Opposition to Truth

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by RJHinds
Verse one makes the general statement that the heavens and the earth were created by God.

God represents Perfection: His Person is perfect; His Plan is perfect. When God creates something is His Work perfect?

Genesis 1: 1-31 The Creation: Thread 157026

"1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. 8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10 God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. 13 There was evening and there was morning, a third day.

14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16 God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17 God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

20 Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.” 21 God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.

24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. 25 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

29 Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so. 31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day." (NASB)

Verse 26 From various sources I've learned that the pattern God followed in making man was Himself: "in Our image, according to Our likeness". Image and likeness referring to a spiritual rather than a bodily shadow image (not a duplication but an inferior finite similarity); in that man's soul is immaterial, spiritual, rational, moral with capacity for relationship. Like God we have self consciousness, mentality, volition and conscience. We are the only creatures who uniquely reflect God.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Then "about" would be a better word than "over" to use in this case.

Agree.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
I'd never heard anybody in the United States of America, even on secular television, ever refer "to Him as the late Jesus..." and thought the forward presented food for thought. Anyone here is free to choose to disagree.

Nobody who died before the lifetimes of the people speaking or writing is ever referred to as "the late [so and so]". That statement is plain daft. No one talks about "the late King Arthur of the Britons" either.

The statement I am referring to is "Nowhere has He ever been referred to in the past tense." This is clearly "false information" that you are promulgating. In respect to your own OP's assertions, does this "false information" make you a "liar"?

Originally posted by SwissGambit
A person confident that their pursuit of truth is on the right track does not need to thump on a podium about the Dangers of Opposing Truth. Only an agenda-peddler does that.

Yes. You used the word "confident". I think the "need to thump on a podium about the Dangers of Opposing Truth" can often indicate insecurity ~ especially when accompanied by evasiveness and pomposity.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
twhitehead, you don't have to do a single thing now or ever; you're a free agent making your own life and death choices. Your words: "They are untrue. You do not need to know that they are untrue for them to be untrue. They are therefore lies according to your OP, and you are therefore a liar." are tantamount to an accusation of lying which viol ...[text shortened]... idelines provisions for the protection of all members' reputations? Do you understand the nexus?

Actually, no, I did not violate the RHP FAQ guidelines.
You see, you redefined the use of the words 'lie' and 'liar' in your OP to make them applicable to anyone who says anything that is even remotely untrue (such as your false accusation that I violated the RHP FAQ guidelines.)

This redefinition of yours makes the use of the words no-longer defamatory. I have, for example, not defamed you by pointing out that you made a mistake when you told me I was violating the above mentioned guidelines.

Now you either have to accept that I am right, and you are wrong, or you have to say I am wrong, and thus a liar, and thus you would be defaming me under the above mentioned guidelines.

Choose wisely.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Choose wisely.

You ask too much.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
A person confident that their pursuit of truth is on the right track does not need to thump on a podium about the Dangers of Opposing Truth. Only an agenda-peddler does that.

Also, a person who is actually learning new truths tends to realize how much they still do not know, and be humbled by that.

And isn't it possible that sincere disagreements indicate a mutual desire to find the truth, rather than a person at war with the truth?

We agree on each of the three. Here's a fourth: While a lie is a lie, some are premeditated; others the result of ignorance.

Note: FMF, twhitehead and wolfgang59 will return after brief timeouts in their respective Naughty Chairs in the Corner.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
A person confident that their pursuit of truth is on the right track does not need to thump on a podium about the Dangers of Opposing Truth. Only an agenda-peddler does that.

Also, a person who is actually learning new truths tends to realize how much they still do not know, and be humbled by that.

And isn't it possible that sincere disagreements indicate a mutual desire to find the truth, rather than a person at war with the truth?

"And isn't it possible that sincere disagreements indicate a mutual desire to find the truth, rather than a person at war with the truth?" -SG

Reminiscent of words I've quoted: "We arrive at the truth through the honest disagreement among friends." -John Locke

Truth focused disagreement, however casual or vehement, is unrelated to the original post's focus 2 on lies and 3 on liars.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Note: FMF, twhitehead and wolfgang59 will return after brief timeouts in their respective Naughty Chairs in the Corner.

You seem to think my question was a joke, but it wasn't. It's a response to your OP and to something you have posted.

You posted this statement: "Nowhere has [Jesus] ever been referred to in the past tense."

This is clearly "false information" that you are promulgating.

In terms of your own OP's assertions, does this "false information" make you a "liar"?[/b]

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Truth focused disagreement, however casual or vehement, is unrelated to the original post's focus 2 on lies and 3 on liars.

I thought you said there were no grey areas? Are you withdrawing that lie?

I am still waiting for an apology from you for your false accusation.

Originally posted by FMF
You seem to think my question was a joke, but it wasn't. It's a response to your OP and to something you have posted.

You posted this statement: [b]"Nowhere has [Jesus] ever been referred to in the past tense."

This is clearly "false information" that you are promulgating.

In terms of your own OP's assertions, does this "false information" make you a "liar"?[/b][/b]

I believe most of us understand that unknowingly making an inaccurate statement is not what most of us classify as lying. Do you understand that?

Originally posted by RJHinds
I believe most of us understand that unknowingly making an inaccurate statement is not what most of us classify as lying. Do you understand that?

Grampy Bobby has chosen to re-post the false information for a second time ~ even after its falsity was pointed out to him. You cannot pass it off as "unknowingly making an inaccurate statement".

Originally posted by FMF
Grampy Bobby has chosen to re-post the false information for a second time ~ even after its falsity was pointed out to him. You cannot pass it off as "unknowingly making an inaccurate statement".

It would be helpful to all, if you could give us a reference that would prove your point. Then we can all see what you mean, since Grampy Bobby may have a different meaning to his statement than what you think.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It would be helpful to all, if you could give us a reference that would prove your point. Then we can all see what you mean, since Grampy Bobby may have a different meaning to his statement than what you think.

The statement "Nowhere has [Jesus] ever been referred to in the past tense." is clearly "false information".