Questioning God's Chosen Communication

[POI]

(1) Why would an omniscient God reveal to ancient societies the questions that modern scientific communities would be interested in? (2) Why would God care more about making scientific knowledge available in these texts versus addressing how He wanted humans to live?

For debate: Does the provided video below answer the above two questions sufficiently? If not, why not? If so, then I guess God is inept?

[TRANSPONDER]

Yes. This 'advanced knowledge' argument was never going to work (accepting that it doesn't work by the believer that it does not being the same thing) because all Yahweh had to do was put the order of creation in the correct order. The Bible readers wouldn't have seen any problem and science would have accepted that the Bible was right.

With slavery, God could have at least said (while noting that the Israelites should remember when they were slaves) that they should not own slaves. But IF they could not avoid it then these were the rules - like they have, and the NT could have hammered the point home. But hardly a flicker of the eyebrow. It has to be left to the humans, bad as they were in the 18th c to come up with the emancipation that God and Jesus couldn't be bothered with.

Bottom like ...the believer and apologist might explain away deny or ignore the Flood and Ark being unfeasible, the sun cannot stand still and sheep staring at striped sticks does not alter their DNA, but what matters is others who are not sunk in denial...if the debate and message of it ever gets to them.

Since it was mentioned in passing in the above video I gotta do this even though I've posted it before. Slavery has been done to death (as a debate) but it is the single worst condemnation of the laws and rules supposedly handed down by God.

Apologists know this as the try to excuse it as "Indentured servitude". It isn't.

[POI]

Bumping this thread for The Tanager, or any other Christian who may agree with him.

[POI]

(2nd request)

Bumping this thread for The Tanager, or any other Christian who may agree with him.

[TRANSPONDER]

I doubt that we will get one. Slavery has been argued by the best and the best they can do is try to pretend that 'Love everyone' somehow eliminates the rules for slave -owing for life and passed to the children as property. Plus the attempt to pretend that the OT invalidates slavery. It condones by saying nothing apart from accepting the institution as normal.

Congrats to PO I by the way for a double award in the 2023 nominations. Deserved

[POI]

I doubt that we will get one.

But it never hurts to continue trying... Response(s) will either eventually come, (or), the silence will remain deafening

[TRANSPONDER]

I doubt that we will get one.

But it never hurts to continue trying... Response(s) will either eventually come, (or), the silence will remain deafening

Not to worry We get threads on the same questions popping up all the time. We can let the old threads vanish - though it does allow for the Deep Dive - crickets from the defeated Bible apologists who resurface, blowharding the same debunked claims a week later. It has a great advantage - they can deny everything, even when they posted before that prayer doesn't work, a fortnight later they can be claiming it does.

[POI]

CRICKETS from the Christian populous. Interesting....

[TRANSPONDER]

Crickets indeed. I find it hard to get my head around it. Like quantum physics, I can put it on paper but cannot get a picture in my head. So I know Faith allows them to pretend refutations and serious Bible problems don't exist and crickets is ignoring the problems and pretending they don't exist. After, of course, they have jumped through all the hoops ransacked the apologetics websites and pulled all the bad lawyer tricks they can.

I can post how I think the faithbrain works (1) but I cannot get my head around it and I am very glad I don't think that way.

(1) "there is some reason Bible is all true, even if nobody knows it". Which we actually see in the 'Perhaps evidence to prove (Bible claim) will turn up in the future".

Yes but logically the idea is to not believe a claim or hypothesis until the evidence turns up. But Faith (a priori God) skews the thing into inverted logic 'The faithclaim is tru until disproven'.100%, and I admit it which they will never do, for the reasons above including crickets.

[1213]

(1) Why would an omniscient God reveal to ancient societies the questions that modern scientific communities would be interested in? (2) Why would God care more about making scientific knowledge available in these texts versus addressing how He wanted humans to live?

For debate: Does the provided video below answer the above two questions sufficiently? If not, why not? If so, then I guess God is inept?

....

I don't think the video is good for anything. I think God's rules in the Bible in all cases are as clear. The problem seems to come when people read only small part of it and ignore everything that doesn't support their interpretations, not the Bible itself. If your video is inept, it doesn't mean God is also.