“It takes a powerless god to produce instructions full of ambiguity that its followers derive diametrically opposed interpretations from, and war against each other in their faith that they got it right while the other has it wrong, rendering the messages fully defenseless against the whims of human interpretation, as if those instructions were composed by mere humans.
Your verbose gibberish hasn’t accounted for this phenomenal failure in “divine” delivery.”
These are incredibly weak arguments, and do not in any way deserve the arrogance implicit in this post. It’s not very intelligent at all. Human beings are able to dispute even the definition of what sex is, if you’re Bill Clinton, and are full of all kinds of absurd arguments and destruction of plain meanings to justify themselves. It doesn’t mean that the human language itself is incapable of giving clear meaning. It just means that human beings believe what they want, regardless of the facts.
No, the argument is totally valid.
If two believers interpret one “divine” message to mean opposing things, in the full innocence of their faith, then the failure is on the entity making the message. Human whim is such a big factor in interpreting such vague and self-contradictory messages that people have lived and died fully believing they interpreted right, and the other, wrongly. Who is the arbiter? Other humans? Pathetic.
Your counter against the above is ridiculously nonsensical, and not fully thought through.