God Does Not Use The "works Of The Devil"

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Bro-Larry

WE all know that God cannot lie.

Where do you get that???????

[Bro-Larry]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

Where do you get that???????

Well, Dave , most of us know that God cannot lie.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Bro-Larry

Well, Dave , most of us know that God cannot lie.

Where do you get this idea? Did you just make it up?????

[Bro-Larry]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

Where do you get this idea? Did you just make it up?????

1399 in his post #61 said, God does not lie. Is that enough proof? No?

OK , You're trying to make me do all the work. Titus 1:2. "...God,that cannot lie..." but you knew that already.

There are many others also which, I interpret to mean that God cannot lie.

e.i.: "God's word: is immutable, cannot be broken, liveth and abideth forever, heaven and earth will pass away but, my word will not pass away, is incorruptable seed, is forever settled in heaven. (II Tim 2:13) ": He cannot deny himself."

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Bro-Larry

1399 in his post #61 said God does not lie. Is that enough proof? No?

OK , You're trying to make me do all the work. Titus 1:2. "...God,that cannot lie..." but you knew that already.

I do. My point should be obvious. With your propensity to pick and choose which Scripture belongs in the cannon, how and more importantly, WHY do you believe the Titus passage? On what basis do you keep this passage and question the validity of others?

As I've said before, you keep the Scriptures that you 'like' and state that the ones that seemingly conflict with YOUR ideas about God are mis-translated. Please tell me how do you know that the Titus passage is not mistranslated?

Marcion lives!

[Bro-Larry]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

I do. My point should be obvious. With your propensity to pick and choose which Scripture belongs in the cannon, how and more importantly, WHY do you believe the Titus passage? On what basis do you keep this passage and question the validity of others?

As I've said before, you keep the Scriptures that you 'like' and state that the ones that seemingly conflict with YOUR ideas about God are mis-translated. Please tell me how do you know that the Titus passage is not mistranslated?

Marcion lives!

By the same reasoning, Dave, do you apply every KJV translated English word exactly as we use it today? I don't question the word of God, I only question the way words and phrases are translated, which make them appear to say something that contradicts the nature of God.

All translations are filtered through the lenses of the translator.

Example: (II Sam 24:1) "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, 'Go number Isreal and Judah' ".

What's wrong with this picture? God is not unrighteous. Some would say, "Well if God is doing it, it is not unrighteous." Balogna!! Balderdash!!!

Unrighteousness is evil no matter who is doing it. If you disagree with this statement, then we have no further reason for discussion.

Now I don't believe God would be either righteous or just, if He had moved David to take a census of Israel, just so He could get angry send judgment on them.

That's the same argument that God hardened Pharoah's heart just so He could judge him. I just don't believe it, even though KJV says that He did.

That's the same argument about God closing the eyes of the people so they could not be healed. I have already posted on this thread how Jesus' own words, quoting from the Septuagint Version disproved the KJV.

It is a similar argument, that God made a man blind from birth, for forty years, just so He could heal him.

God is not unrighteous, and if KJV say's He is, then I just let God be true and every man a liar.

"He that doeth righteousness is righteous". By inverse reasoning, you could deduce that "He that doeth unrighteousness, is unrighteous." A better rendering of this might be: " He that is righteous, doeth righteousness.", and, by inversion: "He that is unrighteous, doeth unrighteousness". (B-LRV)

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Bro-Larry

By the same reasoning, Dave, do you apply every KJV translated English word exactly as we use it today? I don't question the word of God, I only question the way words and phrases are translated, which make them appear to say something that contradicts the nature of God.

All translations are filtered through the lenses of the translator.

Example: (II Sam 24:1) "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, 'Go number Isreal and Judah' ".

What's wrong with this picture? God is not unrighteous. Some would say, "Well if God is doing it, it is not unrighteous." Balogna!! Balderdash!!!

Unrighteousness is evil no matter who is doing it. If you disagree with this statement, then we have no further reason for discussion.

Now I don't believe God would be either righteous or just, if He had moved David to take a census of Israel, just so He could get angry send judgment on them.

That's the same argument that God hardened Pharoah's heart just so He could judge him. I just don't believe it, even though KJV says that He did.

That's the same argument about God closing the eyes of the people so they could not be healed. I have already posted on this thread how Jesus' own words, quoting from the Septuagint Version disproved the KJV.

It is a similar argument, that God made a man blind from birth, for forty years, just so He could heal him.

God is not unrighteous, and if KJV say's He is, then I just let God be true and every man a liar.

"He that doeth righteousness is righteous". By inverse reasoning, you could deduce that "He that doeth unrighteousness, is unrighteous." A better rendering of this might be: " He that is righteous, doeth righteousness.", and, by inversion: "He that is unrighteous, doeth unrighteousness". (B-LRV)

First of all I don't use just the KJV or that family of manuscripts that are used to make up the KJV. Have you studied textual transmission and criticism of the Bible? It appears that you haven't. I use all the major manuscripts available and favor the word-for-word translations over the paraphrases or the dynamic translations. There are VERY little differences between the families and you would know this if you take the time to study the subject. They all have the scriptures that you site with very little, if any, conflict among them that cannot be solved due to scribal error etc. There is more manuscript evidence for the Bible than for any other ancient writing. God has providentially preserved His word.

The other aspect are your presuppositions. You make statements that the scripture can't be correct because it makes God out to be evil. I submit that this is an arbitrary, inconsistent, and illogical position that you are unable to defend.

First of all, on what grounds can you call anything evil? What is your standard? Surly not your own ideas of right and wrong????! If there is no OBJECTIVE basis for your opinions you cannot justify them. Without the God of Scripture everything is left to the whims of man's own opinion. The fact that you cannot understand and reconcile some aspects of God's character should not be surprising as you and I are mere creations and He is THE Creator. We cannot even define what is righteous or unrighteous except He gives us the definition in His word. I can't understand how you can cut out portions of scripture with any warrant just because you cannot understand what God is saying. And it goes beyond that. You are recreating God in your own image according to your preconceived ideas which are arbitrary. You say "Now I don't believe God would be either righteous or just..." That's just it. You don't LIKE the God of Scripture. Same thing for Eve in the garden. She wished to be autonomous and no one can then nor today.

You say "God is not unrighteous. Some would say, "Well if God is doing it, it is not unrighteous." Balogna!! Balderdash!!!" God is the Definer of what is right and wrong and for you or I to make ethical judgments on Him is the height of arrogance. If we think we can make ultimate authority statements we are deceived.

Finally, you offer several/many portions of Scripture that you don't like and so they must be mistranslated. Of coarse you have no proof as such that would nullify or change the way Scripture views God's character. If you do I'd love the see them. Maybe the Jesus' Seminar can help you.....

May I suggest 2 books on the subject. "The Journey from Texts to Translations- The Origin and Development of the Bible" and "Textual Criticism of the Bible-It's History, Methods, and Results" both by Paul D. Wegner.