Jesus deceived the people
- Thread starter wtj
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Proverbs 11:1
A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.
I'm uncomfortable saying that Jesus deceived; a deceiver is something the Lord is not. As he said above, he hates a false balance, meaning that he hates a deceiver.
A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.
I'm uncomfortable saying that Jesus deceived; a deceiver is something the Lord is not. As he said above, he hates a false balance, meaning that he hates a deceiver.
QUOTE (Denver @ Feb 7 2009, 12:35 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=68895
Proverbs 11:1I'm uncomfortable saying that Jesus deceived; a deceiver is something the Lord is not. As he said above, he hates a false balance, meaning that he hates a deceiver.
Firstly...Whats with the empty posts? Are they carried over from a different thread?Anyway, I will post a reply I had given on this very topic in a different forum, it was concerning "assumed lies and "deception" someone felt was ordained by God. The instances were qouted from Rahab's account and from the account where Samuel went to anoint David as king.There are the Biblical definitions pertaining to both "lies, lying, liar, and deception.These were addressed to someone else but I believe they have great relevance concerning this post.Firstly the references you have given concerning the “necessity for lying” is a real attempt to say that God lied, and as we understand such those that lie are liars. The links you sent were attempting to confuse by way of “Redefining” what we believe God referred to as “lying.” Apparently it is not enough to accept that God said that “lies are of Satan, for he is the father of lies.” As I said before in the simplicity of the Word, man tries to complicate and cloud the meaning in order to justify his sin, this is indeed the case.Secondly, and I appreciate you bearing with me in the repetition of the warning;My previous posts were not meant to disregard what you had posted but to show by what spirit they originated from. If we understand the need of those that would claim such a thing, then we can truly address it in the light of truth.This argument is the exact opposite of how Paul would have us conduct our thoughts on matters that seem unclear. Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. Instead they would assume that their prideful understanding would give them cause to judge the actions of Almighty God, again no fear of God in them.So instead of accepting the judgment clearly given by God concerning “lying and liars” they seek to “redefine” the word in order to justify themselves. Re 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. Re 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. Re 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.Re 21:8 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.So in short I point out the error and blasphemy of suggesting that God who cannot lie, has lied, an evil work that the devil himself is the father of, and the Word says;2Co 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 2Co 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?But man would contend that after cowardly “redefining” “lie” that God would lie even after the Word says otherwise. Whether they have the stones to come right out and speak the blasphemy or not it remains blasphemous, because it directly contradicts the Scriptures. So, let’s look at what God has defined as a lie, or lying, or a liar. Liar;1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.Since God is omniscient he is the ONLY person who can define truth. In light of that fact ANYTHING spoken that contradicts what God has said is true is a lie. The Word says that Jesus is the Christ, regardless if anyone has read this truth since God says so it is, and if they deny that then they are a liar.So wouldn’t it be correct to say that anything that contradicts what God has said to be true is a lie? I believe so.Pr 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Pr 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Here it would seem that anyone adding to what God has already said, (common today) would also be found a liar. I would point out that this would include adding assumptions to events that occurred in the Word.Joh 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.Anyone who does not have the truth in them, (only God defines truth, and all he has spoken (his word) is truth), all that contradicts his word is a lie, and those that contradict his word are liars and are of the Devil. Since a “liar” is one that has no truth in them or does not “abide in truth,” and contradicts what God has said, then it would be correct to say that a “lie” would be anything that contradicts the Word of God, or anything that holds NO truth. (See definition of truth above).Deceive: Deception:Again the warning to those who would say that God commits what he has condemned; and that he is a house divided, or that in “redefining” we do away with truth.Ps 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.2Jo 1:7 ¶ For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.According to a great number of Scriptures deceit and lying go hand in hand. It would seem to be the act of presentation or speaking in contradiction or opposition to the truth. (See definition of truth above). Deceit is found in the heart of a man who has “no truth in him.” And “deceit” is the work of a liar. (See definition of a Liar above^).Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary Unabridged Second Edition-Delux Color; Copywrite 1979;Defines “deceit” as;1. The act of representing as true what is known to be false; deceiving; lying; the misleading of a person.2. The quality of being deceitful.3. In Law, any trick, device, collusion, shift, or underhand practice, used to defraud another.For the sake of your question concerning Joshua and Ai, the definition of ambush by Websters again;1. A hiding or lying concealed, for the purpose of attacking; a lying in wait; a snare; a trap.2. The person or body of persons posted in a concealed place.3. A place of concealment from which an unexpected attack may be made;4. To attack from hiding.5. To hide for a surprise attack.Technically by the association of lying with deceit, without the lie present can it be defined as deceit? If that is the case where is the lie in “ambush,” not that there has been ambush without lie, but as far as the incident in question it is absent of a lie, therefore I conclude it is not deceit. If you are curious as to how I came to the conclusion that “deceit” as condemned by God is associated with “Lying” you may consider a “word search/study” on the term “deceit/deceitful/deceive.” Being that as it is, if I were to post those scriptures I would fill up any remaining room I am allotted. But if you so desire and request them I will be happy to post them later, apart from this. One that I will post however; Ps 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.Another thing I would also like to clarify is that a “word” is defined by how it is used in context, and not by a “sterile stand-alone definition.” I see this as being a contributor to how the secular would attempt to justify their error in that they would use a “Lexicon” and reveal the numerous definitions of a word apart from its context and pick the definition that most readily suits their purpose regardless of the context.Pr 12:17 ¶ He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.“false witness” is deceit. False witness would fall under the category of lying as well, as stated in Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 5:20, Proverbs 6:19,Proverbs 14:5, Proverbs 19:5. So in light of those definitions lets look at the example you have given as “Gods deceit” when he sent Samuel to anoint David as King.1Sa 16:1 ¶ And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons. 1Sa 16:2 And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the LORD said, Take an heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the LORD. 1Sa 16:3 And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will shew thee what thou shalt do: and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee. 1Sa 16:4 And Samuel did that which the LORD spake, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the town trembled at his coming, and said, Comest thou peaceably? 1Sa 16:5 And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the LORD: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice.As we read the account above there is no evidence of a lie, nothing untrue was spoken by God or Samuel. Samuel was afraid that Saul would seek to harm him if Saul knew that Samuel was there to anoint a king in his stead. However God told him to give them a reason for their visit, say “I am come to sacrifice to the Lord.” Which indeed Samuel answered the people thus and also did offer Sacrifice. So far no lie. What about deceit?According to the definition given above concerning the need for a lie to be defined as deceit, why? Because there had to be an occasion to present false information and there is none. God told Samuel to say he was there to offer Sacrifice, and he did offer, no lie there. Now it would seem that because information was omitted there are those that would accuse God of “deceitfulness,” how? Consider this; If I tell my wife I am going to the store to pick up a few things and she asks me what I intend to “pick up” and I say “just a few groceries” am I being deceitful? Not if I truly go and pick up a “few groceries.” Am I deceitful because I did not give her an itemized list of the groceries? Again not if I fulfill the “few items” truth. But if I were to tell her “I am going to the grocery to pick up a few items” and then I hit the bar instead of the grocery, then the lie has made it deceit. I have given her a reason to “believe a lie” therefore it is deceit. Are you deceiving your children every night they prepare for dinner and ask you what they are having by saying to them “food?” Nope, however you would be deceiving them by telling them they are having macaroni and cheese when in truth they are having brussel sprouts. Whenever we choose to omit information is it considered deceit? Only under one circumstance…If it is used to hide sin. Go back to my first analogy with the groceries. If I said I was going to the grocery, and that is all the information I offered but along the way stopped to throw some gas in the tank would that be considered deceit? Well, according to any concerned party that I am involved with I highly doubt it, because it is justifiable and no sin. However, say I stopped at the local booze hut on the way back from the grocery and got a fifth…now I can say that is deceitful, why? Firstly all parties concerned with my actions agree that me chuckin’ down a fifth o’ lightnin’ is a sin and the fact that I used the grocery story to “sneak in a wiff” I have “concealed that sin.” So I would only classify omitted information that conceals sinful action “deceitful.” As far as the actions of Samuel as directed by the Lord; there was no lie, there was no “concealing of sin” therefore I say there is absolutely no evidence of deceit whatsoever.There’s my “definitions” and the first case, Samuel and the sacrifice.More to followGod blessGeneral-
Proverbs 11:1I'm uncomfortable saying that Jesus deceived; a deceiver is something the Lord is not. As he said above, he hates a false balance, meaning that he hates a deceiver.
Firstly...Whats with the empty posts? Are they carried over from a different thread?Anyway, I will post a reply I had given on this very topic in a different forum, it was concerning "assumed lies and "deception" someone felt was ordained by God. The instances were qouted from Rahab's account and from the account where Samuel went to anoint David as king.There are the Biblical definitions pertaining to both "lies, lying, liar, and deception.These were addressed to someone else but I believe they have great relevance concerning this post.Firstly the references you have given concerning the “necessity for lying” is a real attempt to say that God lied, and as we understand such those that lie are liars. The links you sent were attempting to confuse by way of “Redefining” what we believe God referred to as “lying.” Apparently it is not enough to accept that God said that “lies are of Satan, for he is the father of lies.” As I said before in the simplicity of the Word, man tries to complicate and cloud the meaning in order to justify his sin, this is indeed the case.Secondly, and I appreciate you bearing with me in the repetition of the warning;My previous posts were not meant to disregard what you had posted but to show by what spirit they originated from. If we understand the need of those that would claim such a thing, then we can truly address it in the light of truth.This argument is the exact opposite of how Paul would have us conduct our thoughts on matters that seem unclear. Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. Instead they would assume that their prideful understanding would give them cause to judge the actions of Almighty God, again no fear of God in them.So instead of accepting the judgment clearly given by God concerning “lying and liars” they seek to “redefine” the word in order to justify themselves. Re 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. Re 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. Re 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.Re 21:8 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.So in short I point out the error and blasphemy of suggesting that God who cannot lie, has lied, an evil work that the devil himself is the father of, and the Word says;2Co 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 2Co 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?But man would contend that after cowardly “redefining” “lie” that God would lie even after the Word says otherwise. Whether they have the stones to come right out and speak the blasphemy or not it remains blasphemous, because it directly contradicts the Scriptures. So, let’s look at what God has defined as a lie, or lying, or a liar. Liar;1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.Since God is omniscient he is the ONLY person who can define truth. In light of that fact ANYTHING spoken that contradicts what God has said is true is a lie. The Word says that Jesus is the Christ, regardless if anyone has read this truth since God says so it is, and if they deny that then they are a liar.So wouldn’t it be correct to say that anything that contradicts what God has said to be true is a lie? I believe so.Pr 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Pr 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Here it would seem that anyone adding to what God has already said, (common today) would also be found a liar. I would point out that this would include adding assumptions to events that occurred in the Word.Joh 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.Anyone who does not have the truth in them, (only God defines truth, and all he has spoken (his word) is truth), all that contradicts his word is a lie, and those that contradict his word are liars and are of the Devil. Since a “liar” is one that has no truth in them or does not “abide in truth,” and contradicts what God has said, then it would be correct to say that a “lie” would be anything that contradicts the Word of God, or anything that holds NO truth. (See definition of truth above).Deceive: Deception:Again the warning to those who would say that God commits what he has condemned; and that he is a house divided, or that in “redefining” we do away with truth.Ps 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.2Jo 1:7 ¶ For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.According to a great number of Scriptures deceit and lying go hand in hand. It would seem to be the act of presentation or speaking in contradiction or opposition to the truth. (See definition of truth above). Deceit is found in the heart of a man who has “no truth in him.” And “deceit” is the work of a liar. (See definition of a Liar above^).Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary Unabridged Second Edition-Delux Color; Copywrite 1979;Defines “deceit” as;1. The act of representing as true what is known to be false; deceiving; lying; the misleading of a person.2. The quality of being deceitful.3. In Law, any trick, device, collusion, shift, or underhand practice, used to defraud another.For the sake of your question concerning Joshua and Ai, the definition of ambush by Websters again;1. A hiding or lying concealed, for the purpose of attacking; a lying in wait; a snare; a trap.2. The person or body of persons posted in a concealed place.3. A place of concealment from which an unexpected attack may be made;4. To attack from hiding.5. To hide for a surprise attack.Technically by the association of lying with deceit, without the lie present can it be defined as deceit? If that is the case where is the lie in “ambush,” not that there has been ambush without lie, but as far as the incident in question it is absent of a lie, therefore I conclude it is not deceit. If you are curious as to how I came to the conclusion that “deceit” as condemned by God is associated with “Lying” you may consider a “word search/study” on the term “deceit/deceitful/deceive.” Being that as it is, if I were to post those scriptures I would fill up any remaining room I am allotted. But if you so desire and request them I will be happy to post them later, apart from this. One that I will post however; Ps 101:7 He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight.Another thing I would also like to clarify is that a “word” is defined by how it is used in context, and not by a “sterile stand-alone definition.” I see this as being a contributor to how the secular would attempt to justify their error in that they would use a “Lexicon” and reveal the numerous definitions of a word apart from its context and pick the definition that most readily suits their purpose regardless of the context.Pr 12:17 ¶ He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.“false witness” is deceit. False witness would fall under the category of lying as well, as stated in Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 5:20, Proverbs 6:19,Proverbs 14:5, Proverbs 19:5. So in light of those definitions lets look at the example you have given as “Gods deceit” when he sent Samuel to anoint David as King.1Sa 16:1 ¶ And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons. 1Sa 16:2 And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the LORD said, Take an heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the LORD. 1Sa 16:3 And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will shew thee what thou shalt do: and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee. 1Sa 16:4 And Samuel did that which the LORD spake, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the town trembled at his coming, and said, Comest thou peaceably? 1Sa 16:5 And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the LORD: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice.As we read the account above there is no evidence of a lie, nothing untrue was spoken by God or Samuel. Samuel was afraid that Saul would seek to harm him if Saul knew that Samuel was there to anoint a king in his stead. However God told him to give them a reason for their visit, say “I am come to sacrifice to the Lord.” Which indeed Samuel answered the people thus and also did offer Sacrifice. So far no lie. What about deceit?According to the definition given above concerning the need for a lie to be defined as deceit, why? Because there had to be an occasion to present false information and there is none. God told Samuel to say he was there to offer Sacrifice, and he did offer, no lie there. Now it would seem that because information was omitted there are those that would accuse God of “deceitfulness,” how? Consider this; If I tell my wife I am going to the store to pick up a few things and she asks me what I intend to “pick up” and I say “just a few groceries” am I being deceitful? Not if I truly go and pick up a “few groceries.” Am I deceitful because I did not give her an itemized list of the groceries? Again not if I fulfill the “few items” truth. But if I were to tell her “I am going to the grocery to pick up a few items” and then I hit the bar instead of the grocery, then the lie has made it deceit. I have given her a reason to “believe a lie” therefore it is deceit. Are you deceiving your children every night they prepare for dinner and ask you what they are having by saying to them “food?” Nope, however you would be deceiving them by telling them they are having macaroni and cheese when in truth they are having brussel sprouts. Whenever we choose to omit information is it considered deceit? Only under one circumstance…If it is used to hide sin. Go back to my first analogy with the groceries. If I said I was going to the grocery, and that is all the information I offered but along the way stopped to throw some gas in the tank would that be considered deceit? Well, according to any concerned party that I am involved with I highly doubt it, because it is justifiable and no sin. However, say I stopped at the local booze hut on the way back from the grocery and got a fifth…now I can say that is deceitful, why? Firstly all parties concerned with my actions agree that me chuckin’ down a fifth o’ lightnin’ is a sin and the fact that I used the grocery story to “sneak in a wiff” I have “concealed that sin.” So I would only classify omitted information that conceals sinful action “deceitful.” As far as the actions of Samuel as directed by the Lord; there was no lie, there was no “concealing of sin” therefore I say there is absolutely no evidence of deceit whatsoever.There’s my “definitions” and the first case, Samuel and the sacrifice.More to followGod blessGeneral-
Similar threads
