/lit/ - Literature

>>2279535
I was going to prove you wrong, but apparently you did it yourself (and made your argument look like complet crap in the process). My mind was already devising a reply that should put you in your place, right until this point:
>And the bible isn't supposed to be a scientific textbook
That is all.
I must say that it made me laugh, that religious people think like this.

And no sir, I have read more about religion and its processes than what you would imagine.
I spent 9 years in a Seminary school and all this to end up ditching the faith to logic.
Simple.

>mfw you are using the most recurrent example of contrariety in the bible despite being wrong since god is supposed to know the outcome
Not sir, it is not evolutive when the man who plays dice knows when, how and which result will the aformentioned dice provide.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo

>>2127148
2/10