Dee Dee,
Well, it is obvious to me that you have not read any of my posts. I have stated time and again and again and again that when I said lying, I was specifically referring to telling untruth in order to deceive. Claim all you wish that I am "falling on my sword," all it shows is how grossly inattnetive you have been to my postings.
So, Jaltus is taking the position that it is okay to deceive unbelievers which of course refutes his earlier dogmatic statement that telling truth in order to deceive is NOWHERE condemned, and he has basically advocating the same position as I am, just with a different moral imperative. I have said that it is not immoral, and in fact righteous, in certain situation to lie. Jaltus is saying that it is not immoral in certain situations to deceive someone. He thinks it makes a whole honking world of difference that the vehicle for the deception is a truth rather than a falsehood… a reversal of Hank’s objection…. Jaltus has the means justifying the end, a logical absurdity.
I stand by my position that it is okay to deceive with the truth.
Leviticus 19:11 does say in fact "do not use untruth to mislead one another." The word in Hebrew in fact means
to speak untruth in order to decieve, that which I have preached against since the beginning. The problem with Dee Dee's argument is that she imports her own definitions into the text.
You see, Dee Dee, there is nowhere in the Bible that teaches against using truth to deceive. Your own argument shows your lack of study, as you have completely mishandled the biblical text arguing your own definitions instead of arguing scripture.
Once again, your inflated self-worth is shown to be just that, inflated.
I am glad that I get to be a pin for you.
Again, do you ever plan on dealing with my argument from God's character that none of you have dealt with yet? Oh, I admit that Knight tried, but his attempt was found lacking, and not just by me but by other readers as well.
