Originally Posted by TF49

DBT ……… you posted:

“Not that any of this matters to the contradiction between descriptions of a God of Love and the vindictive Tyrant of the old testament. If one is true, the other must be false, hence a contradiction between the two sets of descriptions.”

You are wrong in your statement. You are not simply pointing out a contradiction. You are clearly making an interpretation of Scripture and are indeed therefore concluding there is a contradiction. If you were not interpreting scripture …...(wrongly) … you would not even note a supposed contradiction. You have concluded that God is “a tyrant” and you have concluded that the description of a “God of Love” is incongruent.

You have come to these conclusions based on…. your own opinion….. and then insert your opinion in a terribly skewed interpretation of the Bible.

Yep, not a bible scholar…..

btw…. what you have done here is called “eisegesis.”




DBT, you also posted this:

“You yourself happen to be assuming the vindictive tyrant over the God of Love, who does not keep a record of wrongs and is 'good to all' unconditionally.”

Here you go again…. you make a statement and this statement is indeed your “interpretation” of verses that you do not quote but make clear reference to.

You make the statement that God does “not keep a record of wrongs” and is “good to all” unconditionally.

When challenged on this, you retreated to bafflegab and obfuscation.

You have indeed interpreted and have posted that God does “not keep a record of wrongs.”
You have indeed interpreted and have posted that God is “good to all” unconditionally.

Both of your interpretations are inconsistent with even a basic level of scholarship. You seemingly have no idea of the context or application.


When challenged, you retreat to “cut and paste” ….. that is all you can do …. you cannot support nor explain what you said.


The point is this: You have little knowledge of the Bible and little knowledge of biblical interpretation. But, you plunge ahead anyway in your zeal to …..what?
.........influence folks with even less knowledge than you….. Is that it?


Anyway, gotta go, have another road trip.


You offer nothing more than your opinion while venting your frustration at your own inability to deal with the issue of contradictions in the bible.

By focusing your attention and your ire onto your opponent you fail to address the argument and the issues being raised.

It is not my 'scholarship' that is in question. Why you probably wonder....well, because the cruel vindictive nature of the old testament god was noted centuries ago. It is neither my idea or my interpretation of the bible.

I am not making up verses. I quote the relevant verses and it is the verses that speak for themselves.

The verses say what they say without alteration or input from me.

There is a clear and undeniable divide between the nature of the OT god in comparison to the Gospel version. One describes the willingness to kill and condemn generations, the other to forgive and keep no record of wrongs. Which is an undeniable contradiction.


It is not me saying these words, or making these claims. It is right there for anyone to see and read.

It is the apologist who seeks to alter what the words and verses say and mean and transform their undeniable meaning into something more suitable for the believer, more palatable version of the bible an its history at the expense of truth





Last edited by DBT; 07/17/19.