God vs. Satan - if God is all-powerful, why does He not just kill Satan?

If you don't believe that God is engaged in some battle with Satan then what about the war in heaven and Satan faking to the Earth and the scenes from Revelation? It seems that you are discounting all of that. Aren't believers supposed to believe every detail in the fairy tale?

 

Freewill signifies division. Planet earth is the place for humans (with freewill) to divide. In the end, the division means either one is God in a forever realm (which we call heaven), or not. Earth is thus for humans to display who they are. God doesn't kill everyone considered "bad" on planet earth. He allows them to exercise their freewill till they die, then followed by an open and final judgment.

Similarly, angels (with a lesser degree of freewill) are allowed to exercise their freewill till the final judgment. It's not for God to kill every "bad" angel in the process. Instead, everything is well witnessed within a specified time frame for each and every angel to show up who he is, then followed by the final judgment. It's no point to kill any angel in the middle of such a process.

That being said. The influence of Satan on earth is somehow analog to the distinguishing of iron beads from the tin beads. It helps a lot if you have a magnet at hand to attract the iron beads then remove them, such that the tin beads will be identified from the iron beads. Satan works in a similar way, he "attracts" the unsaved for the saved to be identified. Why do you have to remove your magnet in this case?!

 

Revelation is akin to Nostradamas. Even Eusebius claimed it was spurious and it should never have been included in Canon.

To the question of inerrancy - only Evangelicals and Fundamentalists (Pentecostals and that ilk) believe in inerrancy.

 

Wouldn't it be nice if God killed all criminals for their intention, just before they committed their first felony crime.

I'da been a dead man at age 18, and deservedly so. Stealing.

 

Some angels were put in chains during the days of Noah.

 

Who is that Eusebius guy you are appealing to as an authority figure? He didn't have the Bible when he was supposedly alive. What was his opinion about Bel and the Dragon?

 

Eusebius was the fellow who was tasked - by Emperor Constantine - with putting the books together than we now refer to as the New Testament.

 

That is a myth. The New Testament didn't exist before the 8th Century.

 

Now that is nonsensical gibberish of the highest order.

 

I'm atheist now, but as a believer, I had a conception of God (and Satan) existing outside of normal space-time, and that all the events of the Bible concerning God and Satan occurred without any kind of time referent. We being in space-time have all our lives existing within a sequence between the "time" of Satan's rebellion and God's judgement and final punishment. Whether we end up in heaven or hell, we exist outside of time, so while our existence is an eternity as seen from the space-time realm, in that other realm, we have no sense of the passage of time. Everything is "now". God is eternal and changeless because he exists in a timeless realm in which everything is "now".

 

Produce a legitimate copy of one written before the 8th Century. So far not one person has been able to do it. You could be the first.

 

Yeah, that's the action of a stable and caring God.

 

If he saw that the human gene had been contaminated by the fallen angels, then yes. Destroying the contaminated gene in order to preserve the uncontaminated was the only way to save the human race.

 

Burn the village to save the village.
It's the only compassionate thing to do.

 

Yes. If the village contains a virus which will ultimately destroy everyone alive, the only thing you can do is destroy the virus , before it is too late.

 

400-440 AD Codex Alexandrinus,

 

When they studied the dead sea scrolls, they found they were practically identical to the modern day Bible. The message had not changed at all.

 

Not true .. and same with the Codex Sinaiticus. There are many significant differences - directly intended to change or alter the message.

 

No, the differences were insignificant, relating to grammar and spelling, while the message was identical.

https://probe.org/the-dead-sea-scrolls/

 

No offense but you are talking out your backside. For example - in Sinaiticus there is no long ending of Mark. (a known forgery for some time but this was further confirmation). There are entire books in codex Shepherd of Hermes and Epistle of Barnabas that are not in modern Bibles.

Have a look at Deuteronomy 32:43 - Page 7 gives this passage from 3 different Bibles. The older texts (LXX and Qumran 4QDeut - date prior to the common era) , the Masoretic text (MT) was written 700-900AD http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DT32BibSac.pdf

In the MT the passages in relation to "other divinities" have been completely removed.

The one passage that is the same has God "Cleansing" his peoples land - (in the genocidal sense).

Modern Translations read - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+32&version=NIV

The message has completely changed. Even the ownership of the land has changed. Pious Fraud.

Even if we could excuse the MT writers (which we cant) ... what is the excuse of modern translators (who have access to the Sinaiticus and 4QDeut) for leaving out the "other divinities" (well we know the excuse but that does not alleviate the pious fraud).

Never mind that though .. even if we were able to come up with some convoluted explanation for this "sin of omission" .. there is no excuse for changing the last sentence which is the same in all 3 of the older texts.

 

As is illustrated in Post 120 - there are significant differences in some places and Millar Burrows is commentary is disingenuous.

 

It would unbalance the literature and become mundane..

 

You too. No offense of course.

 

Denial much ? I presented you with a specific example of a major change to the text of the Bible and this is what you come up with.

Later Gator

 

That is a fake. One thing all fakes have in common is that the images are always of poor quality and so small that they are impossible to read, preventing an easy analysis. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Codex_Alexandrinus_f41v_-_Luke.jpg

Produce a high quality legitimate image.