Twisting scripture and ripping it from its intended meaning, in a weak attempt to make the scripture mean something other than it's intended.... is garbage!
Which is what you and Jaltus are doing and you both should be ashamed.
C
cirisme
Guest
Prove that we're doing this.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Then you are agreeing that some moral imperatives are dependant upon the circumstances, you just disagree about which ones. That has been the cruz of the argument.
This is a nice overemotional distraction though away from your bankrupt and completely internally implosive position on Biblical deceit, which I will return to. While you may have hoped we have forgotten about that, I have not.
And it appears I was right after all about where Ciris was attempting to go with this.
LOL, Knight, you are such an ignorant person. You literally speak (or write, I guess) without knowing what you are talking about.
Please show how you are correct that Luke 12 is about witnessing and not about dneying Christ in front of people.
Here, let me help:
NKJ Luke 12:1 In the meantime, when an innumerable multitude of people had gathered together, so that they trampled one another, He began to say to His disciples first of all, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
2 "For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known.
3 "Therefore whatever you have spoken in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have spoken in the ear in inner rooms will be proclaimed on the housetops.
4 " And I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5 "But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!
6 "Are not five sparrows sold for two copper coins? And not one of them is forgotten before God.
7 "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.
8 " Also I say to you, whoever confesses Me before men, him the Son of Man also will confess before the angels of God.
9 "But he who denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God.
10 "And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven.
11 "Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say.
12 "For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say."
Which part of this is about witnessing again?
Please show how you are correct that Luke 12 is about witnessing and not about dneying Christ in front of people.
Here, let me help:
NKJ Luke 12:1 In the meantime, when an innumerable multitude of people had gathered together, so that they trampled one another, He began to say to His disciples first of all, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
2 "For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known.
3 "Therefore whatever you have spoken in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have spoken in the ear in inner rooms will be proclaimed on the housetops.
4 " And I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5 "But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!
6 "Are not five sparrows sold for two copper coins? And not one of them is forgotten before God.
7 "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.
8 " Also I say to you, whoever confesses Me before men, him the Son of Man also will confess before the angels of God.
9 "But he who denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God.
10 "And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven.
11 "Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say.
12 "For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say."
Which part of this is about witnessing again?
Last edited:
C
cirisme
Guest
My last post for now...
But, Dee Dee, saying "I do not know Him." and not mentioning that Jesus is the messiah are two entirely different things.
But, Dee Dee, saying "I do not know Him." and not mentioning that Jesus is the messiah are two entirely different things.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
You will get the first one... and I and Knight already answered the second part.
Jaltus... please try to think this through....
Dying for Christ can be, and has been, a very noble thing to do. Nobody has said otherwise.
But is it ALWAYS wrong to deny Christ? In EVERY situation? And the answer to that is obviously NO!
Truth has no obligation to evil.
Jesus was not obligated to tell Pilate who He was even though the answer was of monumental importance.
Christian martyrs were usually in captivity and it was a very powerful witness for them to die publicly for Christ.
Yet that is all together different from a situation where an evil person or force is going to murder you in your home and then murder your family. Especially if you know or sense that you can thwart this wicked plan by telling a righteous lie!
Yes, it is always wrong to deny Christ. To do so is to deny salvation. What kind of witness to the person killing you is it? A bad one.
Jesus died for you, so why are you unwilling to die for Him?
Dee Dee,
As Freak noted, neither of you EVER answer my theological argument from the character of God other than saying "God is love," which is true but totally irrelevant without some sort of explanation.
Again, is God more love than truth? Is Jesus more love than truth? If so, prove it biblically. Neither of you have attempted that, and that would only be the first step in countering my argument.
Jesus died for you, so why are you unwilling to die for Him?
Dee Dee,
As Freak noted, neither of you EVER answer my theological argument from the character of God other than saying "God is love," which is true but totally irrelevant without some sort of explanation.
Again, is God more love than truth? Is Jesus more love than truth? If so, prove it biblically. Neither of you have attempted that, and that would only be the first step in countering my argument.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Let me make this abundantly clear. Knight may or may not fully agree with me on every point, but we are close. I am not saying that it is "just perfectly okay to deny Christ" to save one's own hide in every single situation that may arise. I am saying, though, that I can envisage situations where it would not be wrong. I am not saying I can envisage a lot, but I can envisage some. Sheepdog's illustration was a good example. I would not sacrifice my life to the whim of a drunk fool. Are there circumstances in which I would, you betcha. I believe in true ethical and moral dilemnas against which are absolute standards must be weighed and evaluated.
Really? I believe in true absolutes against which every situation should be governed, hence calling them ABSOLUTES.
Essentially, you are a relativist, all of you. If Christianity might cost your life without you knowing any good that can come from it, you choose life over Christ.
How can you, in your (our) incredibly finite understanding ever hope to balance what you (we) think is a good reason to die with what God considers to be a good one? Do you think God would put you in a position in which your death would be pointless? If so, you certainly deny Romans 8:28.
Essentially, you all are saying you know better than God does, something I reject as anathema.
Essentially, you are a relativist, all of you. If Christianity might cost your life without you knowing any good that can come from it, you choose life over Christ.
How can you, in your (our) incredibly finite understanding ever hope to balance what you (we) think is a good reason to die with what God considers to be a good one? Do you think God would put you in a position in which your death would be pointless? If so, you certainly deny Romans 8:28.
Essentially, you all are saying you know better than God does, something I reject as anathema.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Read again, Jaltus.. I said much more than God is love to proving the underlying reasons why some lying is wrong, which is why not all lying is wrong. If you dealt with the underlying reasons why lying is wrong (all of it in your book) you would not be able to with a straight face say that it is morally acceptable to deceive nonbelievers with truth. What kind of a witness is that, you who are so concerned about witness in that last few posts.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Then how do you deal with Paul's absolute command to obey the government.. you never answered that one really.
Dee Dee,
Please point me to your post. I do not recall any argument of substance that took on my theological argument.
Again, I have no problem saying it is ok to deceive with truth. I have spelled out at least 3 times why it is legitimate, all of which are grounded biblically with real biblical words, not imported English words.
Please point me to your post. I do not recall any argument of substance that took on my theological argument.
Again, I have no problem saying it is ok to deceive with truth. I have spelled out at least 3 times why it is legitimate, all of which are grounded biblically with real biblical words, not imported English words.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
No you have hamstrung yourself trying and basically have approved of deceit which makes you logically incoherent.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
That it circular reasoning. Please show me in Romans 13 where it is qualified whatsoever. You are proving my point. Even absolute commands have inherent grounding in moral hierarchy.
Dee Dee,
Absolutes are that which the entire Bible teaches. I do not take a specific scripture to be an absolute without looking at the idea canoni9cally. What you are doing is called prooftexting and then telling me that is how I must arrive at my absolutes.
TOTALLY FALSE!
Scripture interprets scripture, not a single scripture by itself is forever determinative. What kind of hermeneutical method do you think people use?
Oh, you sure do seem to be a lot of talk without any backing. Do you plan on ever actually dealing with my argument, or do you think it will go away by insulting it to death?
Absolutes are that which the entire Bible teaches. I do not take a specific scripture to be an absolute without looking at the idea canoni9cally. What you are doing is called prooftexting and then telling me that is how I must arrive at my absolutes.
TOTALLY FALSE!
Scripture interprets scripture, not a single scripture by itself is forever determinative. What kind of hermeneutical method do you think people use?
Oh, you sure do seem to be a lot of talk without any backing. Do you plan on ever actually dealing with my argument, or do you think it will go away by insulting it to death?
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
I will say Jaltus that you do have a reasonably good point there. However, I do think that the others have made reasonably good points as well. I see this issue differently than the lying issue in that we have explicit Scriptural examples of righteous lies, and do not have explicit Scriptural examples of righteous denial. I will consider this issue further (not the righteous lying one in which you are absoluely incoherent).