Is God a liar?

[Open Heart]

Sorry, should have said "you are stating a scientific definition"
God is not defined by science. You are putting any illumination in the scientific box. You are confining God to the physical laws He created.

No, I stated what I meant to state. I'm describing what has been determined by experimentation.

I'm not confining God to anything. I just don't think God is stupid. If He creates Natural Laws that can get the job done by themselves, I don't see where he would make extra work for himself.

 

[Open Heart]

I will ask you again. If you were in a room with no windows and only a solid door. Totally dark inside. Then God made the room light up without a light source.....

1/ Could He do it?
2/ Would it Have to be waves and Photons?

If answer to 1/ is "yes" and 2/ is "no" then the definition to "light" is void.

I answer to 1/ is "no" then I am done here.

He would have a person bring in a light. It's the easiest thing. Why would he go to extra trouble?

Let me ask you a question:
Can God make a rock too heavy for him to lift?

Do you think that's an insanely stupid question? If so, then you agree that there are some questions about God's abilities that are just dumb.

 

[BobRyan]

I understand. They believe that God's only source of light is waves and Photons...

I am saying that that is bunk.

I am saying that that is the way He does it in our physical universe but not the only way it can be accomplished.

I am saying that when He said "let there be light" there was no need for a star a sun a wave or Photon....and yet........there was light.

Light - (electromagnetism) is produced by a great many reactions. God was not limited to just nuclear fusion as His "light source". On day 1 there is already "waters covering the surface of the deep". which means we have a solid earth - covered by water as the starting condition on day 1.

"Then God said..." let there be light. And the result was that this already-created Earth, covered with its already created water - and its already created planetary rotation - would have "evening and morning" once the light source was added.

Genesis 1

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

 

[Open Heart]

Hard to believe we are getting this on a Christian discussion board.

You don't think people get inspired to write things from their imaginations? Where do you think Jesus' parables came from? They weren't from history. Nor were they from dreams or visions.

 

[Open Heart]

Christ called him "Moses". Those with a video of it may call him "elohist" -- and those with nothing at all to prove their speculation is true in real life will also sometimes call him "elohist".

You are mistaken. Bible LORE has it that Moses wrote all of the first five books. But we know from the strong differences of writing style that there were four different authors.

 

[Open Heart]

People, who, on these forums, will ask you to define this word and that word. Words that are used in the bible and then use a modern and new scientific definition to derail the truth of the word of God.

The Hebrew and Greeks texts are translated into Modern English. Therefore you can use a Dictionary to understand what the words in the Bible mean.

 

[BobRyan]

You are mistaken. Bible LORE has it that Moses wrote all of the first five books.

No Bible text says that.

You are free to speculate anything you wish of course... you do have free will.

Christ and Paul said Moses wrote it. Who shall we believe? you? We fully accept that you have free will and can say whatever you wish.

Luke 24:27
And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

In the New Testament these first five books are called the book of the law (Galatians 3:10), the book of Moses (Mark 12:26), the law of the Lord (Luke 2:23), the law of Moses (Luke 2:22), and the law (Matthew 12:5). In both testaments the five books of Moses are considered one book.

Mark 12
But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?

Of course we both know that our atheist evolutionist friends will often respond that Moses did not know what he was talking about and neither did Christ. And that the Bible is just the product of people making stuff up the best they can.

But that "explanation" is not very satisfying to Christians - as I am sure you will agree.

 

[Uber Genius]

the fossil records support the slow change of species over time

Cambrian explosion bothered Darwin as phyla appeared suddenly not gradually and it is a knockdown argument to Darwin's descent with modification (tree)!

So I don't grant this point.

IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right? So

no. You have set up an either/or, false dichotomy of sorts. There is another inference. Namely, you have interpreted the passage in Genesis in a modern (anachronistic) fashion that msire presents the meaning the original audience would have understood.

So I am voting that God is not a liar!

I am also voting that you need to study exegetical fallacies as well as logical fallacies a little more closely.

 

[Uber Genius]

the fossil records support the slow change of species over time

Cambrian explosion bothered Darwin as phyla appeared suddenly not gradually and it is a knockdown argument to Darwin's descent with modification (tree)!

So I don't grant this point.

IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right? So

no. You have set up an either/or false dichotomy of sorts. There is another inference. Namely you have made a misinterpretation of the passage to render it in a way no Ancient Jew would have ever interpreted Gen 1.

A study of logical and exegetical fallacies will eliminate these types of mistakes.

 

[BobRyan]

All the scientific evidence points to an ancient earth. Furthermore, the fossil records support the slow change of species over time, such as dinosaurs to birds. *IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right? So then this begs the questions...

Did God lie?
And if God lied, why?

What do you believe?

1. Is the simple style and text of Genesis 1 and 2 soooo difficult to read that we can't know what it is saying? James Barr and the Hebrew professors of all world-class universities respond with a "resounding NO!". He admits that the Genesis 1-2 text and Exodus 20:11 are in perfect agreement - a 7 day creation week. "six days you shall labor...for in SIX DAYS the Lord MADE..."
2. Is there someplace in the Bible where God tells us "Dinosaurs do not exist" or 'never existed'? No!
3. Did God lie? -- no!

 

[Open Heart]

1. Is the simple style and text of Genesis 1 and 2 soooo difficult to read that we can't know what it is saying?

Is the genre so rare that we don't recognize a creation myth?

 

[Open Heart]

2. Is there someplace in the Bible where God tells us "Dinosaurs do not exist" or 'never existed'? No!

The Bible tells us that Dinos and Mankind were made on the same day. But we know from Paleontology that Dinos were extinct millions of years before Man walked the earth.

 

[Open Heart]

Cambrian explosion bothered Darwin as phyla appeared suddenly not gradually and it is a knockdown argument to Darwin's descent with modification (tree)!

We call this punctuated evolution. Study it.

 

[Open Heart]

no. You have set up an either/or false dichotomy of sorts. There is another inference. Namely you have made a misinterpretation of the passage to render it in a way no Ancient Jew would have ever interpreted Gen 1.

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you be more specific and give an example.

The majority of human beings have always taken myths figuratively. At least when they mature.

 

[BobRyan]

The Bible tells us that Dinos and Mankind were made on the same day.

That is true. I was not there to see it happen. But I believe God on that point.

But we know from Paleontology that Dinos were extinct millions of years before Man

No we don't.

We know about the guesswork - but given that God was there and no Paleontologist was there -- I prefer the eye witness testimony on that fact to mere guesswork.

 

[BobRyan]

We call this punctuated evolution. Study it.

punctuated means we go from "improbable speed" to -- "highly improbable speed" in the imagined velocity for evolution to take place.

 

[BobRyan]

Is the genre so rare that we don't recognize a creation myth?

Hebrew scholars and scholars in OT studies in all world class universities agree - this is not written as myth but as historic account. That is the "intended" meaning of the author for his primary audience.

Obviously.

No possibility at all for newly freed slaves from Egypt to take Moses' writing as not being literally true.

They did not have a smarter-than-god don't-believe-what-it-says mindset ... at least not that early. I think we can all agree to that obvious point.

 

[Open Heart]

Hebrew scholars and scholars in OT studies in all world class universities agree - this is not written as myth but as historic account.

How untrue. You are fooling yourself.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
Hebrew scholars and scholars in OT studies in all world class universities agree - this is not written as myth but as historic account.

How untrue. You are fooling yourself.

You have free will. You are free to speculate that narrative for yourself.

I prefer something a little less subjective.

For those that missed it

Hebrew scholars of standing have always regarded this to be the case. Thus, Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written:

‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that:

(a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience
(b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story
(c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark.

 

[Aman777]

Light - (electromagnetism) is produced by a great many reactions. God was not limited to just nuclear fusion as His "light source". On day 1 there is already "waters covering the surface of the deep". which means we have a solid earth - covered by water as the starting condition on day 1.

"Then God said..." let there be light. And the result was that this already-created Earth, covered with its already created water - and its already created planetary rotation - would have "evening and morning" once the light source was added.

Genesis 1

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

Doesn't compute since you ignored the darkness or death which was upon the heaven (Air) earth without form (Dust) and water which came forth from the Air, of which ALL things are made. You missed the Light, which is the incarnation of YHWH/Jesus coming into the physical world from within the invisible Spirit of God. Jesus is the Light of the first day, today, and also the Light of Heaven.

God called the Light good, and God knows that ONLY God is good. For God to call Jesus good is for God to recognize the Light as God. Jesus told us this as He humbled Himself to God while in the flesh:

Luk 18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou Me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.