is
irrelevant. It doesn’t matter whether God, or The Bible, or Christianity needs defending. The Bible commands us to defend it.

Rational People Naturally Desire Reasons Before They Believe Something. God created humans to reason as part of his image (Genesis 1:26-27, Genesis 9:6). It is by reasoning that humans are distinguished from “brute beasts” (Jude 10). God calls upon his people to use reason (see Isaiah 1:18) to discern truth from error (1 John 4:6) and right from wrong (Hebrews 5:14). The primary standard of rationality is that it should cough up an epistemological warrant for belief.

As Norman Geisler put it in his article “The Need For Apologetics.”

“People rightly refuse to believe without evidence. Since God created humans as rational beings, he expects them to live rationally, to look before they leap. This does not mean there is no room for faith. But God wants us to take a step of faith in the light of the evidence, rather than to leap in the dark. Evidence of truth should precede faith. No rational person steps into an elevator without some reason to believe it will hold him up. No reasonable person gets on an airplane that is missing part of one wing and smells of smoke in the cabin.
People deal in two dimensions of belief: belief that and belief in. Belief that gives the evidence and rational basis for confidence needed to establish belief in. Once belief that is established, one can place faith in it. Thus, the rational person wants evidence that God exists before he places his faith in God. Rational unbelievers want evidence that Jesus is the Son of God before they place their trust in him.” ” Norman Geisler (emphasis in original) So, I don’t think it’s sufficient to just give an unbeliever a Bible and walk away and “let the truth defend itself.” For one reason, there are many holy books out there claiming to be “the truth.” The rational unbeliever is going to want you to give some reasons for him to think that The Bible should be believed instead of, say, The Koran, or the Hindu scriptures, or the Buddhist scriptures. He may ask you why you disbelieve in all of the other gods of all of the other religions but not the God of The Bible. That’s not too much to ask. And fortunately, we Christians can meet that challenge if we do our homework. If you simply quote The Bible, you’ll rightly be accused of circular reasoning. You Can Make The Same Argument About Preaching The Gospel

If The Bible can defend itself, why can’t it preach itself? Why can’t we just
leave it up to the non-Christian to go to their local bookstore or library,
purchase a Bible, read it, and just hope for the best? Why can’t we do that?
Well, because, like defending the gospel, scripture calls us to “Make disciples
of all nations” (Matthew 28:19). We’re called to preach the gospel to a dark and dying world. We’re called to spread the good news. Does God need us to preach the gospel for Him? No. Probably not. But we’re called to do it anyway. And we’re called to do Christian Apologetics also (see 1 Peter 3:15).

In Conclusion

The Bible, God, Christianity may not need defending. But that’s irrelevant because God commands us to “Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks for a reason for the hope that you have,” (1 Peter 3:15). We are called to defend our faith against the attacks of unbelievers. When someone asks us why we believe what we believe, scripture commands us to give them reasons. Moreover, people need evidence to determine whether The Bible even is the word of God. How
do we know the Bible is God’s revelation to us, as opposed to the Qur’an or the Book of Mormon? One must appeal to evidence to determine this. No Christian would accept a Muslim’s statement that, “the Qur’an is alive and powerful and sharper than a two-edged sword.” We would demand evidence that the Qu’ran is God’s Word. As Norman Geisler put it in his article “Why We Need Apologetics”; the analogy of a lion is misleading. The only reason a lion’s roar has authority is that we have good evidence of what a lion can do. But if you were just born yesterday or came from another planet, would you be fearful of this big lion?
Probably not. You might try to go pet it and have your alien arm ripped off.

In addition to all of this, you could make a parallel argument about evangelism in general. Why did Billy Graham hold all of those crusades? Why did he travel all around the world preaching to people? Why didn’t he just leave it up to the non-believer to go to their local bookstores, buy a Bible, read it, and hope for the best? If The Bible can defend itself, why can’t the gospel preach itself?  I’ll end this blog post with a quote from John Calvin.
“Even a dog barks when its master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God’s truth is attacked and yet would remain silent.”

Like Calvin, I cannot help but bark when I see skeptics attack Christianity.

Everyone a sinner

Everyone a sinner

1 John 1:8
If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us

Ecclesiastes 7:20
Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.

Isaiah 64:6
We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away

Bible Corruption

Bible Corruption

The Dead Sea Scrolls have all of the books of the OLD Testament except for Esther and Nehemiah and we also know that the Bible was not corrupted when Mohammad was around.

Because

The Quran affirms that the Bible is the word of God.

Yes. You read that correctly. When one begins to examine the Quranic narrative, he or she will quickly come to discover that the Quran affirms the bible’s divine inspiration and inerrancy. Many Muslims, however, assert that such passages are referring to the “REAL” bible.

In other words, prior to its supposed corruption. Yet when we read the following verses, it becomes blatantly clear that “Allah” and his prophet considered the bible to be uncorrupted and inspired DURING THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD:

Surah 5:43: “But why do they come to thee for decision, WHEN THEY HAVE (THEIR OWN) TORAH BEFORE THEM? THEREIN IS THE (PLAIN) COMMAND OF ALLAH; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith.

Surah 5:46-47: “And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, CONFIRMING THE TORAH THAT CAME BEFORE HIM: We sent him the Gospel: THEREIN IS GUIDANCE AND LIGHT, and confirmation of the torah that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. LET THE PEOPLE OF THE GOSPEL JUDGE BY WHAT ALLAH HATH REVEALED THEREIN. IF ANY DO FAIL TO JUDGE BY (THE LIGHT OF) WHAT ALLAH HATH REVEALED, THEY ARE (NO BETTER THAN) THOSE WHO REBEL.”

Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38 (Kitab al Hudud, i.e. Prescribed Punishments), Number 4434: Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar: A group of Jews came and invited the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) to Quff. So he visited them in their school.They said: AbulQasim, one of our men has committed fornication with a woman; so pronounce judgment upon them. They placed a cushion for the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) who sat on it and said: Bring the Torah. It was then brought. HE THEN WITHDREW THE CUSHION FROM BENEATH HIM AND PLACED THE TORAH ON IT SAYING: I BELIEVED IN THEE AND IN HIM WHO REVEALED THEE.

Here are some things to note:

In surah 5:43, the Jews HAVE the Torah (Present tense). THEREIN IS Allah’s command.
In surah 5:46-47 it writes THEREIN IS GUIDANCE. Furthermore, Allah instructs us to JUDGE (Present tense) by the gospel.
Muhammad considered the Torah that existed in HIS time to be the word of God.

Now in light of the Islamic evidence, a segment of the Muslim community have conjured up a theory that the bible was corrupted AFTER Muhammad’s time. This is simply impossible, seeing as we have manuscripts of the bible which date back prior to and during Muhammad’s time.

In other words, we know exactly what the bible said during the commencement and launch of the Islamic religion:

The Chester Beatty Papyrus II: AD 100.
The John Rylands Manuscript: AD 130.
The Codex Vaticanus: AD 325- 350.
The Codex Sinaiticus: AD 375-400.
The Codex Washingtonianus: AD 450.

Since we know the Bible was not corrupted by referring to these ancient documents and papyri, we see that Islam is proven to be locked into a grave dilemma. If the bible was corrupted, then the Quran is false because it affirms its inerrancy and inspiration. But if the bible was NOT corrupted, the Quran STILL remains false because it blatantly contradicts the biblical narrative on virtually every significant point.

Bible - What Manuscripts, Translation, And Version Mean

Bible – What Manuscripts, Translation, And Version Mean

1. Manuscript.

Manuscript [a.]: Writing, as opposed to print; as, the book exists only in manuscript.Manuscript [a.]: Written with or by the hand; not printed; as, a manuscript volume.

2. Translation

Translation [n.]: The act of rendering into another language; interpretation; as, the translation of idioms is difficult.Translation [n.]: That which is obtained by translating something a version; as, a translation of the Scriptures.

3. Version

Authorized Version; King James Version; King James Bible: an English translation of the Bible published in 1611
Douay Bible; Douay Version; Douay-Rheims Bible; Douay-Rheims Version; Rheims-Douay Bible; Rheims-Douay Version: an English translation of the Vulgate by Roman Catholic scholars

THE BIBLE IS NOT CORRUPTED.

Manuscript Evidence
5,686 Greek manuscripts, some from within one generation of the originals
10,000 copies of Latin Vulgate
9,300 copies in other languages: Syriac (350), Coptic (100+), Armenian (2,587), Ethiopic (2,000), Arabic (75), others.
Complete copies of the Bible, from AD300-350, fully 300 years prior to Muhammad and the Qur’an
– – Codex Siniaticus
– – Codex Alexandrinus
– – Codex Vaticanus
Dead Sea scrolls: Discovered in 1947 by Bedouin goat herders; intact copies of most OT books, dated circa 150BC. Established credibility and accuracy of manuscript copying: matched with >99.5% accuracy next oldest extant mss, Masoretic text used for KJV translation and dated circa 900AD. In other words, over a span of >1,000 years of copying, the Bible was copied with remarkable accuracy! God’s word has been preserved!
Quotations of Early Church Fathers
36,289 Quotations from all 27 books of the NT, able to reproduce the entire NT except 11 verses!
Clement of Alexandria(150 212AD) = 2,406 quotes
Tertullian (160 220AD) = 7,258 quotes
Justin Martyr = 330 quotes
Irenaeus = 1,819 quotes
Origen = 17,922 quotes
Hippolytus = 1,378 quotes
Eusebius = 5,176 quotes
MISTRANSLATION, DOESN’T EFFECT THE MANUSCRIPT, DIFFERENT TRANSLATION GIVES BETTER UNDERSTANDING, THAT’S WHY WE DON’T HAVE TAFFSIR, OTHER BOOKS CANNOT BE USE IN EXPLAINING GOD’S BOOK, GOD BOOK PROVE OTHER BOOKS TO BE TRUE, NOT OTHER BOOKS CONFIRMING GOD’S BOOK.

The Claim that the Bible is Corrupt because of Numerical Discrepancies

The Claim that the Bible is Corrupt because of Numerical Discrepancies

There are some Muslims who attempt to discredit the Bible on the basis of contradiction of numbers. They are quick to argue that if the Holy Bible is truly God’s Word, then it would contain no numerical errors because God is perfect. It is true: God is perfect. However, man is not. And though it was God who revealed the Scriptures in perfect fashion, it was the hand of man that copied the manuscripts from one generation to the next. And since man is imperfect, there are bound to be mistakes in his work. We call these mistakes copyist errors because they most likely were made during the laborious and tedious task of duplicating the scriptures for wider distribution. An example of this type of error are the following verses taken from the King James version of the Bible:

And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen.
II Samuel 8:4
And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen.
I Chronicles 18:4

It is clear that the first verse speaks of 700 horsemen, and the other 7000 horsemen — a difference of 6300. Such errors in the Old Testament can be found in other passages and are attributed to the fact that many of the Hebrew characters of numbers closely resembled one another. Thus it was easy to mistake one number for another during the process of copying. It was also easy to misplace a zero that could account for the difference between 7000 and 700. These errors are believed to have been nonexistent in the original scriptures. It is also important to point out to the Muslim that such errors do not affect the great doctrinal teachings of the scriptures. For example, a similar contradiction of numbers can be found in the Qur’an. Notice the following verses:

… in the end will (all affairs) go up to Him (God) on a Day, the space whereof will be (as) a thousand years of your reckoning.
Surat-us Sajda (32):5
The angels and the Spirit ascend unto Him (God) in a Day, the measure whereof is (as) fifty thousand years. Surat-ul Ma’arij (70):4

It appears that one verse speaks of a Day with God equivalent to one thousand years, whereas the other verse equates a Day to fifty thousand years. Yet, in no way does this detract from the Qur’anic teaching that God is merciful and compassionate, and ready to forgive at all times. In like manner, the difference of 6300 horsemen does not detract from the Biblical teaching that God has revealed His mercy and compassion through Jesus the Messiah in whom there is redemption and forgiveness of sins!

Blinded To See The Truth

Blinded To See The Truth

John 12:40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”