>>97899496> I don't understand what this meansIn your interpretation of the story, YHVH punished humans for not populating the whole earth by splitting their languages. So YHVH did something that made it even harder for people to do what he wanted them to do.
> This is determinism, meaning God willed everything, both good and bad, for whatever reasonIt's a logical consequence of being the creator of the universe and omnipotent (which implies omniscience). Nothing happens unless such a being causes it to happen.
> I don't subscribe to this understanding of God's omniscience.So how do you define omniscience?
> Straight up false; if not, can you provide evidence of this being the case?> Genesis 1:28Yes, by pointing out that the mandate comes from Genesis 1, you are refuting your own point. Man was placed on earth at the end of chapter 3, not before. At that point in the story, people weren't even on the earth, they were in the Garden of Eden. By using "earth", the whole translation makes no sense narratively, nor logically in your interpretation (since, according to you, Adam and Eve's sins, and the exile from Eden, weren't initially part of His plan). You have to come up with excuses that contradict each other to try to save your interpretation from any scrutiny, making your whole view incoherent.
> "otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth."(Genesis 11:4)Again, you are using deliberate mistranslations. The original Hebrew (וַיֹּאמְר֞וּ הָ֣בָה׀ נִבְנֶה־לָּ֣נוּ עִ֗יר וּמִגְדָּל֙ וְרֹאשׁ֣וֹ בַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וְנַֽעֲשֶׂה־לָּ֖נוּ שֵׁ֑ם פֶּן־נָפ֖וּץ עַל־פְּנֵ֥י כָל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃) actually says something that translates to: "And they said, Let us build ourselves a city and a tower, whose top is in heaven, and let us make us a name for ourselves, a name that is spread across all the earth." Almost the opposite of what your translation (which doesn't make sense, since, as I said before, building a tower doesn't prevent people from populating the rest of the world) says.
> Refer to the above explanationNot only is your explanation wrong, it doesn't address my points at all.
> But yes you are right, the LORD is a jealous God indeed, but jealousy is not wrong at all, envy is.Both words mean the same thing in this context. God is envious of other gods when people worship them, and wants them to worship Him instead.
> it's also because demons act on behalf of idols to drive people away form the true God by masking themselves as gods and goddessesIronic, since YHVH is clearly not the true God, as evidenced by His own actions and words.
> Because people were made in the image of God and have value, when you find pleasure in the suffering one goes through them you are committing a horrible act to the individual in which God's image is engrained into. Though sadism is also evil when it comes to animalsWhat makes you think that taking pleasure in someone else's suffering is a "terrible act on the individual"? By your logic, cooking a meal would be the same as tasting it. Also, the fact that you had to mention the concept of "the image of God" in one sentence, and then clarify that the concept is irrelevant, is yet another demonstration of how incoherent your thinking is.
> For both of these cases, in relation to either man or beast, what's abominable is taking pleasure in suffering, which is the opposite of the will of God What makes you think that? The fact that suffering exists is proof that YHVH Himself is a sadist.
