Plot holes in the bible and what the motivation for it would be

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: DiaJax

This is the old testament and God says " I regret I have made Saul King". This strikes me as odd why would God regret anything.

It happens a lot in the Old Testament. The idea that God is omnipotent and infallible came a lot later in history. The God of the OT is just a garden-variety Bronze Age tribal deity. The only thing distinguishing Yahweh from the rest is that his followers worshipped him exclusively.

No surprise that most people don't understand the context of the word "regret" in these instances. From the beginning, it's been God's plan to allow people to make mistakes in order to learn from them. It has happened from the beginning, as in the Garden of Eden. All of it was part of God's plan for people to understand human error and the constant need for a savior, which they would never find in human form or by following fallen angels as pagan gods.

But it is God that is being regretful, not man. This suggests God made a mistake. Which from what I have been told is impossible.

a reply to: DiaJax
Can God Feel Regret?

AS IMPERFECT humans, we all feel regret at times. For example, we may feel sorry after we realize that we have made a mistake. Curiously, the Bible says that Jehovah can feel regret. ‘But God is perfect,’ you say. ‘He does not make mistakes!’ In what way, then, does God feel regret? The answer can help us to understand something awe-inspiring: Jehovah has feelings, and our actions can affect his feelings. Consider the words recorded at Judges 2:11-18.

The Bible book of Judges chronicles a turbulent period in Israel’s history. The nation was now settled in Canaan, the land that God had promised to Abraham. For the next several centuries, Israel’s course could be summed up as a recurring cycle of four phases: defection, oppression, supplication, and deliverance.

Defection. Influenced by the Canaanites, Israel “abandoned Jehovah” and began following other gods; specifically, they “took up serving Baal and the Ashtoreth images.”* Such a defection amounted to apostasy. Little wonder that the Israelites “offended Jehovah,” the God who had delivered Israel out of Egypt!—Verses 11-13; Judges 2:1.

Oppression. Provoked to righteous anger, Jehovah would withdraw his protection from the people who had turned their backs on him. The Israelites would then fall “into the hand of their enemies,” who would come in and pillage the land.—Verse 14.

Supplication. In the throes of distress, the Israelites would feel sorry for their wrong course and cry out to God for help. Their supplication may be indicated by the expression “groaning because of their oppressors.” (Verse 18) Supplicating God was part of the recurring cycle. (Judges 3:9, 15; 4:3; 6:6, 7; 10:10) How did God respond?

Deliverance. Jehovah would hear Israel’s groaning and “feel regret.” The Hebrew word rendered “feel regret” can mean to “change one’s mind or intention.” One reference work says: “Jehovah, moved by their groaning, changed from his purpose of punishment to one of deliverance.” In his mercy, Jehovah would “raise up judges,” who would deliver his people from their enemies.—Verse 18.

Did you notice what moved God to feel regret, or change his mind? It was the change in attitude on the part of his people. Think of it this way: A loving father may discipline an erring child, perhaps by withholding some privilege. But upon seeing that the child is truly sorry, the father decides to end the punishment.

What do we learn about Jehovah from this account? Whereas willful sin arouses his anger, repentant hearts move him to show mercy. It is sobering to think that what we do can affect God’s feelings. Why not learn how you can make Jehovah’s “heart rejoice”? (Proverbs 27:11) You will never regret it.

a reply to: whereislogic

But Saul does repent. Saul admits his mistake yet God still chooses David over Saul.

The regret god feels is over the poor choices humans make. God chose Saul to be king. Although Saul made two mistakes for which he tried to repent God chose not to accept his repentance. In turn choosing a new king and abandoned Saul.

Don't quote me on this but if you admit your sins and repent aren't your sins forgiven. If this is true God would have no reason to regret choosing Saul as king.

God could still choose a new king but the regret is unnecessary.

Haven't there been other people in the bible who have sinned and been redeemed?

a reply to: Deetermined

From the beginning, it's been God's plan to allow people to make mistakes in order to learn from them.

So it’s always been part of God’s plan to make us suffer. Even though, being omnipotent an’ all, He could have made a world in which nobody and nothing ever needed to suffer.

Some God, that. The embodiment of callousness and sadism.

Fortunately for His reputation, your claim does not hold up to textual scrutiny.

Genesis 6:6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

God isn’t sorry that mankind is suffering, He’s sorry He made man in the first place.

In Exodus 32, Moses gives God a tongue-lashing for his cruelty towards the Israelites. God is chastened.

Exodus 32:14 And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

This conversation with Moses isn’t about letting people suffer for their own good. It’s about actively persecuting them, and ceasing to do so when one is rebuked.

In the First Book of Samuel, God regrets a specific decision He has made:

1 Samuel 15:10-11 Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel, saying, It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the Lord all night.

God isn’t sorry that the Hebrews are suffering, but that Saul isn’t playing by His rules. It is after this complaint that Samuel abandons Saul. He also lies to Saul, directly contradicting what God said earlier by telling Saul,

1 Samuel 15:29 The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.

A few verses later, the Bible confirms that Samuel lies in telling Saul this, by repeating

1 Samuel 15:35 And the Lord repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.

That is the last line of the chapter. The next chapter is about the selection of David to replace Saul.

There are numerous other instances of this kind scattered through the Old Testament. The Book of Jeremiah, in particular, is full of them.

*

All of it was part of God's plan for people to understand human error and the constant need for a savior, which they would never find in human form or by following fallen angels as pagan gods.

Say rather, it was the priests’ plan to keep the people dependent on the God they had raised up and promoted, so that priestly wealth and power over the masses might be preserved and exalted.

a reply to: Astyanax


How do we know that the "Holy Books" were written by GOD, ALLAH, etc..?

a reply to: whereislogic

God is fittingly described as omnipotent.

Right. So God is omnipotent.

The God described in the bible is all-powerful or almighty, but He still can't do just anything you can imagine.

This is a new meaning of omnipotence? All-powerful but impotent to do evil? All powerful but unable to tell a simple lie?

The only way to prove Satan wrong conclusively or provide sufficient evidence for the observer is to let it play out.

Prove to whom? To humans? Why should an omnipotent Creator, who could bend the universe to His will, be concerned with our opinion of Him? Is it because He loves us? Then His love is a weakness that compromises His omnipotence. Or is it because, being perfectly good, He is unable to lie? Then He is not omnipotent, and there’s an end to it.

I know you JWs don’t believe Jesus was actually divine. However, you do believe he was the Son of God and the King of Heaven and God’s most beloved creation. So tell us — what kind of omnipotence finds itself in such a bind that it must sacrifice its own favourite creature to itself in order to restore the order of creation?

Especially when the sacrifice is fake: the victim is resurrected three days later. All a bit of a charade, isn’t it?

I bet the OP is as curious as I am to find out how you deal with that particular ‘plot hole’.

a reply to: carewemust

How do we know that the "Holy Books" were written by GOD, ALLAH, etc..?

On the contrary, we know that they were not.

The Bible is a book about God, written by human beings. Some claim that it is divinely inspired, but I have never heard anyone claim that the Almighty ever put pen to paper (or stylus to vellum) and authored it himself.

The Qu'ran does claim to be the literal word of God, but it was not written down by Him but rather recited using Muhammad as a mouthpiece. Others later wrote down what he said, and the whole thing was committed to writing some years after the Prophet’s death.

Are you suggesting that, though the books are fallible, God is not? Then whence, as Epicurus enquired, cometh evil?

originally posted by: midnightstar
Heck he GOD him self committed the first sin I do believe its considered a sin to lay with your sister or mother or father or brother and who else was there to lay with in eden ?

God made man on the 6th day, read it in Genesis. God made Adam and Eve on the 8th day.

See if you don't study the Bible in depth it won't make sense to you.

a reply to: xstealth


God didn't make man on the 8th day, that was the 6th, you are incorrect.

Rested on the 7th because He was done creating.

I don't know what makes you think you are correct, but you need to read that again. I don't have to bother typing it, it's page 1 and everyone knows this.

I hope you are joking.

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: midnightstar
Heck he GOD him self committed the first sin I do believe its considered a sin to lay with your sister or mother or father or brother and who else was there to lay with in eden ?

God made man on the 6th day, read it in Genesis. God made Adam and Eve on the 8th day.

See if you don't study the Bible in depth it won't make sense to you.

That's probably why you think that man was created on day 8.

Because you have not studied page 1 in depth never mind the Bible, you clearly lack comprehension if you really think that.

I don't see how it is possible to claim that and claim that someone else needs to study in depth or won't understand...doesn't and that you do.

He created man on day 6, 7 He rested.

Day 8 was the first day after the completion of all creation. Nothing was created on day 8.

All the depth in the Universe won't change that fact.

originally posted by: EasternShadow

originally posted by: DiaJax
a reply to: Disturbinatti
All I know is in Judaism Jesus was a prophet of God and Christianity he was the son of god.

Jesus the son of God?

Wrong.

Christians believe in individual salvation from sin through repentance and receiving Jesus Christ as their God and Savior through faith (and in some Christian traditions, good works). Jews believe in individual and collective participation in an eternal dialogue with God through tradition, rituals, prayers and ethical actions. Christianity generally believes in a Triune God, one person of whom became human. Judaism emphasizes the Oneness of God and rejects the Christian concept of God in human form.

en.wikipedia.org...

I agree Jesus pbuh is not the literal son of God, the quotes surviving the Gospel of the Hebrews have him calling the Holy Spirit his "Mother" which outraged many forcing Jerome to lie and say it's because Spirit is fem. in Hebrew. That is true but would explain "She" and not "Mother'', Simon Cepha also calls the Spirit a She in Syriac Homilies and Recognitions of Clement, the oldest dated (410AD) MS. in the world.

So the Father thing is figurative too. His Father and God are our's too. ''You have one Father in Heaven." "Our Father." "Our God is ONE God."

But on the other hand I think that person may have just been saying Xtians BELIEVE Jesus pbuh is "God the Son."

Not that it makes sense.

At least you get it.

Genesis 1:26

Let us make man ....31...day 6.

Genesis 2:3 So God blessed the SEVENTH day and made it Holy, because ON IT God had rested from all the work that he had done in creation.

The second account doesn't provide cronology and doesn't in any way contradict the cronological sequence of the first.

Lots of good that "in depth" study has been!!

JK. We all make mistakes. I am sure you meant 7th.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

The second account doesn't provide cronology and doesn't in any way contradict the cronological sequence of the first.

What!!

Man was the last living thing God fomed in genesis Chapter 1.

God even let Earth bring forth the trees and all living Things before God formed man. God also formed Man as male and female.

In Genesisi Chapter 2. Lord God first formed Adam from the dust on the ground. And then Lord God formed A garden east of Eden.


Just a side question.

Why did Adam not give a name to the serpent?

Adam named all the beasts that Lord God made in the garden of Eden.

- All the beast that Lord God formed. Are they the same beasts we have to day?

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: whereislogic

God is fittingly described as omnipotent.

Right. So God is omnipotent.

The God described in the bible is all-powerful or almighty, but He still can't do just anything you can imagine.

This is a new meaning of omnipotence? All-powerful but impotent to do evil? All powerful but unable to tell a simple lie?

The only way to prove Satan wrong conclusively or provide sufficient evidence for the observer is to let it play out.

Prove to whom? To humans? Why should an omnipotent Creator, who could bend the universe to His will, be concerned with our opinion of Him? Is it because He loves us? Then His love is a weakness that compromises His omnipotence. Or is it because, being perfectly good, He is unable to lie? Then He is not omnipotent, and there’s an end to it.

I know you JWs don’t believe Jesus was actually divine. However, you do believe he was the Son of God and the King of Heaven and God’s most beloved creation. So tell us — what kind of omnipotence finds itself in such a bind that it must sacrifice its own favourite creature to itself in order to restore the order of creation?

Especially when the sacrifice is fake: the victim is resurrected three days later. All a bit of a charade, isn’t it?

I bet the OP is as curious as I am to find out how you deal with that particular ‘plot hole’.

your comments here make me wonder if lucifer was cast out of heaven for pointing such things out. the king of kings sabotaging the greater order for the sake of a minor player, ie the human race. becoming obsessive and irrational to the point of losing the war just to win a skirmish. why else would an omnipotent force of creation sack a third of its royal army, including one of the most prized members of his personal guard?

a reply to: DiaJax
God does not accept insincere repentance. i.e. Just words. Saul's actions afterwards (towards David) clearly provide evidence that he wasn't really repenting, just doing the political thing (sort of like Trump apologizing for all the people he scammed with the Trump University, if he would ever do that).

Notice the following verses from 1 Samuel 15:24,25,30

Then Saul said to Samuel: “I have sinned, for I have overstepped the order of Jehovah and your words, because I feared the people and listened to what they said. 25 And now, please, pardon my sin, and return with me so that I may bow down to Jehovah.”

30 At this he said: “I have sinned. But honor me, please, in front of the elders of my people and in front of Israel. Return with me, and I will bow down to Jehovah your God.”

It was just for show, to be seen together with Samuel by the people so that the people would think he still had Jehovah's approval. A political stunt. Notice also that he says "your God". Not "my God" or "our God", showing a glimpse of what was in his heart at that point in time. If he had had true repentance he wouldn't have had any issue with God choosing David to succeed and replace him and he would have humbly accepted the correction by his God. He got powerhungry and filled with pride, and it didn't go away after that incident, it got worse. Something Jehovah already could read in his heart at that point in time.
Repentance

In Biblical usage, a change of mind accompanied by heartfelt regret over a former way of life, wrong actions, or what one has failed to do. Genuine repentance produces fruitage, a changed course of action.—Mt 3:8; Ac 3:19; 2Pe 3:9.

Matthew 3:8

8 Therefore, produce fruit that befits repentance.

Saul did not do so, as is clearly seen from the rest of the record.

Acts 3:19

19 “Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, so that seasons of refreshing may come from Jehovah himself

Saul didn't. Genuine repentance isn't about just saying you're sorry or acknowledging what you've done wrong. Only genuine repentance will be accepted by Jehovah. Saul continued in his path of defiance against Jehovah's will (which was to make David king after that). He did not turn around or produce fruit that befits repentance.

originally posted by: Astyanax

This is a new meaning of omnipotence?

No, it's old. The power to act wickedly or tell a lie does not equal the will to act wickedly or tell a lie. Without the will to do so, it's not gonna happen by a being that is also omniscient and perfect (as in it's not going to happen by mistake). Therefore, a perfect, omniscient and omnipotent God that does not want to lie or act wickedly cannot possibly do so. This is what the bible also clearly confirms when it says "God, who cannot lie," (Titus 1:2) and "For a certainty, God does not act wickedly; The Almighty does not pervert justice." (Job 34:12)

Jesus is the divine Son of God. I doubt you have much interest in Jesus' ransom sacrifice and the reasons why. For those who do:
Why do we die? Why did Jesus Die? PART ONE

Foreknowledge, Foreordination: Insight, Volume 1

Infinite exercise of foreknowledge? The argument that God’s not foreknowing all future events and circumstances in full detail would evidence imperfection on his part is, in reality, an arbitrary view of perfection. Perfection, correctly defined, does not demand such an absolute, all-embracing extension, inasmuch as the perfection of anything actually depends upon its measuring up completely to the standards of excellence set by one qualified to judge its merits. (See PERFECTION.) Ultimately, God’s own will and good pleasure, not human opinions or concepts, are the deciding factors as to whether anything is perfect.—De 32:4; 2Sa 22:31; Isa 46:10.

To illustrate this, God’s almightiness is undeniably perfect and is infinite in capacity. (1Ch 29:11, 12; Job 36:22; 37:23) Yet his perfection in strength does not require him to use his power to the full extent of his omnipotence in any or in all cases. Clearly he has not done so; if he had, not merely certain ancient cities and some nations would have been destroyed, but the earth and all in it would have been obliterated long ago by God’s executions of judgment, accompanied by mighty expressions of disapproval and wrath, as at the Flood and on other occasions. (Ge 6:5-8; 19:23-25, 29; compare Ex 9:13-16; Jer 30:23, 24.) God’s exercise of his might is therefore not simply an unleashing of limitless power but is constantly governed by his purpose and, where merited, tempered by his mercy.—Ne 9:31; Ps 78:38, 39; Jer 30:11; La 3:22; Eze 20:17.

Similarly, if, in certain respects, God chooses to exercise his infinite ability of foreknowledge in a selective way and to the degree that pleases him, then assuredly no human or angel can rightly say: “What are you doing?” (Job 9:12; Isa 45:9; Da 4:35) It is therefore not a question of ability, what God can foresee, foreknow, and foreordain, for “with God all things are possible.” (Mt 19:26) The question is what God sees fit to foresee, foreknow, and foreordain, for “everything that he delighted to do he has done.”—Ps 115:3.

Selective exercise of foreknowledge. ...

a reply to: whereislogic

Plot?
That implies FICTION, and fiction it is.The Old Testament is a Bronze Age fable, of course it has "holes".It was written by uneducated, superstitious sheepherders and , uh, hucksters of the supernatural.It was originally that way, still is, always will be because of it's mythological nature.That's the FACTS!
Whatever you want kids! That's religion for ya!

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: whereislogic
Why should an omnipotent Creator, who could bend the universe to His will, be concerned with our opinion of Him?

I was not trying to describe a motive for God. I thought for a moment about the need for making that clear when I was using that phrase cause I read the same thing into it when using my atheist spectacles. But I can keep on elaborating then about what I'm not saying, implying or doing (or trying to rephrase things to close such doors). At the moment I wrote that I was thinking about the benefit of it all for us or other creations such as angels.

a reply to: TzarChasm

your comments here make me wonder if lucifer was cast out of heaven for pointing such things out. the king of kings sabotaging the greater order for the sake of a minor player, ie the human race. becoming obsessive and irrational to the point of losing the war just to win a skirmish. why else would an omnipotent force of creation sack a third of its royal army, including one of the most prized members of his personal guard?

From a strictly story perspective this would actually make the most sense and it fits within the framework of omnipotent/omniscient. Maybe Lucifer saw that God was getting obsessed and chose not to bow to God creation, Adam, (Quran) almost saying to God. "Why are we doing this?". Someone taking to much pride in his work becomes offended and discussion ensues then eventually a fight. Then the fall of the angels

IMO, makes for a good story motivation which definitely means no plot holes.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Yes, it does suggest a purge, doesn’t it? Especially in the light of God’s instructions to Adam and Eve regarding the Tree of Knowledge, which indicates that Yahweh is pretty sensitive to informed criticism.