| Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 150
| if you can't understand my English i apolagize it is non of my business you say that i am muslim because i submit to god through Jesus. ahaha
Do you know what Jesus said he said in Gospel of John, Ch.No.5 V.No.30 ‘I can of my own self do nothing - as I hear I judge, and my judgement is just, because I seek not my will, but the will of thy Father, who has sent me’. he submit his will to almighty god he who submit his self to almighty god in arabic it calls as a muslim Islam comes from the root word sallam which means to submit your will to the will of allah(s.w.t) and it is also derived from the arabic word salaam which means peace in shortcut Islam means Acquireing Peace by submitting your will to the will of allah(s.w.t).
Do not submit your will to the created but to the creator .... who is Allah(s.w.t)
Why don't you glance at my posts? you again quote that 3:48 And He (Allah) will teach him the Scripture and wisdom,
and the Taurat (Torah) and the Injil (Gospel).
Allah taught Isa the holy Kitabs (Sacred Scriptures).
I say that Allah (s.w.t) is talking about Enjail not Bible and if you look at the Holy Book Qur'an You gets that Prophet Mohammad peace be upon him as well know about the Books (Torah and Enjail.... you are supporting me to present the mistakes of Bible not Enjail. no Problem Lets know the mistakes in Bible In the field of Zoology, it is mentioned in Leviticus, Chapter No.11 Verse No.6, that… ‘Hare is a cud chewer.’ We know that Hare, does not chew cud’ - Previously people thought by the movement of the hare. Now we know hare is not a cud chewer, neither does it have a compact mentalised stomach. It is mentioned in the Proverbs, Chapter No. 6, Verse No. 7, that… ‘Ant has got no ruler, no sear, no chief.’ Today we know that ants are sophisticated insects. They have a very good system of labour, in which they have chief, they have foreman, they have workers. They even have a queen, they have a ruler - Therefore Bible is unscientific. Further more, it is mentioned in the Bible, in Genesis, Chapter 3, Verse 14, and Isaiah Chapter 65, verse No. 25, that… ‘Serpents eat dust.’ No Geological book says ‘Serpents eat dust.’ It is mentioned in the Book of Leviticus, Chapter No.11, Verse No.20… ‘Among the abomination things, fowls with four feet - They are an abomination.’ And some scholars say that ‘fowl’ is a wrong translation of the Hebrew word ‘uff.’ In King James, it should be ‘insect’ or ‘winged creature.’ And in New International Version, it says… ‘Winged creature.’ But it says… ‘All insects which are four footed, are an abomination - They are detestful for you.’ I want to ask by Dear Respected Christian Borthers/Sisterst that ‘Which insects have got four feet?’Even a student, who has passed elementary school, knows that insects have got 6 feet. There is no bird in the world, there is no foul in the world, there is no insect in the worlds, which have got four feet. Furthermore there are mythical animals, and fabulous animals mentioned in the Bible, as though they exist - For example unicorn. It is mentioned in the Book of Isaiah, Chapter 34, Verse No.7, talking about unicorn as though it exists. You look open the dictionary, it says… ‘An animal which has got a horses’ body, and a horn which is only available in myths.
In the Field of Hydrology the Bible say regarding ‘Hydrology’? Bible says in Genesis, Ch. No.9, Verse No.13 to 17, that… ‘After God, at the time of Noah submerged the world by flood, and after the flood’ subsided, He said… ‘I put up a rainbow in the sky as a promise to the humankind never to submerge the world again, by water. To the unscientific person it may be quite good… ‘Oh rainbow is a sign of Almighty God, never to submerge the world by flood again.’ But today we know very well, that rainbow is due to the refraction of sunlight, with rain or mist. Surely there must have been thousands of rainbows before the time of Noah, peace be upon him. To say it was not there before Noah’s time you have to assume that the law of refraction did not exist - which is unscientific. |