The majority of the religious defend and abide by the Bible until someone close to them commits suicide, then they ignore it completely.

So it's consistent for (as I already mentioned) one of these biographies to insert huge important events at random that all of the others would have taken notice of, but somehow didn't? It's consistent for each of the four gospels to describe scene at the empty tomb in strikingly different ways? It's consistent for two of them to say that Jesus was the son of yahweh, but for the other two to give genealogies showing how he's descended from David via Joseph? Am I to presume that it is also consistent for these genealogies to differ wildly? And I'm guessing it's super consistent for one account to say Judas bought the field of blood with the thirty pieces of silver himself at which point he tripped and exploded into gore confetti upon impact, and for another account to say Judas through the money at the high priests' feet and they used it to buy the field (and oh yeah, Judas hung himself or some shit). So no, the gospels are most definitely not consistent. Now, for ordinary, man-made books, some mild quibbles, but the problem is, you and your ilk claim that the bible is the word of a perfect, infallible god

/r/atheism Thread Parent