Or when he did it to the country.
Yes sure if you want to ignore the rest of the scriptures.
The first command from God to man and woman is be fruitful and multiply. It is the very next verse after God created man and woman. This was before the fall, and even before the don’t eat from fruit of the tree.
So Adam and Eve (and their kids) couldn’t have been immortal. They would have rapidly overpopulated the Earth.
What did I forget that negates the story clearly showing that God was testing Abraham and never intended on letting him murder his son by His command?
Please post where the Bible says that Abraham was going to kill Isaac because of a deal he made with the Devil.
No. That is the answer that you find comfortable.
Fine. You have made your position known. Other posters, however, (including the OP), are looking at the work from a different perspective–that within the context of the work as it exists, did the character of God lie.
Since the other posters are attempting to continue their discussion, which differs from yours, it would be nice if you would refrain from interrupting their discussion to continue repeating your point. Further pursuit of your claim will be considered deliberate hijacking of this thread.
[ /Moderating ]
Are you serious, or am I being whooshed? Are you really saying my opinion on this question is not welcome? I’m being perfectly polite, as far as I can see.
I don’t care how polite you are if you persist in “politely” hijacking the thread. Everyone understands the point you are making. Some will argue with you because that is what Dopers do, but you are arguing a point that is tangential to the issue raised by the OP and if you want to argue that point, go open your own thread.
Regardless whether there is one, uniform bible or a collection of (up to) 78 books that are more or less haphazardly collected, the question is not whether all the pieces of the bible agree, but whether the character of God can be considered to have lied. Your posts address a different issue and are not appropriate, here.
[ /Moderating ]
ok - let me try to rephrase it another way -
‘Old Testament’
a) assume that the people that ‘wrote’ the bible were speaking on behalf of God and wrote things correctly as dictated and that it actually is ‘the word of God’ the historical events that are accounted in the book are to be taken literaly.
b) a worldwide flood never happened - a pair of every animal could not have fit on the ark as described, let alone 7 of each of the ‘unclean’ ones.
c) God Lied.
‘New Testament’
a.) Same assumption as (a) above, except these are the words of Jesus the Christ and he is, for all intents and purposes ‘God’ in this equation, and if not God, he is his chosen one and therefore speaks for God.
b.)
[QUOTE=Luke 21:32 NIV]
“Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
[/QUOTE]
c.) God lied
Q.E.D.
Fascinating.
Could you please provide the chapter and verse on the above?
I thought he could do anything. By definition.
It’s both!
Such are the oddities that arise when working with millenia old “everything and the kitchen sink” deities.
The Bible records Adam’s death, but not Eve’s.
At any rate, the verse in question is:
“but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”
That’s from the JPS 1917, but almost every other translation I’ve seen says essentially the same thing, i.e. that they would die that day. The only exceptions I’ve seen are paraphrases that dumb the text down for modern readers.
Since Adam allegedly lived for some nine centuries after he ate the fruit, God lied to him.
He could have just changed His mind.
See Genesis 22-12 that I bolded in post #54. God’s reason for not letting Abraham go ahead with the murder that He commanded supports that the command was to test Abraham’s fear of God.
Wait, wait, wait, Abraham had to go down into Moria to sacrifice his son (psyche !) ? That’s crazy dangerous, it’s full of orcs !
But is there not scripture later that says God never tests his followers? If so, which is the lie?
[QUOTE=James 1:13 NIV]
When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone
[/QUOTE]
What you quoted says that God doesn’t tempt others to do evil, not that he never tests anyone. Why “which is the lie”? If it says what you say, both examples could be lies.
So, you agree this is an example of God lieing?
James, the author of the book, writing on behalf of God - states unequivocally that God does not test/tempt anyone.
Earlier writers attest to God constantly testing individuals - again, they are writing for God and under his direction.
Which is it?
Now, we could debate the difference between ‘test’ and ‘tempt’, but I would propose that in the specific case of Abraham, the test was to do something that was known ‘bad’ (murder, human sacrifice) and it falls under the evil category.
Read what I wrote again. I think I was pretty clear.