Posted by Amir on 5/20/2009, 7:35 am, in reply to "Science or Miracles"
41.212.201.198
"The story in the Bible was not meant to be a miracle. It appears to be caused by a scribal error."
It cannot be a miracle because even by a miracle it is impossible for someone to be older than his father.
Chronicles 22:2 tells us that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign. The Hebrew texts, plus Wycliffe 1395,Coverdale 1535, Bishop's Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1599, Jerome's Vulgate 382 A.D., Clementine Vulgate, the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version 1901, Douay 1950, Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, Italian Diodati 1602, French Louis Segond, Portuguese Almeida, the NKJV 1982, RSV 1952, NRSV 1989, the Jewish translations of 1917 and 1936, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, the new Judaica Press Complete Tanach, the Hebrew Names Bible, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, Webster's 1833 translation, the New English Bible 1970, the New Jerusalem Bible 1985, the Amplified Bible 1987, KJV 21st Century, and the Third Millenium Bible all say Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign.
The inspired Hebrew text clearly says Ahaziah was 42 years old. The masoretic scribes were very scrupulous in copying their sacred trust. No word or number was written from memory but each word was carefully checked before he recopied it. The copies were checked and checked again and if there were a single error, the whole was discarded and and new one begun.
Jesus(peace be upon him) said: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matthew 5:18. When Jesus(peace be upon him)mentions the jots and tittles he is speaking of the Hebrew language.
There is no evidence that the errors are only limited to spelling of proper names and numbers.And even if we were to assume that this is indeed a scribal error it takes away the Bible's perfection.
"The story about people living in a cave for three hundred years is contrary to what science has discovered about the human physiology. Fat people's can fast for about a month or so before they die, but they can't go without drinking for more than a few days. When you claim that people can go for hundreds of years without eating and drinking, and then claim that you are making claims which are compatible with science, your claims are absurd."
U do not appear to have understood the subject.People who fast may it be for a month or more will of course die if they do not consume water.I am no even sure that they will last that long.This mainly because at the same time they are taking part in other activities.In other words they are actively using energy.But people who hibernate are different.This is mainly becaus hibernation consume the least possible amount of energy and hence it can last much longer.Yogis demonstrate WEEKS of death like feat, barely breathing, with absolutely NO INTAKE OF FOOD OR WATER.If u r comparing a fat person to a yogi then i'm sorry to say but the comparison doesn t stand.
Now the point requiring attention here is the fact that hibernation can prolonge lifespan and this is why science is trying to induce it in humans.Of course science currently cannot keep people in hibernation for 300 years,in fact i'm not sure that they'll be able to manage even a year or two BUT what u must understand is that this is not due to the fact that it is impossible but because science has not mastered this process.The companions of the cave were put in hibernation by Allah and hence i don t doubt that he could keep them alive that long.My point is that science doesn t disprove hibernation ,NOT EVEN for 300 years though it is still unable to produce anything as such.WE can compare it to a time when science was looking forward to space exploration but couldn 'f due to limited technology,but they knew it was possible.
"If you can quote a peer reviewed scientific article to support your claim that people can live for years without drinking, please feel free to post it."
A new type of organism discovered in an Arctic tunnel came to life in the lab after being frozen for 32,000 years.
NASA is also interested in possibly putting astronauts in hibernation when going on very long space journeys, making it possible, one day, to visit far-away places.The closest star proxima centauri is about 4.2 light years away.If the sun is considered to be a ball and the eart a pea at about 20 cm away(20cm represents the distance earth-sun) then on the same scale Proxima centauri would be about 8KM away).Just now imagine the tme it would take to travel to other stars.By comparison it takes about 18 months to travel to Mars.
Cases of human hibernation have been recorded though they were mostly accident.A Japanese businessman, Mitsutaka Uchikoshi,35,was found on a snowy mountain side 24 days after vanishing.
When searchers discovered him, Mr Uchikoshi appeared to be in a frozen coma.His pulse was almost undetectable.
His body temperature had dropped to 71f (22c) and his organs had mostly shut down.
He was treated for hypothermia-multiple organ failure and blood loss from his fall.Remarkably, he recovered fully with no lasting ill effects.
When rescuers found Mr Uchikoshi, who broke his hip when he slipped and fell down the mountain, he had lost a lot of weight.
Until becoming unconscious the businessman had survived by sipping the remains of a bottle of barbecue sauce that he had been carrying with him when he fell.
His doctors believe he survived unscathed because he went into some kind of frozen hibernation.
One of his doctors said: "He was frozen alive and survived. If we can understand why, it opens up all sorts of possibilities for the future."
There is also a case of an embryo,here's what The Times says:A HEALTHY baby girl has been born in California after spending 13YEARS as an embryo frozen at -235C. Laina Beasley is a triplet because she was conceived at the same time, by the same parents, as her two 13-year-old siblings.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41272000/jpg/_41272029_debbieandlaina.jpg
There's even a website called icelift.com which offers to induce hibernation for 50 years.u might try it illumunati.Who knows ,may be after 50 years indeed u'll come back to meet your grandchildrens lol!
"The claims Muslims make for the Koran itself are not supportable by science. This problem is not necessarily in the contents of the Koran, but in the claims you make. According to Muslims, the Koran itself did not originate naturally, but is itself a miracle. "
Very true.The revelation of the Quran was miraculous in nature and science doesn t explain that ,but so what?It contains scientific facts as signs for the believers and whether science supports its means of revelation or not,it doesn t affect this fact.
"In other words, you are trying to use science to prove something which science does not allow, a miracle. "
I didn t use science to prove the revelation of the Quran which is a miracle.I only compared the facts that established modern science agrees with the Quran.
"You are trying to cover the Koran with the patina of scientific accuracy even though you are simultaneously claiming that the Koran transcends science. Your approach doesn't work."
Yes the Quran tracends science because what the QUran stated 1400 years ago ,it is today that we are getting a better understanding of it.I don t see why my approach doesn t work because the Quran agree with science on established scientific facts,that is on the truth.So whether the Quran tracends science or not is irrelevant to the truth.That is the Quran agrees with cience though it tracends it because science contains the truth.
"This is the same logical fallacy you have made in using the Bible. When the Bible appears to support your claims, you profess to believe it, but when it disagrees with you, you reject it."
With the Bible it is different because it isn t 100% valid.The Bible says that insects has four legs as do the Quran and science ,i accept it.
The Bible says the earth is flat in contrary to the Quran and sience,i totally reject it.
Now just answer this simple question:Do u agree with the Bible that the earth is flat?
If yes then i no comments but if u answer no then i don t see why u told me that i shouldn t be following only part of the Bible.So is the earth flat?yes or no?Do u accept it or not?
I'll be waiting for your answer.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread
