The Bible Has No Contradictions

"Here is the Genesis verse since you seem to have misread it haha:Genesis 2:17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. This clearly and unequivocally states that "in the day" you eat the apple (not years later; that same day), You "shalt surely die". The talking magic snake said this was bs, And he was correct. They ate the fruit and the fruit did not kill them. They did not die "in the day" of the fruits consumption; therefore, Contradiction. This is the literal reading of this verse. I haven't forgot we are arguing the Bible's contradictions, I think you have. Is this not a verse directly from the Bible? I even used your preferred KJV. "I literally copied and pasted a paragraph explaining this. Here it is again: "With regards to the Hebrew word yom for day in Genesis 2:17, It refers specifically to the action of eating and not “dying die. ” Solomon used an almost identical construction in 1 Kings when referring to Shimei: “For on the day <yom> you go out and cross over the brook Kidron, You will know for certain that you shall surely <muwth> die <muwth>; your blood shall be on your own head. ” (1 Kings 2:37) This verse uses yom (day) and the dual muwth just as Genesis 2:17 did. In Genesis 2:17, yom referred to the action (eating) in the same way that yom refers to the action here (go out and cross over). In neither case do they mean that was the particular day that death would come, But the particular day they did what they weren’t supposed to do. Solomon also understood that it would not be a deathon that particular day but that Shemei’s days were numbered from that point. In other words, Their (Adam and Shimei) actions on that day were what gave them the final death sentence—they would surely die as a result of their actions. Therefore, The day, In Genesis 2:17 was referring to when Adam and the woman ate, Not the day they died. "This is what the verse said, So no, There was no contradiction. How it's read by the lay man is irrelevant; it's the purpose and person behind it writing it that matters, And that person did not make a contradiction. "Perhaps you didn't understand what I was saying, Or I didn't phrase it clear enough. I'll reword it:If the future is a composition of compounding free will directed decisions, Then no one can logically know the future, Because the future is the result of free will choices that have not yet been made. It's impossible for someone to have knowledge of the future if the future can have an infinite amount of possibilities, And those possibilities are directed by numerous agents operating in a free will capacity. The only way someone can know the future is if it's pre-determined and free will does not exist. I can even simplify this further by removing humans as free will agents; God itself cannot be omniscient and have free will simultaneously. Logically speaking, He cannot both know his choice and freely choose it. This in itself is a logical contradiction. "That makes no sense. Knowing the future simply means that you know what will happen before it happens. Here's an example:Some guy (Bob) can travel through time. Let's just say Bob goes into the future to see all of the questions that his teacher asks in class and what the answers are. Then, He travels back and answers every single one correctly. Bob obviously did not decide what the future would be, However, He still KNEW it before it happened. This is what I'm talking about. As to the other choice thing, God simply has made all of his choices already. That's obvious because he's omniscient; he knows everything and he has infinitely quickly made the decisions for all of those. To conclude, I have refuted all of your points. Just to remind you, You can't bring in any new ones because that would obviously be unfair.