50,000 errors in Bible

[TrueReligion]

The Jehovah's Witnesses in their "AWAKE!" Magazine dated 8 September, 1957, carried this startling headline " "50000 ERRORS IN THE BIBLE?" (See below for the reproduction).

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/AwakeArticle(1957).html

What the christians have to say in this, is still remaining or they are removed? if removed? how many remaining now?

Then how come it becomes word of God?

[TrueReligion]

Ofcourse Torah is old,but wat about the contradictions found and erros in Torah and Bible,? with these facts, can some1 claim it as word of God?

Well first of anyone can claim just about anything, so yes

If you mean: Does it make sense that a holy book written by god, or by men inspired by god telling us his word, is flawed? Then no. It does not make sense. A perfect god that wouldn't pass a first grade biology or geology test is not making sense. However putting a literal belief in the bible and that all of it is true is arguably not making sense in the first place and I don't think any Christian on this forum does (as in being a follower of the flat earth society).

Yes, and majority of christians in this forum and around also knows and accept this that there are many contradictions and errors in bible, but still want to follow blindly their faith.

[Goat]

Ofcourse Torah is old,but wat about the contradictions found and erros in Torah and Bible,? with these facts, can some1 claim it as word of God?

Well first of anyone can claim just about anything, so yes

If you mean: Does it make sense that a holy book written by god, or by men inspired by god telling us his word, is flawed? Then no. It does not make sense. A perfect god that wouldn't pass a first grade biology or geology test is not making sense. However putting a literal belief in the bible and that all of it is true is arguably not making sense in the first place and I don't think any Christian on this forum does (as in being a follower of the flat earth society).

Yes, and majority of christians in this forum and around also knows and accept this that there are many contradictions and errors in bible, but still want to follow blindly their faith.

Yet, the Muslims on this site refuse to see that exact same things that they point out about the Christians also apply to them. People in glass houses should not throw stones.

[TrueReligion]

Ofcourse Torah is old,but wat about the contradictions found and erros in Torah and Bible,? with these facts, can some1 claim it as word of God?

Well first of anyone can claim just about anything, so yes

If you mean: Does it make sense that a holy book written by god, or by men inspired by god telling us his word, is flawed? Then no. It does not make sense. A perfect god that wouldn't pass a first grade biology or geology test is not making sense. However putting a literal belief in the bible and that all of it is true is arguably not making sense in the first place and I don't think any Christian on this forum does (as in being a follower of the flat earth society).

Yes, and majority of christians in this forum and around also knows and accept this that there are many contradictions and errors in bible, but still want to follow blindly their faith.

Yet, the Muslims on this site refuse to see that exact same things that they point out about the Christians also apply to them. People in glass houses should not throw stones.

With due respect Goat, I would suggest you should stay on topic here, we arediscussing bible, if you have any claim bible is without errors, bring it on, otherwise its quite obvious as no christian came to defend the errors in bible as claimed by christians themselves.
and no christian came forward to defend these errors, whereas muslims came to defend the false attack on Islam, and the muslims showed the right picture .
If you have any queries or things to prove bible and torah s correct, bring it forward, otherwise its proven already that these books are fulll of errors.

[Goat]

Ofcourse Torah is old,but wat about the contradictions found and erros in Torah and Bible,? with these facts, can some1 claim it as word of God?

Well first of anyone can claim just about anything, so yes

If you mean: Does it make sense that a holy book written by god, or by men inspired by god telling us his word, is flawed? Then no. It does not make sense. A perfect god that wouldn't pass a first grade biology or geology test is not making sense. However putting a literal belief in the bible and that all of it is true is arguably not making sense in the first place and I don't think any Christian on this forum does (as in being a follower of the flat earth society).

Yes, and majority of christians in this forum and around also knows and accept this that there are many contradictions and errors in bible, but still want to follow blindly their faith.

Yet, the Muslims on this site refuse to see that exact same things that they point out about the Christians also apply to them. People in glass houses should not throw stones.

With due respect Goat, I would suggest you should stay on topic here, we arediscussing bible, if you have any claim bible is without errors, bring it on, otherwise its quite obvious as no christian came to defend the errors in bible as claimed by christians themselves.
and no christian came forward to defend these errors, whereas muslims came to defend the false attack on Islam, and the muslims showed the right picture .
If you have any queries or things to prove bible and torah s correct, bring it forward, otherwise its proven already that these books are fulll of errors.

With due respect, when someone lives in a glass house, and throws stones, it is prefectly reasonable to point out the fact their privy is right at the back of the house.

Perhaps you think that by 'proving' the bible wrong, it somehow makes the Quran correct??

[TrueReligion]

Ofcourse Torah is old,but wat about the contradictions found and erros in Torah and Bible,? with these facts, can some1 claim it as word of God?

Well first of anyone can claim just about anything, so yes

If you mean: Does it make sense that a holy book written by god, or by men inspired by god telling us his word, is flawed? Then no. It does not make sense. A perfect god that wouldn't pass a first grade biology or geology test is not making sense. However putting a literal belief in the bible and that all of it is true is arguably not making sense in the first place and I don't think any Christian on this forum does (as in being a follower of the flat earth society).

Yes, and majority of christians in this forum and around also knows and accept this that there are many contradictions and errors in bible, but still want to follow blindly their faith.

Yet, the Muslims on this site refuse to see that exact same things that they point out about the Christians also apply to them. People in glass houses should not throw stones.

With due respect Goat, I would suggest you should stay on topic here, we arediscussing bible, if you have any claim bible is without errors, bring it on, otherwise its quite obvious as no christian came to defend the errors in bible as claimed by christians themselves.
and no christian came forward to defend these errors, whereas muslims came to defend the false attack on Islam, and the muslims showed the right picture .
If you have any queries or things to prove bible and torah s correct, bring it forward, otherwise its proven already that these books are fulll of errors.

With due respect, when someone lives in a glass house, and throws stones, it is prefectly reasonable to point out the fact their privy is right at the back of the house.

Perhaps you think that by 'proving' the bible wrong, it somehow makes the Quran correct??

I will prefer to keep on the post, not bring irrelevant posts here, your arguments here is just showing your hatred towardsIslam, if you are neutral, thn discuss on the topic, and you will get reply.

[Wyvern]

Of course there are errors in the bible just like any other book. Religious books in particular are prone to error because they are so open to interpretation and of course if you don't agree with one interpretation you will consider it an error. I could also point out that there are quite a few christian apologists that could come up with an explanation for any supposed error you might point out. So all an error in the bible really means is that you have two or more people making a different interpretation of a particular passage.

[TrueReligion]

Of course there are errors in the bible just like any other book. Religious books in particular are prone to error because they are so open to interpretation and of course if you don't agree with one interpretation you will consider it an error. I could also point out that there are quite a few christian apologists that could come up with an explanation for any supposed error you might point out. So all an error in the bible really means is that you have two or more people making a different interpretation of a particular passage.

Protestant scholars sometimes try to convince people that the claim of distortion in
the Bible is made only by the Muslims and that no such claim is made by anyone else. The fact is that the ancient and later writers of both the Jews and the Christians have claimed the presence of distortions in the Bible more frequently than the Muslims. Before producing witnesses to prove our claim we must mention particularly two terms which are frequently used in their books about the history of the holy books. The two words are errata, and various readings (variations in reading).
Horne said on page 325 of vol. 2: The best difference between errata, an error of
a copier, and various readings, a variation in the text, is that described by Michaelis who said, When there is difference between two or more descriptions only one of them can be true; the rest will be either deliberate distortion or an error of the copier. It is really difficult to separate right from wrong. If there remains any doubt, it is called variation of the text,and when we are certain that the copier has written it wrong we call it errata.
In short there is no great difference between the two terms. A variation in the text is nothing but distortion according to generally accepted terminology. Now any admission to the presence of such variations would obviously be an admission to the presence of distortion.
According to the findings of Mill the number of such variations in the text of the
Bible is thirty thousand, and according to Gricsbach it is one hundred and fifty thousand and according to Sholtz the number of such variations is innumerable and unknown.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica under the entry, Scripture, in vol. 19 includes the
statement of Wettstein that the number of such variations in the Bible is one million. With the above in mind, I can show the real errors, which cannot be taken as translation error, butwhat you call blunders. Few I mentioned already in the post, others are for instancegeneology of Jesus between Mathew and Luke.

[Wyvern]

Of course there are errors in the bible just like any other book. Religious books in particular are prone to error because they are so open to interpretation and of course if you don't agree with one interpretation you will consider it an error. I could also point out that there are quite a few christian apologists that could come up with an explanation for any supposed error you might point out. So all an error in the bible really means is that you have two or more people making a different interpretation of a particular passage.

Protestant scholars sometimes try to convince people that the claim of distortion in
the Bible is made only by the Muslims and that no such claim is made by anyone else. The fact is that the ancient and later writers of both the Jews and the Christians have claimed the presence of distortions in the Bible more frequently than the Muslims. Before producing witnesses to prove our claim we must mention particularly two terms which are frequently used in their books about the history of the holy books. The two words are errata, and various readings (variations in reading).
Horne said on page 325 of vol. 2: The best difference between errata, an error of
a copier, and various readings, a variation in the text, is that described by Michaelis who said, When there is difference between two or more descriptions only one of them can be true; the rest will be either deliberate distortion or an error of the copier. It is really difficult to separate right from wrong. If there remains any doubt, it is called variation of the text,and when we are certain that the copier has written it wrong we call it errata.
In short there is no great difference between the two terms. A variation in the text is nothing but distortion according to generally accepted terminology. Now any admission to the presence of such variations would obviously be an admission to the presence of distortion.
According to the findings of Mill the number of such variations in the text of the
Bible is thirty thousand, and according to Gricsbach it is one hundred and fifty thousand and according to Sholtz the number of such variations is innumerable and unknown.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica under the entry, Scripture, in vol. 19 includes the
statement of Wettstein that the number of such variations in the Bible is one million. With the above in mind, I can show the real errors, which cannot be taken as translation error, butwhat you call blunders. Few I mentioned already in the post, others are for instancegeneology of Jesus between Mathew and Luke.

I certainly hope you are not using this to prove the bible is incorrect. All books have errors and of course the larger the book the more errors it will have in general unless the printers are especially careful when setting up the presses. Additionally you have to all agree which version is the "official" edition so you have something to compare against and among christianity there is no such single official edition.

[TrueReligion]

Of course there are errors in the bible just like any other book. Religious books in particular are prone to error because they are so open to interpretation and of course if you don't agree with one interpretation you will consider it an error. I could also point out that there are quite a few christian apologists that could come up with an explanation for any supposed error you might point out. So all an error in the bible really means is that you have two or more people making a different interpretation of a particular passage.

Protestant scholars sometimes try to convince people that the claim of distortion in
the Bible is made only by the Muslims and that no such claim is made by anyone else. The fact is that the ancient and later writers of both the Jews and the Christians have claimed the presence of distortions in the Bible more frequently than the Muslims. Before producing witnesses to prove our claim we must mention particularly two terms which are frequently used in their books about the history of the holy books. The two words are errata, and various readings (variations in reading).
Horne said on page 325 of vol. 2: The best difference between errata, an error of
a copier, and various readings, a variation in the text, is that described by Michaelis who said, When there is difference between two or more descriptions only one of them can be true; the rest will be either deliberate distortion or an error of the copier. It is really difficult to separate right from wrong. If there remains any doubt, it is called variation of the text,and when we are certain that the copier has written it wrong we call it errata.
In short there is no great difference between the two terms. A variation in the text is nothing but distortion according to generally accepted terminology. Now any admission to the presence of such variations would obviously be an admission to the presence of distortion.
According to the findings of Mill the number of such variations in the text of the
Bible is thirty thousand, and according to Gricsbach it is one hundred and fifty thousand and according to Sholtz the number of such variations is innumerable and unknown.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica under the entry, Scripture, in vol. 19 includes the
statement of Wettstein that the number of such variations in the Bible is one million. With the above in mind, I can show the real errors, which cannot be taken as translation error, butwhat you call blunders. Few I mentioned already in the post, others are for instancegeneology of Jesus between Mathew and Luke.

I certainly hope you are not using this to prove the bible is incorrect. All books have errors and of course the larger the book the more errors it will have in general unless the printers are especially careful when setting up the presses. Additionally you have to all agree which version is the "official" edition so you have something to compare against and among christianity there is no such single official edition.

Like I said, translator and copying error can be noticed, but errors runing since 2000 yrs? and those errors were found in hebrew, greek, samaritan version as well. it means all are wrong rite?

[Wyvern]

Like I said, translator and copying error can be noticed, but errors runing since 2000 yrs? and those errors were found in hebrew, greek, samaritan version as well. it means all are wrong rite?

You will have to be more specific since the bible has not existed for 2000 years. So in your eyes if a human makes an error when setting up the presses even a tiny one that particular error would make the actual work being printed wrong? Would you care to identify the "official" bible you are using to make the designation that one is wrong.