Contradictions, errata, or erroneous facts in the Bible

[KCDAD]

OK... let's open this up for real discourse... what do you find absolutely inexplicable in the Bible?

I don't mean something that just doesn't make sense, but is irrational, inconsistent with physical laws of the universe, inconsistent with protestations of God as infinite, perfect, omniscient or omnipotent.

 

[IFG1P315]

OK... let's open this up for real discourse... what do you find absolutely inexplicable in the Bible?

I don't mean something that just doesn't make sense, but is irrational, inconsistent with physical laws of the universe, inconsistent with protestations of God as infinite, perfect, omniscient or omnipotent.

The last two parts of your question/statement contradict themselves. IF the Bible is accurate in its depiction of events and God then the universe and its physical laws are dependent on him. So it is reasonable that He could do or orchestrate things that stand outside those "laws" He made.

 

[KCDAD]

The last two parts of your question/statement contradict themselves. IF the Bible is accurate in its depiction of events and God then the universe and its physical laws are dependent on him. So it is reasonable that He could do or orchestrate things that stand outside those "laws" He made.

That is true if God is arbitrary and chose laws that suited him at the time... but later decided that they weren't important enough for himself to follow.
I suggest if it is possible that God would establish laws in a universe which were not universally binding to EVERYTHING in that universe, they are in fact not laws at all, but whims.

 

[HypnoToad]

Ok, so you call them "whims" - so what?

 

[KCDAD]

Ok, so you call them "whims" - so what?

It's ok with you that you give your worship to a deity that is bound by no consistency or order? Capricious and arbitrary actions? That kind of deity is not worthy of worship, no matter what power it has. Fear, yes. Worship, no.

 

[HypnoToad]

It's ok with you that you give your worship to a deity that is bound by no consistency or order? Capricious and arbitrary actions? That kind of deity is not worthy of worship, no matter what power it has. Fear, yes. Worship, no.

I don't see any consistency or order problems in God's actions. I don't see any capricious or arbitrary actions by God.

 

[KCDAD]

I don't see any consistency or order problems in God's actions. I don't see any capricious or arbitrary actions by God.

Destroying his creation after calling it good? Genocide?

 

[HypnoToad]

Destroying his creation after calling it good?

He called the original creation "good". He never called what it became "good".

Genocide?

What's inconsistent about that? God was always sovereign over life.

 

[KCDAD]

He called the original creation "good". He never called what it became "good".


What's inconsistent about that? God was always sovereign over life.

His creation was good... not flawed so that it would go bad... it was not good if it went bad.

 

[HypnoToad]

His creation was good... not flawed so that it would go bad... it was not good if it went bad.

Presence of choice wasn't a flaw, so there was no "flaw" that made it go bad.

"Went bad = couldn't be good" is nonsense. I've got milk that is currently good. After a while, it will certainly be bad. That doesn't mean the milk is "bad" now.

 

[JayJay77]

Just because God said it was "good" didn't mean He didn't know what He was doing, or what was about to happen.

If you recall, right after the sin of Adam and Eve, He predicted and set in motion the plan of man's redemption (that's if it wasn't set in motion before the world even began).

Before the sin, Adam and Eve had no idea what opposing God was. Now that we are born into it, we're presented with a choice.

Our judgment is dependant on our choice to serve this "merciful" God, or suffer His wrath. What's so complicated about that? My dad always said, "Yeah, God is a loving God. But if we're not right with Him, He'll love us straight to hell."

 

[KCDAD]

Presence of choice wasn't a flaw, so there was no "flaw" that made it go bad.

"Went bad = couldn't be good" is nonsense. I've got milk that is currently good. After a while, it will certainly be bad. That doesn't mean the milk is "bad" now.

If you created it good, it wouldn't go bad. It COULDN'T go bad.

 

[HypnoToad]

If you created it good, it wouldn't go bad. It COULDN'T go bad.

If you created it with choice, sure it could.

 

[KCDAD]

Just because God said it was "good" didn't mean He didn't know what He was doing, or what was about to happen.

If you recall, right after the sin of Adam and Eve, He predicted and set in motion the plan of man's redemption (that's if it wasn't set in motion before the world even began).

Before the sin, Adam and Eve had no idea what opposing God was. Now that we are born into it, we're presented with a choice.

Our judgment is dependant on our choice to serve this "merciful" God, or suffer His wrath. What's so complicated about that? My dad always said, "Yeah, God is a loving God. But if we're not right with Him, He'll love us straight to hell."

This is a argument about Superman and Spiderman, which is stronger?

Adam in not a human being... he is all of mankind. In fact Genesis uses 'adam" in the 2nd verse of the 5th chapter to describe both the man and the woman. I suppose you think that was their last name... Mr and Mrs Adam?

 

[CShephard53]

It's ok with you that you give your worship to a deity that is bound by no consistency or order? Capricious and arbitrary actions? That kind of deity is not worthy of worship, no matter what power it has. Fear, yes. Worship, no.

God is bound by His own expressed will in the Bible.

If you created it good, it wouldn't go bad. It COULDN'T go bad.

Wrong. If I create a computer and intend it for good, someone can still come along and use it for porn.

 

[KCDAD]

God is bound by His own expressed will in the Bible.

Wrong. If I create a computer and intend it for good, someone can still come along and use it for porn.

Not if you create it incapable of that. Apparently you didn't create good enough. Do you think God's "good" wasn't good enough?

 

[CShephard53]

This is a argument about Superman and Spiderman, which is stronger?

Adam in not a human being... he is all of mankind. In fact Genesis uses 'adam" in the 2nd verse of the 5th chapter to describe both the man and the woman. I suppose you think that was their last name... Mr and Mrs Adam?

Problem with adam meaning all of mankind:
It is used singularly. Not plurally.

 

[CShephard53]

Not if you create incapable of that. Apparently you didn't create good enough.

That is a poor reason to say it wasn't good. If things are, in the long run, made perfect, why was the original creation not good enough if it leads to that?

 

[HypnoToad]

Not if you create it incapable of that.

So, man would have been "better" without choice?

 

[KCDAD]

Problem with adam meaning all of mankind:
It is used singularly. Not plurally.

Genesis 5:2

Read it again ... for the first time.