(June 1, 2014 at 3:24 am)Godschild Wrote:(May 31, 2014 at 1:03 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Utterly beside the point. If then Bible is God's word, and God is omnipotent as wants humans to be saved (most of them, I mean), then he could have made the Bible immediately explicable to everyone. As mentioned above, we could simply read the Bible and know EXACTLY what God wants from us. Since we don't, it argues very strongly against the Bible having the unique spiritual value claimed for it.
Furthermore, the word translated as 'evil' in the passage under discussion has a whole raft of different meanings in Hebrew, so it seems rather unfair to point the translation finger at English.
Boru
Excuse any and everything to make your point the correct one want you, dishonest, dishonest. Calamity fits well with the situation surrounding the verse and evil doesn't fit at all according to the rest of the scriptures.
Were you not taught that words with several meaning should be considered by the situation, was basic when I was in school.
GC
Actually, the surrounding verses are concerned with righteousness and salvation, so God claiming to commit moral evil fits better than God claiming responsibility for moral evil.
But you (deliberately, I think) didn't address my chief point which is that translation should not matter. God could have easily made the meaning of the Bible in toto clear to everyone. Why didn't he?
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
