Summations Only

Well it is an inconsistency. Albeit minor.
Look through Lev11 and see how nonsensical it is. It's not easy. There is no reason to expect he should know without that absurd list ( contradicted elsewhere as well)
The other reason is kind of say " Faith think". Say there was another guy called Billy. Ole Billy was part of the gang wiped out in the non- existent flood. Anyway, say the bible said Billy was busy sorting through clean and unclean animals. Faith would be the first to say that heathen Billy couldn't know clean from unclean, god didn't spell that out until Leviticus! You imbecile.
So it's inconsistent, but you point isn't lost. It isn't much.The other point which Faith conveniently ignored was the righteous thing. God calls, as far as my memory goes, only two people righteous in the bible. ( I mean two as opposed to seven. Or having seven equal two sometimes but not always). One is Noah. The other is Lot ( the daughter screwer). The best god could come up with is Noah and an incestuous man to call righteous men.
Anyway, Romans 3:10 says no one is righteous. Isaiah 64:6, Job 15:4 imply no one is righteous.
This one I call an outright contradiction.
( Also, as you say, there is no way anybody could have any righteousness before the 10C anyway )))). )

Faith god calls Noah righteous here:
Gen 7:1......for thee I have seen righteous...
Then numerous places in bible they suggest there is no such thing as a righteous man.If your point is no one is perfect, then you're wrong again:
Job 2:3. Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a PERFECT an upright man....So no matter how you want to spin it. You are wrong.
The problem you have is believing apologists. Apologists lie routinely and with no embarrassment. Stop believing them will serve you better.

When you repeat apologist bunk, it will likely be a lie.
Consider using some self thought and bible reading instead.

It's also not clear the laws of Leviticus were used either.
These here imply you can eat anything
Gen9:3 ( came up earlier) Luke 10:8. Romans 14:2Roman14.2 There is nothing unclean of itself

You are correct. Thanks.
We may not have to wait long anyway.

There is really some incredibly stupid comments on eating in the bible and I will leave to you to decide about god approval.Ezekiel 4:12,15 And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man.
( so we have a shit cake here)2 Kings 18:27
....hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?You would have a hard time making up something stupider than this.
Faith I can do this absurdity from the bible stuff with whatever you want to bring up. Please consider not believing what you read on these Christian sites and particularly apologists. Consider reading logically and looking at information not fully sanitized and justified from sites that frankly outright lie.

Faith, I have read about four flood accounts. You know what they all have in common. Some god is pissed. He floods the earth. Some hero exists.
They are all the same that way and none of them happened.
Noah is no more unique than any other flood myth and indeed is most likely a copy of prior mythical flood. And, there is no scientific support for it but ample disproof. Insurmountable disproof actually.
God gave you brain, he wouldn't be insulted if you applied it. No where in the bible does it say you aren't allowed to think for yourself.

There are a few ways to read that absurdity.
The bible is not hard to understand. But believing apologists is not going to do it. They do not care about the truth. Their only objective to preserving some belief. Broaden your knowledge base and consider reading opposing views.
You would not go to only a Muslim site to find out about Islam. You'd read opinions contrary to it as well. The bible is just a book after all.Edited by Golffly, : No reason given.

Wow. I would have thought you had a different thought process. For what it's worth, I consider this spot on.

Thanks Dwise1, in my view that was superb.
What we see here is a theology that makes a bible fit it.
The last long post of faith turned my stomach. It's such deluded bunk, I can't handle it now.

There is a story similar to Abraham/Isaac.
It is in Judges and perhaps we're familiar, if not I'll recap.
Judges 11:29--The spirit of the Lord enters Jephthah. One would think that would be a good thing but alas, many times it isn't.
-If god helps kill the Ammonites, Jephthah will perform a human sacrifice on whoever comes out first from his house. ( Kind of a nice thought)
-Well god comes through on his end and a "very great slaughter" occurs. Thanks god.
-Who comes out of Jephthah's house. His bouncing daughter.
- After the daughter spends a couple months wailing about her virginity. Jephthah offers her as a burnt offering to the lord as promised, keeping his end of the bargainSo we have some similarity in that a human sacrifice is to be performed on behalf of god. God has in his power to stop it, substitute a lamb or (as I now learn by some fantastical bible rewriting by Faith) resurrect the daughter.
But the daughter is killed. No lamb is substituted. No resurrection occurs. Oops.So when phat says "could you even surmise that God had no intention of rescuing Isaac"?Well, indeed, after reading the whole bible. Seeing god murder all over the place, for no reason given, for immoral reasons, for absurd reasons... then have an example of actual human sacrifice...the answer is it is surprising that Isaac doesn't get his neck slit by his father and never to be heard from again.

You are reverse quote mining. And it doesn't support a thing you say.
You have ( apologists) made up everything you are writing to try and explain why a god would torture a father psychologically, to make him think he had to kill his son, for God.
In short, you are rewriting the bible the way you'd like it to be.Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.

How do you think you logically came to this camp, when you haven't shown the ability assess the validity of what your camp tells you?
What you've done is parrot what you've been told. Accept it and rationalize it. But there hasn't been any independent thought shown.
Why should we be expected to believe you are capable of assessing one camp vs. another camp.Edited by Golffly, : spelling

And a good response to that; Dishonesty from whoever started your theology. Followed up by followers who lack the capacity to think or question because it often leads to a lack of faith.

This is the best I could do Faith.
There is a story similar to Abraham/Isaac.
It is in Judges and perhaps we're familiar, if not I'll recap.
Judges 11:29--The spirit of the Lord enters Jephthah. One would think that would be a good thing but alas, many times it isn't.
-If god helps kill the Ammonites, Jephthah will perform a human sacrifice on whoever comes out first from his house. ( Kind of a nice thought)
-Well god comes through on his end and a "very great slaughter" occurs. Thanks god.
-Who comes out of Jephthah's house. His bouncing daughter.
- After the daughter spends a couple months wailing about her virginity. Jephthah offers her as a burnt offering to the lord as promised, keeping his end of the bargainSo we have some similarity in that a human sacrifice is to be performed on behalf of god. God has in his power to stop it, substitute a lamb or (as I now learn by some fantastical bible rewriting by Faith) resurrect the daughter.
But the daughter is killed. No lamb is substituted. No resurrection occurs. Oops.So when phat says "could you even surmise that God had no intention of rescuing Isaac"?Well, indeed, after reading the whole bible. Seeing god murder all over the place, for no reason given, for immoral reasons, for absurd reasons... then have an example of actual human sacrifice...the answer is it is surprising that Isaac doesn't get his neck slit by his father and never to be heard from again.So the short answer to your post is apologists made up every single
word of your post. There is no bible support for it. It's classic quote mining. There is no reason that any person reading the bible could come to that conclusion. There is no rational way to come the conclusion you summarized. Thus there is no rational answer that can be provided except apologists make up shit, the poor followers believe it.