(May 2, 2015 at 9:27 pm)Theoretical Skeptic Wrote:(May 2, 2015 at 8:12 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: So you're saying that the Word of God is not trustworthy ... yet reading it convinced you.
Clearly you are giving testimony against yourself here. Perfect communication is not susceptible to misunderstanding, yet your perfect god needs human translators to tell you what he means where.
What you really have here should be called "The Believer's Guide to Cherry-picking."
The Word of God? Jesus was the Word of God and perfect. God's communication to the writers of the Bible was inspired. It was temporal in a sense that it applied to the people in the time which it was given, but it's translation was not inspired and so imperfect. The Bible is an example to us in how Jehovah dealt with specific people in a specific time.
Clearly a better method of conveying what is only the most important message this god if yours has for his creations is needed. Why cannot he inspire each individual directly? Why cannot he inspire traducers to convey only the pure message?
I agree with you that the Bible has many insertions and corruptions put there by men. You'll understand why I reject that book when you ponder the fallibility of the men who composed it originally, and who voted on its contents.
Ponder that for a moment: the contents of the Bible were voted on by men.
Forgive my amusement at your credulity, but citing the Bible is not only circular reasoning, it's laughably naive.