Mark Tapscott over at Hillfaith has yet another attempt at excusing bible contradictions. It’s a short one so I’ll show it all here: (BTW, no memes)
“Everybody knows at least the general outlines of the Old Testament story of David killing the giant Philistine warrior, Goliath, with nothing more than a sling and a smooth stone, right?
That’s why atheist critics of the Bible often point to two verses in Samuel that seem to indicate that David actually killed Goliath twice.
“Aha! See!!! The Bible can’t be the inspired, true word of God because here’s the prophet Samuel claiming in successive verses that David killed Goliath by hitting him in the forehead with a stone and that David killed Goliath with his own sword.”
Here’s the key passage in I Samuel 17:48-51:
“When the Philistine arose and came and drew near to meet David, David ran quickly toward the battle line to meet the Philistine. And David put his hand in his bag and took out a stone and slung it and struck the Philistine on his forehead. The stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the ground.
“So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and struck the Philistine and killed him. There was no sword in the hand of David. Then David ran and stood over the Philistine and took his sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him and cut off his head with it. When the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled.”
So, did David kill the mighty Philistine giant with his sling and a smooth stone or with Goliath’s own sword? Or why does Samuel seem to indicate that David killed Goliath twice, once with his sling and stone, and a second time with Goliath’s sword?
On its face, this appears to be a clear example of a contradiction in Scripture and one that raises a legitimate doubt about what Samuel wrote was actually inspired by God or Samuel let his creative writing juices go a little to far.
There are two fundamental points to be considered here. First, according to the Apologetics Press’s Eric Lyons, in the third of his three volumes “The Anvil Rings,” it’s highly unlikely that any sentient individual writer is going to purposely contradict himself in consecutive sentences.
“Second, we need to keep in mind that there are many specific questions that Bible students cannot answer about things mentioned in Scripture,” Lyons points out. “For example, God created light without the Sun on day one of Creation, but we are uninformed about the nature of that light.”
Lyons then reminds us that I Samuel “could easily be indicating that David struck Goliath with an initial, unrecoverable blow to the forehead, and then quickly finished him off via decapitation.”
If that sounds like a rationalization, remember that we often hear of people killed in car accidents when in fact they didn’t pass away until on the way to the hospital or a fews later in the hospital. Do we say the hospital killed that person? No, we typically say they were killed as a result of a crash.
Lyons closes by pointing out that “it seems equally unjust to accuse the Bible of a contradiction for using words and phrases in ways not all that different from how we truthfully, understandably and defensibly use them in 21st Century America.
“Why can’t we be as fair with Scripture as we are with each other? David dealt a crushing blow to Goliath with a sling and a stone, and then finished him off with the giant’s own sword.”
nice excuses, Mark. Curious how you assume your author to have a clue, when there is no evidence of that at all. the anonymous authors of the bible nonsense weren’t that intelligent. your apologist tries to clami that language was the same 2000+ years ago. Curious how it isn’t and christians often try to claim how dare we assume the ancients thought as we do when their nonsense is questioned. Nice hypocrisy.
“here are two fundamental points to be considered here. First, according to the Apologetics Press’s Eric Lyons, in the third of his three volumes “The Anvil Rings,” it’s highly unlikely that any sentient individual writer is going to purposely contradict himself in consecutive sentences.
I know that there are many contradictions in your bible and christians can’t explain. That’s because your bible is an incoherent mess by an ignorant people.
This isn’t the only mess regarding Goliath. I addressed that one here.
Club Schadenfreude 
For me, this is kind of a contradiction, but not one of the more important ones. It’s more an example of sloppy unclear writing, which you wouldn’t think would be a problem for an all-powerful god. But somehow this god allowed their “perfect book” to be filled with confusing stuff like this.
The contradictions that I find more important are things like: Does god know everything or not? Does god punish children for the sins of their parents or not? Is correct belief all that’s required for salvation, or are correct actions also required? Since the bible has verses supporting all those positions, the only way to come up with an answer to those questions is some serious cherry-picking.
LikeLike
The David and Goliath text utilizes a narrative technique called recapitulation, where an event is described generally and then explained in greater detail. Such storytelling methods are consistent throughout Scripture and other ancient texts. It isn’t confusing, just a narrative technique you aren’t likely familiar with.
As to you other points, I understand how these might seem contradictory at first glance, but much of this comes down to reading verses in their proper context and understanding the Bible as a whole. For example:
Does God know everything or not? Scripture affirms God’s omniscience (e.g., Psalm 139:4, 1 John 3:20). Verses that seem to suggest otherwise (like Genesis 22:12) often use anthropomorphic language to describe God’s interactions with humanity in ways we can understand.
Does God punish children for their parents’ sins? Ezekiel 18:20 clearly states that individuals are responsible for their own sin. Passages like Exodus 34:7, which mention visiting iniquity “to the third and fourth generation,” describe the natural consequences of sin affecting families, not a direct punishment for ancestors’ sins.
Is correct belief or correct action required for salvation? The Bible presents faith and works as complementary. Faith leads to salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9), but genuine faith produces good works (James 2:17-18). They’re not contradictory but part of the same transformative relationship with God.
The key to clarity is understanding how different passages fit into the larger biblical narrative. It’s not cherry-picking—it’s seeing the bigger picture.
LikeLike
Thank you for such a good example of the cherry-picking I was talking about. You have just quoted verses that support your opinion of what you think the book means, and ignored or rationalized the ones that don’t. And I guess you have to do that to maintain your belief, because once you realize that your book is not divinely inspired, but purely the work of fallible humans who didn’t agree on all this stuff, you can’t keep your faith.
LikeLike
What I provided isn’t cherry-picking, but rather a reflection of how biblical hermeneutics works, a method developed over centuries to interpret Scripture. Hermeneutics is about understanding the Bible in context—historical, literary, and theological.
For example, when a verse seems to suggest a contradiction, we don’t just pick the ones that support our view and ignore others. We study how different passages fit into the broader narrative of Scripture and how the Bible interprets itself. This involves considering the cultural and historical context, the genre of the text, and the overall message of the Bible.
Take the issue of God’s omniscience, for instance. There are verses that describe God’s all-knowing nature, and some passages that appear to suggest He is testing or discovering something about humans. But these are understood as God accommodating Himself to human language and perception. The Church has spent millennia reflecting on these apparent tensions, and the consensus is that they don’t undermine the doctrine of divine omniscience—they instead deepen our understanding of how God interacts with creation in ways we can comprehend.
The same applies to the tension between faith and works. Both are essential in Scripture, and early Church Fathers and theologians have long discussed how they work together. It’s not a simple contradiction but a matter of understanding the relationship between the two.
These aren’t just personal interpretations, but the result of serious theological reflection over centuries. The Church’s teachings are built upon consistent, long-term study of the Bible. So, far from ignoring or rationalizing difficult passages, I’m engaging in the kind of theological reflection that has been central to Christian thought for thousands of years.
Moreover, the Bible is a book that is both accessible and deep. It invites those new to the faith to come and begin understanding, but it also rewards deeper study for those who are intentional about it. A shallow, sophomoric pass over texts like these—without engaging in the deeper hermeneutical work—makes it all too easy to point fingers and cry “Contradiction!” Without taking the time to go beyond the surface, one’s only recourse is to dismiss apparent difficulties, like calling it “cherry-picking,” rather than seeking out the fuller meaning behind the text. Understanding the Bible’s deeper truths takes effort and humility, something that can’t be found in a quick critique without further engagement.
LikeLike
Every Christian claims that only their version is right and their hermeneutics are right. Again, this is no more than cherry picking. That you even need hermeneutics shows your religion isn’t what it claism to be. Why should it take centuries to make sense out of a set of books that the supposed author wants you to understand? You also have the problem that christins change their interpretations over time, so one interpretation, aka hermeneutic, changes for another one.
The context of the bible is that it is a set of books that were never meant to be read together, except for perhaps the torah part. They were all written by different anonymous people, in different places at different times. Claiming there is one “context” is false and we can see that since christains cannot agree on what they want to claim as context.
When there are contradictions, Christians do just pick the ones that support their view and ignore the others. For example, that’s why there are Christians who believe in free will and those who claim predestination. Each side claims that it’s version is the right one, citing being “biblical” having “hermeneautics”, the holy ghost told them, etc.
First question, why does an omniscient god need to test anyone? By definition it knows the result. There is nothing to show that this god has to accommodate itself to anything and do tell why an omnipotent being would need to do that. Again, as I have noted elsewhere, this god has no problem at all telling people things clearly and telling them to immediately stop something. But Christians must invent a god that is less than humans, that it has to coax them to stop slavery, and that it has to use confusing nonsense since they need excuses why their god supports slavery, etc. It seems that they have to claim that this god couldn’t make humans that could understand it which is a rather amusing thought.
Of course, cultists don’t think that their bible is wrong, and thus they have to invent apologetics to explain away what they don’t like about it so they can keep clinging to the idea that they have an omnipotent best friend. That’s your “consensus”.
Per Paul, there is no faith or works needed, just “grace”. There is perhaps a tacit assumption that grace will cause faith and works.
These are personal interpretations, by those that christains consider their leaders. That doesn’t make them facts. There are many “churches”, and they each disagree. Long term study of baseless nonsense also doesn’t make it true. “theological reflection” is what has led to Christianity splintering.
The bible is not accessible or deep considering how Christians treat it. Christians can’t agree on it, and there is nothing wise or thoughtful about it that hasn’t come from another source long before this religion existed. One thing tht christinas often do is claim that there are different levels of Christians and their understanding. This often comes out in when a christian claims his theology is more “sophisticated” than that of others, and that of non-christians. It’s so common that atheists have noted it and ridiculed it: Sophisticated Theology.
And not one sophisticated theologian can show that his understanding is any better than the next christian’s or non-christian’s. Understanding the bible takes effort, it does not take humility, by which the christain means accepting without question.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As I stated in another reply, recapitulation doesn’t mean what you claim. So I don’t’ know if you mean another word or you simply have this one completely wrong. Recapitulation is “a concise summary” per merriam webster.
It is confusing as we can already see, Phillip. The whole bible is confusing considering how christians don’t agree.
Again, you claim “context” and there is none since you assume that these book are all meant to be read together and there is nothing to support that.
This god does not know everything per the bible. There are claims of omniscience, but this god repeatedly is surprised by things. Nothing in Genesis says that this is just for how humans would supposedly “understand” things. It literally says that this god didn’t know where adam and eve are.
“8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” 10 He said, “I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.” 11 He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” 12 The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate.” 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent tricked me, and I ate.” “
There are several problems here with this god’s supposed omniscience. It doesn’t know where Adam and Eve are. It didn’t know that satan was in the garden, or it knew and did not warn Adam and Eve. It doessn’t know why adam and eve are hiding.
There are other instances in the bible wehre this god is not what christains claim. There’s the infamous iron chariots. There is the tower of babel where god has to travel to see it and be afraid of it. This god has to travel to see if Sodom and Gomorrah are as bad as people “tell” him. “0 Then the Lord said, “How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and how very grave their sin! 21 I must go down and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me; and if not, I will know.””
Again, Christian presupposition informs how they interpret the bible and that makes them invent things that aren’t supported since a literal reading makes their god not what they want.
You also make up something to excuse your god when it comes to Exdous 20. Nothing at all shows that this god simply punishes people by collateral damage for their ancestors’ actions.
“ You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, 6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation[b] of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
This has it saying it does the direct punishment. The skeptics annotated bible has quite a long list of contradictions and good articles on just how the contradictions work. This is the one regarding if this god punishes people for other people’s sins or not:
“Yes, God often punishes innocent people for the actions of others.
He punished every human being because of something one man did.
By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men. Romans 5:12
God punishes children for things that their fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers, and great-great grandfathers did. He is so proud of this that he repeated it four times in the Bible.
I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. Exodus 20:5 , Deuteronomy 5:9
Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children unto the third and to the fourth generation. Exodus 34:7
Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. Numbers 14:18
“Bastards” don’t choose to be bastards. And yet God punishes them by excluding them from his congregation. And not just them, but all of their descendants for ten generations.
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. Deuteronomy 23:2
If you fail to follow all of God’s commandments, God will curse your children.
If thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day … Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body. Deuteronomy 28:15-18
For walking after, serving, or worshiping other gods; forsaking Yahweh, not obeying his laws, etc.
Wherefore hath the LORD pronounced all this great evil against us? or what is our iniquity? or what is our sin that we have committed against the LORD our God? Then shalt thou say unto them, Because your fathers have forsaken me, saith the LORD, and have walked after other gods, and have served them, and have worshipped them, and have forsaken me, and have not kept my law. Jeremiah 16:10-11
And sometimes God slaughters children for the unspecified sins of their fathers.
Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers. Isaiah 14:21
The Great and Mighty God shows lovingkinndness to thousands, but punishes children for the iniquities of their fathers.
Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD of hosts, is his name. Jeremiah 32:18
Here are some examples from the Bible:
• When Ham saw his father Noah drunk and naked, Noah cursed Ham’s son Caanan and all of Caanan’s descendants with slavery. This curse punished a son (and perhaps an entire race) for something (God knows what) his father supposedly did.
And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father …. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan [Ham’s son]; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Genesis 9:21-25
• God “closed up all the wombs” of the women in King Abimelech’s court to punish him for believing Abraham’s cowardly (half)lie about his half sister and wife, Sarah. So God punished the women for whatever it was that Abraham and Abimelech did.
The LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham’s wife. Genesis 20:18
• God punished all of Eli’s descendants for the behavior of Eli’s sons.
I will perform against Eli all things which I have spoken concerning his house … I will judge his house for ever … because his sons made themselves vile, and he restrained them not. 1 Samuel 3:12-13
• God was angry at David for having Uriah killed. As a punishment, God had David’s wives raped by his neighbor while everyone else watched. (The “neighbor” that God chose to do his dirty work for him was David’s own son, Absalom.)
Thou [David] hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife … Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun. 2 Samuel 12:9-12
And Ahithophel said unto Absalom, Go in unto thy father’s concubines, which he hath left to keep the house … So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel. 2 Samuel 16:21-22
• To punish David for having Uriah killed and causing others to blaspheme, God killed Bathsheba’s baby boy.
Because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die. … And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick. … on the seventh day, that the child died. 2 Samuel 12:14-18
• God sent a three-year famine on David’s kingdom. When David asks God why, God answers: “It is for Saul, and his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites.” So God sent a famine to punish a kingdom for something that a former king had done.
There was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites. 2 Samuel 21:1
• To appease God and end the famine that was caused by his predecessor (Saul), David agrees to have two of Saul’s sons and five of his grandsons killed and hung up “unto the Lord.” God stopped the famine after Saul’s sons and grandsons were killed and hung up for him.
Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the LORD …. And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD. … And after that God was intreated for the land. 2 Samuel 21:6-14
• To punish David for a census that he (and/or) Satan inspired, God killed 70,000 men (and 200,000 or so women and children) in a pestilsence.
And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. … So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning even to the time appointed: and there died of the people from Dan even to Beersheba seventy thousand men. 2 Samuel 24:1-15
And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel. … So the LORD sent pestilence upon Israel: and there fell of Israel seventy thousand men. 2 Samuel 24:1-15
• God was angry with Solomon, but decided to punish Solomon’s son rather than Solomon himself, because he liked Solomon’s father (David) so darned much.
Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant. Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it for David thy father’s sake: but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son. 1 Kings 11:11-12
• Since Ahab humbles himself before the Lord, God decides not to bring evil on him; he’ll bring it on Ahab’s son instead.
Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: but in his son’s days will I bring the evil upon his house. 1 Kings 21:29
• Elisha makes his servant (Gehazi) and all his descendants lepers forever.
Elisha said unto him … The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. 2 Kings 5:25-27
• God will punish the children of Shemaiah because their father taught rebellion against the Lord.
Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will punish Shemaiah the Nehelamite, and his seed … because he hath taught rebellion against the LORD. Jeremiah 29:32
• And in the ultimate injustice, God punishes everyone for someone else’s sin, and then saves them all by killing an innocent victim.
Justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath. … We were reconciled to God by the death of his Son. … By the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation … By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Romans 5:9-19
No, God doesn’t punish people for the actions of others.
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deuteronomy 24:16
But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin. 2 Kings 14:6, 2 Chronicles 25:4
In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity. Jeremiah 31:29-30
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezekiel 18:20
“
The bible can’t decide how someone is saved. We have jesus saying that belief is what is needed in John 3. We have jesus also claiming that there is no choice to believe, but salvation comes from this god choosing who it wants to allow to worship it (damning everyone else) Matthew 13. Jesus shows that works are required when it talks about taking care of the sick, poor, etc. Paul says that salvation comes from only this god picking you. He also says that women need to bear children to be saved. It’s quite a mess. They are all contradictory since each instance claims that the method being talked about is the only one. Again, these books were not written together.
and curious how faith doesn’t produce good works since Christians can’t do what james promises later, in James 5 when he promises that Christians will be able to heal others of injury and disease.
There is no “clarity” and there is no bigger picture. Christians assume that there is, with no evidence to support that claim.
LikeLiked by 1 person
agreed. There are far more important ones taht christians cannot explain away. This god is either incompetent or imaginary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your concern about the narrative of David’s encounter with Goliath in 1 Samuel 17 is a common critique, but it stems from a misunderstanding of both the Hebrew language and narrative style used in ancient texts, as well as the historical and cultural context of biblical storytelling.
Let’s look closely at the passage you referenced:
The perceived contradiction arises because some assume that the text is describing two separate deaths. However, this is a misunderstanding of the way ancient Hebrew narratives functioned. In ancient Hebrew storytelling, it was common to use repetition and elaboration to provide additional details rather than introduce new events.
The act of cutting off Goliath’s head was not a second killing but a confirmation of his death, a common practice in ancient warfare to demonstrate victory decisively. The text isn’t claiming Goliath was killed twice—it’s describing a single victory in two stages.
In the Hebrew language, verbs like “killed” are often used in a comprehensive sense. For example:
This narrative technique is called recapitulation, where an event is described generally and then explained in greater detail. Such storytelling methods are consistent throughout Scripture and other ancient texts.
Early Church Fathers, who approached Scripture with great care and reverence, did not see this passage as problematic. St. Augustine, for example, emphasized the coherence of Scripture and the necessity of reading it within the context of its overarching message. He wrote in The City of God:
“Whatever there is in the Word of God that cannot, when taken literally, be referred either to purity of life or soundness of doctrine, you may set down as figurative.”
In this instance, there’s no doctrinal or ethical contradiction—only a figurative retelling of a singular event through a culturally appropriate narrative style.
In the context of ancient warfare, victories were often emphasized with visible proof, such as displaying the severed head of a defeated opponent. By cutting off Goliath’s head, David provided irrefutable evidence of his triumph, especially for the Israelite and Philistine armies.
The use of Goliath’s sword underscores David’s complete victory—it wasn’t just his skill with the sling but also his boldness in finishing the fight that mattered. The narrative highlights David’s reliance on God, as he had no sword of his own but turned the weapon of his enemy against him.
The claim that there are “two deaths” is based on a modern, overly literal reading of the text rather than an appreciation of ancient narrative techniques.
Both verses describe the same event, focusing on different aspects to highlight David’s faith and God’s power working through him.
LikeLike
Yes it is a common critique and it is still a notable contradiction in a set of books claimed to have been created by a perfect being.
Yes, the story says that David “killed” goliath twice. It is describing two separate death, one by a sling stone, and one by getting one’s head cut off. The first attack may or may not kill. The second most certainly will.
Christains often claim that repetition is used which is true in some cases but not all. And this has two different event separated in time and space. An example of repetition that does exist is found in Zechariah 9 where we see the supposed prophecy of jesus riding on a donkey:
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter Zion!
Shout aloud, O daughter Jerusalem!
Lo, your king comes to you;
triumphant and victorious is he,
humble and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”
The gospels get it wrong since they misinterpreted it, which is amusing. The two different death scenes regarding goliath isn’t doing this. There can’t be two killing blows. What seems to be happening in the story is to try to claim that David didn’t need real weapons to kill goliath the first time, and for reasons unknown it was added that a sword was needed.
Recapitulation is repeating the same thing as a concise summary, not including different events.
Nothing shows that early christains were any more careful or reverent than the next human, and we can see that by the many different versions of christainity that existed from the very beginning. These ignorant people also didn’t see two contradictory versions of the creation story to be problematic either, nor did they see it as problematic to have a god that in one place claims he will never punish someone for someone else’s actions, and in another place says it will. They weren’t the authorities you think they are. Augustine is a notable one for making up things wholesale, like claiming coherence when there is none, claiming unbaptized children go to hell, etc. Christians pick and choose from their “fathers” just as they do from their bible.
There is no overarching message in Christianity since Christians cannot agree on the most basic thigns in their religion nor can they show that their particular version is the right one. Like every other Christian, Augustine just takes what he wants as literal, metaphor, exaggeration, etc. That quote from Augustine guarantees doctrinal and ethical contradiction.
As I have demonstrated you are wrong about the supposed cultural narrative style. The fight didn’t need finishing if David killed goliath with the sling stone. It was finished. All you have is a story that has no evidence that it ever happened, and the usual gilding the lily by the inventors that always gets them into trouble.
If your god is what christains claim, that this god couldn’t get past human frailties shows that it isn’t omnipotent, etc. It’s a lot like when Christians try to claim that their god simply couldn’t’ just tell the Israelites that slavery is wrong, and had to slowly get around to that. If it is omnipotent, it would need no one to write for it, and it could have told the Israelites to immediately stop it with the slavery just like it says to immediately stop it with the eating shrimp.
LikeLike