Need explanations regarding some of Bible verses

DivinePonytail

Debmey, not all members have been so long here like you do so dont expect everyone to knows you past posts.
Besides you threw your challenge towards gunblade (and he agree) to answer one for one question regarding bible & quran. If you cant answer gunblade's question i advice you to stay away from this thread.

kompia23

my post #33 shows just one of the seems-like-contradictions which I've stumbled upon. How come they got the guts to re-write the bible back and altering the verse in it?

When translating, some may not realised that they altered the number because they thought the copier have made mistake on the number. So, they change it in the sense thinking that it's the copier wrong. But the translator have no harm thought in doing so. Same like us, sometimes we tend to change things that we thought is right but in fact it by itself is actually correct. That is my opinion / prospective about the whole thing, but we must understand is that this is only a tiny err on behalf of translator which did not affect anything on the historical event that happened at that time, which is the King Ahaziah reigned.  

I still use NIV bible as reference because it contains the same content as in other versions.

Focusing on details is good but don't let it lost you on the bigger picture.

Regards.

[ Last edited by  kompia23 at 3-2-2009 03:06 PM ]

gunblade712

I agree when you say that we lose the bigger picture of it.

But how can they change 'em, thinking that the copier is wrong? I've heard that the original manuscript is lost, hence they relied on the copy's copy of the original.

I've also read about how the writings on the copy's copy manuscript got smudged out.

Kompia, although that we shouldn't lose our focus on the bigger picture, it is stated there that the NIV changed the age of Azahiah in 2 Chronicles 2:22 to "22" in oppose to KJV's 2 Chronicles 2:22 which says Azahiah was "42". The difference is not only in the words used, but also the facts given.  

This is not the problem of translation, nor it is the problem of "choices of words".

kompia, an error, no matter how tiny it is, should NOT be present in the Word of God. If there IS a tiny error, it shows that either human hands have tampered with it, or it is not from God. Whichever it is, the authenticity of the book will be doubted.

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy. (Miraculous Quran;4:82)

Discrepancy:

kompia23

kompia, an error, no matter how tiny it is, should NOT be present in the Word of God. If there IS a tiny error, it shows that either human hands have tampered with it, or it is not from God. Whichever it is, the authenticity of the book will be doubted.

Well, you are right in saying that, but do remember the book we used is not the original book in the original language which is without errs. The books we have are translations of the best that the translators can provide in term to the actual words in the copies of the found copy of the original.

The message i would like to portrait is that despite such vast number of versions we have in bible translation, only few areas have been identified to have such errs. My question is why need to focus on this (maybe 0.01%) and not concentrate on the (99.99%) that is in argreement.

Anyway, the 0.01% is due to translation error.

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy. (Miraculous Quran;4:82)

Discrepany occurs when you found them in the original book not in the translation books. Also, not by comparing the one translation with another translation.

Regards.

gunblade712

Originally posted by kompia23 at 3-2-2009 04:48 PM

Well, you are right in saying that, but do remember the book we used isnot the original book in the original language which is without errs.The books we have are translations of the best that the translators canprovide in term to the actual words in the copies of the found copy ofthe original.

The message i would like to portrait is that despite such vast numberof versions we have in bible translation, only few areas have beenidentified to have such errs. My question is why need to focus on this(maybe 0.01%) and not concentrate on the (99.99%) that is in argreement.

Anyway, the 0.01% is due to translation error.

Kompia, most of the Christian websites that I've visited told me that most of the original text is lost. That is why they would have to rely the copy's copy rather than the original manuscript.

If the copy's copy of the manuscript is proven to have an error in it, why don't you threw them away as fabrications? Why would Christendom would have to make a council and decides which is a revelation and which is not?

And even after the councils, there are the one Bible that have 66 books, and the other have 73 books, am I right?

And later after that, an error STILL occurs (referring to KJV - NIV issues on Ahaziah's age in 2 Chronicles), which the NIV decided to change the number to 22 while the KJV retained the age of 42.

Like I say, kompia, this are not the problem of translations, both of 'em are giving us different facts, yet both of 'em says that this is in the book of Chronicles. If both came from the same source, how come the fact (not words, but fact) are different?

If you claim that a book is from Kalamullah, the word of God, then the book must be free from error, no matter how tiny it is, but this is the Muslim's belief on such issue. If you think that it is acceptable for the word of God to contain a minute error due to whatever reasons, then we are ok with that.

Discrepany occurs when youfound them in the original book not in the translation books. Also, notby comparing the one translation with another translation.

Regards.

Like I've stated above, the difference is not in the choices of words, but in the facts. If both came from the same original source, how come the outcome is different?

Someone must have tampered with either one or both of the books.

Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (Miraculous Quran;2:79)

Debmey

whenever there's a "differences" in the Quran's translation, we go back to the original language which is the Arabic language, debmey.

Same here, we have the original Textus Receptus, no different.

And the "difference" in the Quran's translations are just the difference in the choices of words the translator choose to used to translate an arabic word, NOT A DIFFERENCE IN THE FACTS GIVEN BY THE QURAN.

Same for the Bible. Aren't you a hypocrite then?

If you have a normal IQ and above you can see the difference here.

So if you question my IQ for asking the same questions you ask, there is something very wrong with your head isn't it?

I've given the example on how the difference of FACTS, NOT THE CHOICES OF WORDS, between two (or more) of the Bible's version.

And because of this translation's problem, I've requested that the person who can answer my question to give me the explanations regarding the TRANSLATION problem.

Didn't you just dismiss differences in translation as nothing much but difference in the choices of words the translator choose? Ahahahahahaha...................

gunblade712

Originally posted by Debmey at 4-2-2009 03:47 AM

Same here, we have the original Textus Receptus, no different.

so present your "Textus Receptus" here in response to my question, debmey.

Why the long argument but zero answer?

Same for the Bible. Aren't you a hypocrite then?

I say the Bible gave out different FACTS, not just different choices of words.

Unless, of course, your upbringing told u that 22 is equal to 42.

So if you question my IQ for asking the same questions you ask, there is something very wrong with your head isn't it?

What's the same question, debmey? I'm asking question pertaining THE BIBLE, are you telling me that you are asking me, a Muslim, about YOUR BIBLE?

Didn'tyou just dismiss differences in translation as nothing much butdifference in the choices of words the translator choose?Ahahahahahaha...................

Yes, I did.

But is there ANY language in the world that tells you 22 (that's TWENTY-TWO) is equal to our 42 (that's FOURTY-TWO), debmey?

That's what I meant by the difference of not just words, but FACTS.

If you can't understand this simple question, then I can see that you have zero knowledge regarding your own bible.

You haven't even answered my question even though your challenge have been answered.

Please, troublemaker, provoker, and cowardice action like what you are doing now is not acceptable here.

hujanhijau

Originally posted by Debmey at 4-2-2009 03:47 AM


Same for the Bible. Aren't you a hypocrite then?

the same ? really?

is it a choice of word between 4000 and 40000?
come on, you still dont get it?

[ Last edited by  hujanhijau at 4-2-2009 12:21 PM ]

Debmey

The answer is very simple, copyist error. It doesn't change doctrine does it?
There are copyist errors in quran manuscripts too.

gunblade712

copyist error?

so there's an ERROR in that Bible which is being used world-wide?

an error in the "Word of God"?

which one should we take into consideration as the "lesser error" compared to the other? The NIV or the KJV?

gunblade712

it changes the FACTS given in the book, debmey.

22 is NOT the same as 42.

Debmey

Does it change doctrine?

hujanhijau

how do you know it was a copyist error anyway?

and still, those error are in the bible to this very day..

hujanhijau

it shows the unreliability of the book

gunblade712

is that how you concluded things?

That it is OK to have errors and discrepancies in your "Word of GOD" as long as it does not change the doctrine?

If there are errors in your "Word of God", how can you be so sure that the "doctrine" that was imbued in the book was also not an error?

Debmey

You still haven't answered my counter question.
Are any doctrines changed?
How to move on when you muslims dare not answer counter questions after we have answered you? Can you be sincere? Are you not hypocritical?

gunblade712

Originally posted by Debmey at 5-2-2009 10:32 AM
You still haven't answered my counter question.
Are any doctrines changed?
How to move on when you muslims dare not answer counter questions afterwe have answered you? Can you be sincere? Are you not hypocritical?

Debmey, the authority and the value of your holy bible is being questioned here.

If people find ONE ERROR, HOW can you be so sure that the "doctrine" imbued in it is not the SECOND ERROR?

There are NO ANSWER FROM YOU, DEBMEY. Even kompia agrees that the difference is a MINUTE ERROR, but still, an error is an error. Errors should NOT be in the Book of God, because it would bring doubt.

Now, about your so-called counter question, how can you be so sure that the "doctrine" which has been imbued in the book is ALSO NOT AN ERROR?

Debmey

Can you prove that the copyist error that you have found changed the doctrines?
How would a change from 4200 to 42000 change any doctrine may I ask?

hujanhijau

can you prove that the doctrine itself is not an error?

Debmey

Wrong approach. If you assert that Bible doctrines are wrong, the burden is on you to prove it rather than the other way around.
Since you muslims wanted to prove that Bible doctrine is somehow wrong because there are copyists errors, it is therefore logical that you prove that doctrines are wrong because of copyist errors.