darth_ender said:

CP3S said:

darth_ender said:

I think the Bible is actually very clear that not everything from God is perfect. In specific, what the Bible implies in various places God's greatest creation, that being mankind, is also clearly pointed out to be quite flawed. And if his greatest creations are flawed, why is it so hard to believe that the message given to and received by and interpreted by those flawed creatures is imperfect?

I didn't mean to say everything from God is perfect, I meant that the Bible claims that God's message is perfect.

And it is. But the Bible is not.

But the Bible itself claims to be all those things. Since it makes those claims, which we are both in agreement are not true, it clearly contains some very blatant falsehoods. This book, which we both agree contains falsehoods, is the only source for the idea of a perfect man dying as a sacrifice for our sins and coming back to life three days later. This idea of a divine sacrifice followed by a resurrection to prove its divinity is the entire premise of Christianity. Once the integrity of this source material is admitted to being flawed, which again, I am grateful we are in agreement on, how can anything it says be taken with more than a grain of salt? What if the narrative of the resurrection is a lie, as the Bible's own claim to being the perfect word of God is a lie?

Again, with the acceptance that the Bible is flawed and full of falsehoods, the entire house of cards starts to collapse. Who can ever say what of it is true and what of it is flawed? This has to put the very basis of Christianity into serious question. Without the divine sacrifice and the resurrection, Christianity as a religion is meaningless.