Perfect god writes a book

>perfect god writes a book
>book contradicts itself

Kek

You mean the protestants that follow the book?

delete this

>Sola
>Scriptura
>Lmao

It doesn't, it's a complete atheist meme. I read the entire Bible and I can't find any of the supposed "glaring, earth-shattering contradictions" atheists are always talking about.

Why make baseless claims that you are unwilling and unable to support?

Why follow one book?

They don't exist. They're laughably ridiculous. Like, "in the OT, you can't wear wool and linen blends, but in the NT, you can."

Asinine atheists are the worst people in the world; they literally think like psychopaths.

I follow the one true God.

Who is most talked about and revealed in the one holy collection of books on the planet.

Shut up whore.

It contradicts itself at the outset of Genesis. First stating that he created man and woman together, and then stating that he created man and later woman.

Ezekiel 18:20: The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father.

Exodus 20:5: I the lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

The first account is God's, and it includes the entire creation week.

The second account is Adam's, and it includes Day Six forward.

God made man knowing He would make woman to fit together with man; God made us male and female from the beginning, even though Eve was created after Adam.

There is no contradiction there; a contradiction is A and Not A in the same manner, time and place.

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

...to those who hate me.

Taking text out of context is a pretext for a lie.

>god wrote the book
>implying man didn't fill it with falseness later on

That didn't really paint it as non-contradictory.

>that image
But user, if they hated Catholics would he side with the Pope?

The son of a wicked man who hates the lord will inherit all sorts of problems, from poverty to diseases to enslavement to addictions, etc.

He will nevertheless be judged on his own merits.

So what about the other quote, where God will visit inequity upon the subsequent generations?

That is visiting the iniquity on your children. If you hate God, get AIDS and have a child, that child is born with AIDS.

Nevertheless, that child will be judged on its own merits.

And there's another layer to this; nobody is judged by God to be righteous on their own merits. Righteousness to God is believing in God and having righteousness imputed to you.

I'm righteous in God's eyes because of what Jesus did, and my belief in what Jesus did, not because of what I do. Or don't do.

Well, I don't know enough about the bible to discuss this any further, but I'll grant you this one.

But I'm just gonna say, that's fucking twisted. Nobody is a good person in your belief, they're just puppets of the divine. Fuck that.

The account of Paul's conversion in Acts 9:

> 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” 5 He asked, “Who are you, Lord?” The reply came, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 6 But get up and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” 7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless because they heard the voice but saw no one. 8 Saul got up from the ground, and though his eyes were open, he could see nothing; so they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. 9 For three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

> 23 After some time had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, 24 but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night so that they might kill him; 25 but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall,lowering him in a basket. 26 When he had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples; and they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple. 27 But Barnabas took him, brought him to the apostles, and described for them how on the road he had seen the Lord, who had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had spoken boldly in the name of Jesus.

Paul's own account of his conversion in Galatians 1:

> 15 But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any human being, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me, but I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus. 18 Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days; 19 but I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother. 20 In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!

Not puppets. Lost broken creations that He wants to redeem and fix.

And can only do so if they psychically assuage his wounded ego.

>basement dweller contradicts god

Thank you for proving that Paul claims to have been instructed by Jesus personally in Arabia for three years.

Which is indeed the case.

Your first verses are about his Saul to Paul conversion; your second verses are about the origins of his information and beginning of his ministry.

Paul tried to start his own ministry before he was ready, and almost got killed. So he decided maybe God's way was better after all, and met with God on the mountain of Moses.

He's not wounded dude. We are. But we're not puppets; we can choose to reject the fix.

The Olympics haven't even started yet and already we've got a strong gold medal contender in the category of mental gymnastics.

I have a hard time remembering that what is so clear and obvious to me is only so because I do not completely lack all faculty for understanding spiritual things.

>god is omnibenevolent
>god murders baby egyptians
Therefore, murdering babies is good

Searching for God's claim to be "omnibenevolent", whatever that means.....

0 results.

I'm remembering that line

Ah, the classic ideologue defense of "if you don't get it, it's because you're broken."

Not at all.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

There's no way for you to "get it".

All good would be a better claim.

Divine command theory is totally a thing. Standard belief is that anything God does is good because God is good thus if God does it it must be good. A demented circular reasoning, quite fitting really.

Yes yes, and I have false consciousness, which is why I don't agree with Marx.

Truly Christianity is remarkable in the layers upon layers upon layers of mental armour it instils. You never have to face criticism because it's covered it from every angle. "People disagree with Christianity? That just proves it right." "Christianity is growing less popular in places. That just proves it right." "Christians are doing things that don't match dogma? That just proves it right." On and on and on.

God is just, he doesn't extend infinite mercy to everyone. God can't be benevolent if he rewards those who do evil.

He forgives those who ought to be forgiven and condemns those who ought to be condemned.

God is Good. And only God is Good.

But to say that God is "omnibenevolent" reduces God to, what, Santa Claus? But even Santa Claus has a "naughty" list.

So no. I find that "omnibenevolent" is an atheist strawman, and that in linking God to this non-existent characteristic of anything, they think they can disprove the existence of God.

Shooting and killing a rabid dog that's running towards your children is good. But not from the dog's perspective.

It's because you make claims for us that we do not make for ourselves.

(Plus there really does exist spiritual armor, and I really do have a set. It's neat. Comes with a sword and everything.)

>He forgives those who ought to be forgiven and condemns those who ought to be condemned.

The god(s) described in the abrahamic tradition does absolutely no such thing. He's just an asshole, and that's all.

Happily, this creature is less an ontological reality, and more a projection of what humans would be like if they themselves were gods.

You can believe that until you die, and are face-to-face with Him.

Need I say you are not ready for that meeting?

>ITT: people who don't know anything about the Bible getting BTFO

>perfect god writes a book
Since when?

Dude your trilby almost fell off there

>taking a cosmic baseball bat to Horus's kneecap
>bad
3000 years later, and polytheshits still mad

ITT fedoras getting blown the fuck out

Kek

Danth's law

What's that?

So did those Egyptian babies deserve to be condemned? Or was that just to show everyone that he wasn't fucking around?

What about babies that die without being baptized and are thrown into hell?

The babies that God killed were taken to heaven to live with God forever.

Don't worry about them.

Worry about you.

I don't know the answers to these questions, anything I would say would just be a guess.

Genesis is, as Saint John Chrysostom put it, a "prophecy into the past". It's like Revelations, except looking backward.

>What about babies that die without being baptized and are thrown into hell?

All babies, and all people, who die before they reach their own individual age of accountability are blameless before the Law, and are taken to heaven.

The Kingdom of Heaven is made up of children, and if you want to enter, you must enter as a child enters.

Why don't you read the bible and find out, you fucking incompetent neanderthal?

>What about babies that die without being baptized and are thrown into hell?

This evil teaching is Roman Catholic mind control, making people think that getting their baby's head wet saves their soul.

And the Roman Catholics who are counting on getting their heads wet as babies are going to be shocked when their ambient temperature raises to 2500 degrees centigrade.

Weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth shocked.

I don't know if they deserved it, but people weren't individualistic back then: babies were seen as in unity with their parents and as part of the same religion and ideology, people were looked at in terms of families and tribes, not as individuals. Not until the new covenant does looking at people purely in terms of individuals come into play (Ezekiel 18:20)

We don't know where unbaptized babies go.

>We don't know where unbaptized babies go.

You don't know where you're going.

I guarantee it.

Doesn't that make it more ethic to abort children? Since that spares no chance of them not being saved? Like, yes, it would doom the parent, but wouldn't it be a selfless act of parental love?

I find this line of thinking so evil and alien to my being.

>God who engineered creation writes a book
>Not a single ecuation, law, breakthrough or anything that could further our understanding of creation or at least certify that the one who wrote it was not an ignorant barbarian
>In fact the first book is so scientifically incorrect most denominations now pretend its a metaphor/prank/2deep4u

That's true.

>you're not a very good reader, are you?

>GENESIS 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
>GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

or is it

>GENESIS 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
>GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

So, which is it. Genesis 1:25, he created the beasts first, or Genesis 2:18, he created Man first, and then beasts?

Or what about god's opinion of what he'd made.
>Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.

Or is it Genesis 6:5-6
>5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
>6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

So either he saw everything he's made and it was good. or it wasnt, because men are wicked. which he'd created. Which one?

and so on.

*tips*

But you can send so many baby souls to heaven, and all it costs is your one soul going to hell.

Man and beast made Day Six, and nothing you say in this post is a contradiction.

Everything God made was good.

Then mankind joined satan's rebellion, sinned, died, and the entire creation was cursed.

lrn2r34d

John the beloved apostle says that all Christians can know that they are saved and heaven bound, and yet here you are, not knowing you're not saved, but thinking your church will somehow sneak you in.

I don't usually advocate people killing themselves, but I do see the necessity.

>Man and beast made Day Six, and nothing you say in this post is a contradiction.

Yes, but one was made before the other.

The word translated as "know" is "eido" not "ginosko".

Common understanding is that first things are mentioned first. Why are you so confused? Is it fun to be confused?

Wow, St. Peter will let you right in with witty observations like that! You'll totally get in!

I hope you're talking about the Qu'ran, right? The book that actually claims to have been written by god?
>téléchargement
Of course you're not talking about the Qu'ran you spineless faggot. Talking shit about the Qu'ran gets you killed.

It claims to have been written by allah, not God.

Al-lah is Hubal is HaBaal is the Ba'al of the Moabites.

The Arabs have never worshiped the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Just the gods Abraham left when God called him out of Ur of the Chaldeas.

The contradictions aren't as disenchanting as the fact that a tremendous amount of the Bible is traced in previous books, mythologies, folklores, traditions, philosophers, etc. It's crystal fucking clear to anyone with half a brain that Christianity was a philosophical and cultural progression. A literal, supernatural being had nothing to do with it. God was symbolism.

Nice job. 100% lies. 100% bullshit. Very tenacious a student of your father you are.

>Man and beast made Day Six, and nothing you say in this post is a contradiction.

Wow. that's some serious fact-denial going on there.

let me repeat that since you have severe cognitive disabilities. Lets boil it down to the facts, no 16th C language to confuse you.

Genesis 1:25 God made all the animals.
then
Genesis 1:26 God Makes Man in his image.

OR

Genesis 2: 7 God formed man from the dust of the ground,
then
Genesis 2:18 God said, man should not be alone
Genesis 2:19 God then creates every animal, for Adam, who named them.


Gen 1:25: Create the Animals, then Man
Gen 2: 7, 2:18: Create Man, then Animals.

If you cannot see a contradiction in that, then you are utterly delusional.

Weird. I read your post over and over but I don't see the argument.

>doesn't know everything is in a time loop including God

God brought all the animals He made before He made Adam to Adam in order for Adam to name them.

Collaboration between Creator and created, which is of course the meaning of life.

And why your life has no meaning.

If you want, you can dive into the different Hebrew verb tenses, and that will explain to you the past pluperfect imperative used, or you can just nod and wonder off.

Kill yourself?

I mean that my salvation is always in question,and I can never take it for granted.

Still not seeing that argument.

>God brought all the animals He made before He made Adam to Adam in order for Adam to name them.

Yes.
AFTER saying "man shouldnt be alone", and creating them.

Whereas in the other version, it says he created the beasts.
then it says he created man.

How can you not understand that this is a contradiction?

>If you want, you can dive into the different Hebrew verb tenses, and that will explain to you the past pluperfect imperative used, or you can just nod and wonder off

Oh, go on, explain to me what it says in hebrew then. I'm sure you're fluent in it....

>Perfect God designs the human species
>Haemoglobin's affinity with carbon monoxide is 210 times greater than with oxigen
Either God doesnt exist or he is planning to gas us in mass.

I'm telling you as your elder that you are not saved.

That you need to read the bible, specifically Romans 10, and learn what to do in order to be saved.

And then do those things, and be saved.

Die?

God did not create any animal in response to Him saying "man should not be alone". That line of thought ended with the creation of Eve.

>fucktards think earth is God's playground
>earth was granted to us
>blame God for everything we caused

You needn't, as no such thing will take place.

That guy looks like Joey from Friends.

then why does it say

>And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them:

That is clear - god makes a statement, then does the action of forming out of the ground, and then brings them to adam.

Or do you believe that you can simply re-write this supposedly "holy" book when you encounter inconvenient facts that contradict each other?

and this is just one of how many hundreds of such contradictions?

Most of the things people compaint about have nothing to do with our actions.

You will find to your horror that you are wrong.

Can you summarize that?

You limit the actual teachings of Christ by holding onto such a primitive, shallow understanding of what he said.

For example, he said that the kingdom of heaven is within you. And yet, people still talk about heaven as if it's somewhere you go to after physically passing. This isn't just a misunderstanding, this is a blatant lack of reading comprehension.

I did warn you.

Hebrew word is in its pluperfect form. It reads that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.).

Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.

Gargle bleach?

He actually said that the Kingdom of God was in their midst. That they, the pharisees, supposedly looking for their Messiah, were literally standing next to their God and did not know it.

Where the King is, so is the Kingdom.

He knows my fate before I'm there.
Before I was, he knew it then.
Know salvation isn't yours to share.
Know it was never meant for some men.

Break that down for me.