Can God lie?

Derf

Well-known member
No, I meant objectively false, as I said.



And here is why it's not possible for your explanation to be true:



Yes, it does. It doesn't say "and they lied to Pharaoh and said", no, but here's what it does say:

Then the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of whom the name of one was Shiphrah and the name of the other Puah;and he said, “When you do the duties of a midwife for the Hebrew women, and see them on the birthstools, if it is a son, then you shall kill him; but if it is a daughter, then she shall live.”But the midwives feared God, and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the male children alive.So the king of Egypt called for the midwives and said to them, “Why have you done this thing, and saved the male children alive?”And the midwives said to Pharaoh, “Because the Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women; for they are lively and give birth before the midwives come to them.”Therefore God dealt well with the midwives, and the people multiplied and grew very mighty.And so it was, because the midwives feared God, that He provided households for them.So Pharaoh commanded all his people, saying, “Every son who is born you shall cast into the river, and every daughter you shall save alive.” - Exodus 1:15-22 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus1:15-22&version=NKJV

Verse 15, Pharaoh speaks to Shiphrah and Puah (two Hebrew midwives)
Verse 16, he commands them to kill the male children, but let the female children live, as they do their duties as midwives
Verse 17, the midwives did not do what Pharaoh told them to do, and did not kill the male children, as they did their duties as midwives
Verse 18, Pharaoh asks them why they didn't do what he said
Verse 19, the midwives answer Pharaoh, telling him a lie, that the Hebrew women give birth faster than the egyptian women.
Verse 20, God rewards the midwives for their defense of the innocent, and the number of Israelites grows
Verse 21, a more explicit statement of God rewarding the midwives for their actions, giving them families of their own.

Derf, have you ever been present for the birth of a human being? I have. It took several hours, and the mother was in the hospital room overnight the night before giving birth. There were plenty of signs that she was getting ready to give birth, even hours before it happened.

Hebrew women. Egyptian women. All of them are human beings. They aren't going to vary that much when it comes to bodily processes.

On top of that, and arguably more importantly, the Bible explicitly states that the midwives delivered the male children alive. Meaning they were ipso facto delivering the children, and not "arriving late to the delivery," as what they said, that the babies pop out of their mothers' wombs "before the midwives come to them," would necessarily imply!

The passage literally does not leave any room for any other interpretation besides that they lied to Pharaoh!
Yes, you're right.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Some relevant discussion here:
Excellent opening post in that thread. (y)
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Because the qualifier is so subjective, perhaps.
It isn't subjective at all.

As stated before, if God sends a truthful and an untruthful statement and asks the receiver to choose the truthful statement, it's not the same as lying. Otherwise every teacher that made you take a true/false test would be a liar.
I don't understand why you won't answer the question and why you seem to need to squirm around the plain reading of the text of scripture.

This is a good distinction. But let me ask of it would be ok for an attorney representing a pro-life defendant to put forward statements he knows are false in order to win a pro-life court case?
The question is too generalized to say with certainty. It would depend upon what is at stake in the case. The laws in this country concerning abortion are almost entirely unjust and so the answer would probably be a yes, but, again it would depend on the specifics.

You understand that it isn't relevant though, right? Do you do any of your other doctrine based on what my opinion is about a particular case study? Is there anyone besides me who forms opinions concerning hypotheticals that determines what your doctrine is? I suspect not. I only answer the question because you're trying to see if I'm willing to be consistent, which is fine, but even that has no bearing on whether your position is at odds with the biblical material.

Well, you don't agree with them. That's not the same as them being untrue, unless you like question-begging.
Ha! You might be able to get away with such tricks with other people but I'm not that stupid. You are the one begging the question, which was my point, and this snide remarks of yours proves that you knew that was the point when you said it. You simply do not get to presuppose the answer to the question being debated and then get to accuse me of being the one doing the question begging. It won't work and it only goes to demonstrate that you've run out of substance.

Lying would need that qualifier, just like killing does. That's why "murderers" make the list--it qualifies killers.
Saying it doesn't make it so, Derf. The context is the qualifier to add another wouldn't be inacurate but it would be redundant and therefore not necessary.

I agree. You would normally not need a qualifier for lying...it would be redundant, since lying is generally thought of as evil.
"....normally thought of as evil....."

.....by people who don't know the biblical material and simply believe what they're taught from the man behind the pulpit.

No, not "directly", as I already "danced" out for you.
Yes, directly - by any definition of the word! The action was a lie, the result was reward - period.

Speaking would be of the same category. Lying is speaking in an evil way, like murder is killing in an evil way.
I disagree. Lying, for the right reason is wisdom, righteousness and godly.

One could speak in other evil ways, including slander,
Slander is one of the evil forms of lying.

reviling, etc. And one can speak in good ways, like encouraging, exhorting, etc.
The "etc." being like when the midwives lied.

That's called begging the question, and you know it.
Saying it doesn't make it so, Derf.

How could it possibly be question begging. The word of God is THE authority in Christian doctrine and practice. My citing the plain reading of text is direct evidence. There is no sense at all in which it could be construed as begging the question.

Then why do you interpret it differently than the text plainly says? (two can play that game)
It isn't a game and this nonsense of yours counts as a lie! You KNEW it was false when you said it!
The facgt is that one of us takes our doctrine more seriously than God's own words - and I mean the actual words that came out of God's own mouth, as in with quotation marks, and the other of us does the reverse, which is precisely the entire point! I do not interpret it, I simply read it and take it to mean what it seems to plainly state. You want to say that it doesn't mean what it seems to mean and you want to do so for no reason at all other than your doctrine!

Right! "Keep lying and your blessings will abound." No, the text explicitly says exactly what they were being rewarded for: fearing God by disobeying the command to slaughter the Hebrew boys.
There's your opinion and then there's the word of God that any third grade child can read and understand.

Rehab saved the spies lives, and in that she did a good thing.
She saved their lives by telling a lie and in that she did a good thing.

But the reward was for not jeopardizing the spies and their mission, just as the text plainly says. (see how easy it is?)
Right, she lied so as to not jeopardizing their mission. You position would imply that she did evil that good might come of it, my position makes no such implication. I simply acknowledge what she did and that it was a righteous thing to do.

Good, because of the greater evil alternative. I'm still waiting for a case where you lie without a greater evil alternative and it is a good lie. Hypothetical will be fine.
There is no need for a hypothetical we've been talking about a real one for several days now....

I Kings 22:19 Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ 22 The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’​
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him.Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?”And He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground.So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand.When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth.”And Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear!Surely You have driven me out this day from the face of the ground; I shall be hidden from Your face; I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth, and it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.”And the Lord said to him, “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him. - Genesis 4:8-15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis4:8-15&version=NKJV
What law is that, exactly?
What part of "for another thread" do you not understand?
I understand all of it, but what has that got to do with this?
They were under the law of their conscience.
Agreed, but not the Law of Moses or some municipality's law.
It's astounding that you don't even realize that you're contradicting yourself within a few sentences.
"If one sins they ARE under the Law, as it was made FOR sinners."
Those are your words.
There was no Mosaic Law yet.
Can you tell the difference between the Mosaic Law and a conscience?
I''ll let you read and find out for yourself.
So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand.Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs.But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.“Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man.And as for you, be fruitful and multiply; Bring forth abundantly in the earth And multiply in it.” - Genesis 9:1-7 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis9:1-7&version=NKJV
That is fine, for after Noah.
But it didn't apply before it was spoken/written.
Cain wasn't slain for his, what we now call, sin.
The hypothetical has you IN such a situation. You can't just say "it wouldn't happen."
I mean, you could, but that's just being intellectually dishonest.
Don't you have faith in prayer?
Prayer won't stop the murderer from killing the person in front of you.
God might.
YES. That's what this entire discussion is about, Hoping!
I am glad we agree that since the Mosaic Law was written that lying is a sin.
Exodus 20:16..."Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."
Lev 6:2-4..."If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour;
3 Or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein:
4 Then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found,
Yes it is. Why do you disobey Him?
?
They did BOTH, and God rewarded them for it.
Yes He did, in an era without the Mosaic Law, and to people who were not under the law of Moses.
In other words, you would, at least according to your own position, sin.
Shame on you!
Without the Law of Moses, it wasn't a sin.
The fact is that He doesn't.
He did for the pregnant Israeli women, and for Rahab.
That only works for His followers. You are not one of them.
Our opinions differ.
Yes, there was.
How was Rahab an Israelite?
How were the pre-Mosaic Law midwives under the Mosaic Law?
See post #80.
I disagree with any conclusion that says that lying is not a sin in the post-Mosaic times.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
What law is that, exactly?

All of them.

I understand all of it

Clearly not.

Agreed, but not the Law of Moses or some municipality's law.

Were they not under the laws of the nation they lived in?

That's "the law."

There was no Mosaic Law yet.

So what?

Can you tell the difference between the Mosaic Law and a conscience?

Irrelevant.

That is fine, for after Noah.
But it didn't apply before it was spoken/written.
Cain wasn't slain for his, what we now call, sin.

It was sin, period. Always was sin.

God expressly forbid the death penalty (and the law as a whole, by extension) from Cain to the Flood, and for a reason.

He then REINSTATED the law (the death penalty) IMMEDIATELY AFTER Noah left the ark. The whole world is under that law. Sin leads to death, and the wages of sin is death. If ALL lying was sin, then EVERY lie ever told is something deserving of death.

As you stated, sin is not imputed when there is no law.

But that's the whole point: The world is under the law, whether it's the Mosaic law or not, for ALL of humanity since Noah is descended from Him, and the law God gave to Noah applies to Him AND his descendants.

Thus, if ALL lying is sin, then Rahab AND the Hebrew midwives sinned when they lied, and they did in fact lie, as shown in post #99.

Thus, God rewarded their lies, their sin, greatly. You literally have God rewarding sin, and not punishing.

YOU MAKE GOD UNJUST WITH YOUR POSITION.

That makes you WRONG, for GOD IS NOT UNJUST!

God might.

He won't.

God is not in the business of protecting people from the consequences of people's actions.

I am glad we agree

Quit putting words in my mouth.

that since the Mosaic Law was written that lying is a sin.[//QUOTE]

Exodus 20:16..."Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."
Lev 6:2-4..."If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour;
3 Or have found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein:
4 Then it shall be, because he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found,

Notice how it doesn't condemn lying outright, but lying in specific circumstances.

Notice how He did not condemn lying to defend the innocent, but condemned lying to defend wickedness.

Yes He did, in an era without the Mosaic Law, and to people who were not under the law of Moses.

It literally does not matter that they were not under the law of Moses.

They were, in fact, under the law, the law that God gave to Noah right after he got off the Ark.

Without the Law of Moses, it wasn't a sin.

Yes, it was. Sin is sin regardless of whether one is under a law or not.

He did for the pregnant Israeli women, and for Rahab.

You're not even talking about the same thing anymore!

Our opinions differ.

The difference is that I'm right, based on scripture, and you're wrong.

How was Rahab an Israelite?

I never said she was. She WAS under the law, though.

How were the pre-Mosaic Law midwives under the Mosaic Law?

I never said they were. They WERE, however, under the law.

I disagree with any conclusion that says that lying is not a sin in the post-Mosaic times.

Translation: "I'm right and you can't convince me otherwise!"

No thanks.
I don't want to listen

Translation "I'm right and you can't convince me otherwise! I'm plugging my ears and can't hear you BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!"

to things that you think go against Godliness.

I'm not the one who thinks all lying is sin!
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
@Derf,

Were are just going in circles. If you've got something of substance to add then great. Otherwise, I'll chalk it up as yet another conversation where the disagreement boiled down to conforming ones doctrine to the plain reading of scripture vs conforming the meaning of the text to fit one's doctrine.

Clete
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
All of them.
Of course.
Clearly not.
You're entitled to an opinion.
Were they not under the laws of the nation they lived in?
Sure, if there was one.
But God didn't put any stipulations on nation's laws like He would eventually put on His.
That's "the law."
Not God's Law though.
That is the only Law that counts.
Irrelevant.
If you can't tell the difference we are finished here.
It was sin, period. Always was sin.
Yet sin, without God's Mosaic Law, is not imputed.
God expressly forbid the death penalty (and the law as a whole, by extension) from Cain to the Flood, and for a reason.
Where did Hs forbid that?
He then REINSTATED the law (the death penalty) IMMEDIATELY AFTER Noah left the ark. The whole world is under that law. Sin leads to death, and the wages of sin is death. If ALL lying was sin, then EVERY lie ever told is something deserving of death.
Mosaic Law without Moses?
Interesting.
As you stated, sin is not imputed when there is no law.
No Mosaic Law.
But that's the whole point: The world is under the law, whether it's the Mosaic law or not, for ALL of humanity since Noah is descended from Him, and the law God gave to Noah applies to Him AND his descendants.
Where may I find this Law of Noah?
Thus, if ALL lying is sin, then Rahab AND the Hebrew midwives sinned when they lied, and they did in fact lie, as shown in post #99.
Neither group was under the Mosaic Law so your point is moot.
No law, no knowledge of sin..."... for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom 3:20)
Thus, God rewarded their lies, their sin, greatly. You literally have God rewarding sin, and not punishing.
No Law, no sin that breaks the Law.
YOU MAKE GOD UNJUST WITH YOUR POSITION.
You are entitled to an opinion.
That makes you WRONG, for GOD IS NOT UNJUST!
He is indeed just...that is why He rewarded those at that time because He would one day have to penalize liars.
He won't.
What happened to that "just God" you referred to?
Jesus said He would answer our prayers. (John 14:13-14)
God is not in the business of protecting people from the consequences of people's actions.
I disagree.
He has protected me a bunch of times and I pray He will continue to protect me from the actions of others.
Your style of life sounds scary.
Quit putting words in my mouth.
Why does an agreement with you offend you?
Notice how it doesn't condemn lying outright, but lying in specific circumstances.
Keep in mind that the devil is the father of lies and of those who use them, since lying was outlawed.
John 8:44..."Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
There is always Rev 21:8 too..."But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."
You are looking for loop-holes.
Notice how He did not condemn lying to defend the innocent, but condemned lying to defend wickedness.
Notice that His qualification that lying was a sin had not been published yet.
It literally does not matter that they were not under the law of Moses.
No Law, no sin. (Rom 3:20)
They were, in fact, under the law, the law that God gave to Noah right after he got off the Ark.
Print said law, please.
Yes, it was. Sin is sin regardless of whether one is under a law or not.
Then Rom 3:20 is a lie.
I don't believe it is a lie.
You're not even talking about the same thing anymore!
OK, that may be the reason you can't seem to understand me.
The difference is that I'm right, based on scripture, and you're wrong.
Back to you.
I never said she was. She WAS under the law, though.
But not the Law of Moses that said He forbids lying/bearing false witness...right?
I never said they were. They WERE, however, under the law.
Yeah, your Law of Noah.
Or of Jericho.
But not the Mosaic Law, which condemned lying.
Translation: "I'm right and you can't convince me otherwise!"
Back to you.
Translation "I'm right and you can't convince me otherwise! ...
I'm not the one who thinks all lying is sin!
Are you telling the truth now?
How can I ever believe anything else you say after you print something like that?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Sure, if there was one.

There was.

But God didn't put any stipulations on nation's laws like He would eventually put on His.

Whatever that's supposed to mean.

Law is law.

The world is under the law.

Not God's Law though.

Irrelevant.

That is the only Law that counts.

ANY law someone is under, he is obligated to keep it, as per Paul.

Yet sin, without God's Mosaic Law, is not imputed.

Please show where the Bible specifies "God's Mosaic Law," rather than just "law."

Where did Hs forbid that?

In the passage I quoted.

Mosaic Law without Moses?

Not what I said, you troll.

Interesting.

Liar.

No Mosaic Law.

Irrelevant.

Where may I find this Law of Noah?

In the passage I quoted.

Neither group was under the Mosaic Law so your point is moot.

They were under A law. It doesn't matter that they were not under the Mosaic law, specifically.

No law, no knowledge of sin..."... for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom 3:20)

Correct. It doesn't make sin not sin.

No Law, no sin that breaks the Law.

Wrong. You don't seem to understand what "imputed" means.

He is indeed just...that is why He rewarded those at that time because He would one day have to penalize liars.

Your god is not just, but arbitrary.

God cannot reward sin and remain righteous. Your position has your god rewarding sin.

My position has God rewarding something, lying, that is NOT sin, and remaining righteous.

Deceiving one's enemies is NOT WRONG. God Himself does it often throughout the Bible.

What happened to that "just God" you referred to?
Jesus said He would answer our prayers. (John 14:13-14)

Ripping verses out of context is no way to defend one's beliefs.

Jesus was speaking DIRECTLY to His twelve disciples. You are not one of His twelve disciples.

I disagree.

No one cares.

He has protected me a bunch of times and I pray He will continue to protect me from the actions of others.
Your style of life sounds scary.

Or, you're lying for effect.

Which IS a sin, by the way.

Why does an agreement with you offend you?

It's not an agreement, and you knew that before you wrote that. Quit lying, you hypocrite.

Keep in mind that the devil is the father of lies and of those who use them, since lying was outlawed.
John 8:44..."Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
There is always Rev 21:8 too..."But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

Post #80.

You are looking for loop-holes.

Liar.

Notice that His qualification that lying was a sin had not been published yet.

Post #80.

No Law, no sin. (Rom 3:20)

Nope.

No law, sin not imputed. Not "no sin."

Print said law, please.

I already did. You ignored it.

Then Rom 3:20 is a lie.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

I don't believe it is a lie.

Irrelevant.

OK, that may be the reason you can't seem to understand me.

Maybe if you stopped being irrational, I could understand you. But you haven't said anything rational yet.

But not the Law of Moses that said He forbids lying/bearing false witness...right?

The law that says "if you kill a man, by man you must be killed."

Do not bear false witness is an extension of that.

Yeah, your Law of Noah.

You mock God's word.

Or of Jericho.
But not the Mosaic Law, which condemned lying.

Supra.

Are you telling the truth now?

This sentence is false.

How can I ever believe anything else you say after you print something like that?

Don't believe me. Believe God's word. It shows that not all lying is sin. If you have a problem with that, take it up with God.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
No such thing, because it's a contradiction.

The letter (aka the law) kills, but the Spirit gives life.
It refers to how we serve the law. No contradiction there.

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
It refers to how we serve the law. No contradiction there.

Fair point.

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Serve in newness of spirit, meaning "without law." He literally says "not [serve] in the oldness of the letter." He's contrasting serving in spirit, rather than placing oneself under a law.

The "spirit of the law" is a non-biblical cliché that has confused millions of Christians.

But I'll drop this for now, since it's a topic for a different thread. I just wanted to point out the bad cliché.
 

Derf

Well-known member
This sentence is false.
@Hoping's sentence was a question, and as long as it was meant as a question, it can't be false or true, but it gets to the whole point of this part of the thread--that if it's ok to lie sometimes, then integrity is out the window. No one can know whether you are lying for a good cause or actually telling the truth. With such a philosophy, you have made it impossible to believe, for instance, young earth creationists when they give arguments for science supporting the Genesis account.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
@Hoping's sentence was a question, and as long as it was meant as a question, it can't be false or true,

The sentence "This sentence is false" WAS my answer to his question.

It wasn't talking about his question. "This sentence" is referring to the sentence itself.

"This sentence is false" is a self-contradictory statement.

If it's false, then the statement itself becomes true, which makes it false, which makes it true... ad infinitum.

but it gets to the whole point of this part of the thread--that if it's ok to lie sometimes, then integrity is out the window.

The sentence "This sentence is false" disproves the idea that you lose integrity by lying

Only if lying is always wrong will doing so throw integrity out the window. In other words, once again, you're begging the question that it is.

But that's not the case.

You can lie, and still maintain integrity.

The Hebrew midwives did what was right by lying to Pharaoh. Had they told the truth, then Pharaoh would have gotten angry with them, and had them put to death and replaced with people he could trust, and then thousands of little children would have been slaughtered, but boy howdy, at least the midwives told the truth! /s

No, what they did was the wise move, and as shown throughout the Bible, deceiving the enemies of God is not wrong, especially since God Himself does it.

The principle is do not do evil that good may come of it. They did not do evil by lying to Pharaoh. They did good.

If what they did was evil, then when God rewarded them for it, He would have been rewarding evil. God does not reward evil, and thus, you have a contradiction.

No one can know whether you are lying for a good cause

I'm not sure where you came up with the "lying for a good cause" idea, because, as far as I can tell, neither I nor Clete have said "lying for a good cause," but rather to lie when it's the right thing to do.

or actually telling the truth.

Sure they can.

It just takes a bit of wisdom.

With such a philosophy, you have made it impossible to believe, for instance, young earth creationists when they give arguments for science supporting the Genesis account.

No, such a philosophy does not make it impossible.

God is the source of wisdom.

It takes wisdom to know when to lie, and even more so to know when NOT to lie, when doing so would not be wrong.

Legalism has a way of doing away with wisdom, and forcing people to resort to process solutions, rather than trusting God and His word, because it gives a false sense of righteousness. Doing what is right is required, even if it means violating a law.

I refer you back to the show I posted earlier, which I recommend listening to in full.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
There was.



Whatever that's supposed to mean.

Law is law.

The world is under the law.



Irrelevant.



ANY law someone is under, he is obligated to keep it, as per Paul.



Please show where the Bible specifies "God's Mosaic Law," rather than just "law."



In the passage I quoted.



Not what I said, you troll.



Liar.



Irrelevant.



In the passage I quoted.



They were under A law. It doesn't matter that they were not under the Mosaic law, specifically.



Correct. It doesn't make sin not sin.



Wrong. You don't seem to understand what "imputed" means.



Your god is not just, but arbitrary.

God cannot reward sin and remain righteous. Your position has your god rewarding sin.

My position has God rewarding something, lying, that is NOT sin, and remaining righteous.

Deceiving one's enemies is NOT WRONG. God Himself does it often throughout the Bible.



Ripping verses out of context is no way to defend one's beliefs.

Jesus was speaking DIRECTLY to His twelve disciples. You are not one of His twelve disciples.



No one cares.



Or, you're lying for effect.

Which IS a sin, by the way.



It's not an agreement, and you knew that before you wrote that. Quit lying, you hypocrite.



Post #80.



Liar.



Post #80.



Nope.

No law, sin not imputed. Not "no sin."



I already did. You ignored it.



Saying it doesn't make it so.



Irrelevant.



Maybe if you stopped being irrational, I could understand you. But you haven't said anything rational yet.



The law that says "if you kill a man, by man you must be killed."

Do not bear false witness is an extension of that.



You mock God's word.



Supra.



This sentence is false.



Don't believe me. Believe God's word. It shows that not all lying is sin. If you have a problem with that, take it up with God.
OK, thanks for reading and replying to my post.
I cannot tell lies and still maintain my integrity .
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
OK, thanks for reading and replying to my post.
I cannot tell lies and still maintain my integrity.

You can't tell the truth and maintain your integrity either, apparently, given how much lying you've been doing.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
OK, thanks for reading and replying to my post.
I cannot tell lies and still maintain my integrity .
Have you ever considered that your "integrity" is a pride issue?

Here's a hypothetical...if you don't mind. Suppose the children were being rounded up for some nefarious reason. Your children were hiding under the house in a "secure" location. When asked if there were any children there, would you think about your "integrity" or your children?
 
Top