Alright, I want a good, clean fight. Simply state your side, your argument/counter-argument/comment and whatnot. I'm not trying to troll this, just wanting a good debate, so let's have one. (Atheist by the way)
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-01 2:30
a bit off topic, but let's assume god does exist. i have a question about the bible itself. Why did god, in all his omnipotence and omniscience, thought it would be a good idea to impart his WORD through man, a being he knows by this point is severely flawed after falling from grace. Why does he allow man to write it in such ambiguous language? why does he not account for the fact that centuries later when this book is ready that a lot of the shit that happens in it doesn't make a whole lotta sense now that we know a little bit more about how the universe works?
Being omnipotence and omniscience, wouldn't it have been better to do it yourself so there's no misunderstanding? Why didn't he carve the damn thing into a mountain? Why didn't he have it written in a language that has a little more variety in it so we aren't trying to pick the right word out of the handful of meanings it could be. Make an unambiguous language, a language that would stand the test of time without being misinterpreted (the Eskimos have so many words for snow BECAUSE it would be easy to misinterpret what they were saying if all they had was the word 'snow' when they meant 'sideways blowing sleet'). Why didn't he leave a copy of this damn book on the moon like the space odyssey monolith so that when we reached that point, holy shit, there's a bible on the moon!?
It just seems to me that a being with 20/20 foresight would have foreseen the problems with his current method of distribution and made a few pre-publishing changes.