Let's see how many apologetics take the bait

[Pat Mustard]

Why would the perfect being, the omnipotent god, not make laws that were binding on everybody for all time? Why would he create laws that were later superseded and improved upon, thus calling into severe question his perfection (as he had created something imperfect)?

I don't know.

Does my ignorance mean that the premise is the only true hermeneutical principle with which to understand what is happening in the Bible? Can those who critique the moral coherence of the Bible according to this premise be mistaken?

Can you phrase your argument in anything other than meaningless gibberish pleqse?

If I read your meaning properly, no you can't have it both ways, in that you can't both mqintain that the bible is the infallible word of god and then sweep all the fallibilities under the carpet.