• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Meat Limits of Christian rules

Ok. Why do you then sense the need to look at these women from a position of them sinning? Why not think the best of people rather than the worst?
Because lying is easiest way to do their job without harming babies or mothers.

Do some game theory. Besides, I already explained.

The bible very clearly states when it is noteworthy that people are lying or being deceptive. If you choose to believe that they were sinning/lying I can't convince you otherwise. I choose to believe if it is not written we can't apply sin without evidence.

When you can give me some documentation on your certification on midwife and birthing practices of that time I'll let your conjecture bear more weight than any one elses.

Shalom.
Where is Bible says that WARNING:LYING IN PROGRESS is mandatory? Sometimes you have to figure it yourself.

Start with Laban lying about marriage order of daughters. Then visit Potifar wife. You can also visit Jacob's sin lying about whereabout of Joseph.

In all cases described situation as what was happening isn't same as what people has said. So this implies lying. Again, there is no need to say somebody lied.
 
The messiah Jesus never sinned. If healing was a sin he could not be the messiah. Period.
Man, let's do basic logic.

Bible says Lord is sinless and sin is breaking Law. So Lord must never break His own Law, otherwise He has done sin and therefore He isn't anymore sinless.

Do you understand that Lord limiting Himself is one of basic Christian ideas?

Genesis 9:11

And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

Do you get it? Lord Himself saying what He won't do again, therefore reducing number of allowed action by Him by one.

If Lord again tries to flood Earth, He is liar.

So by what logic, healing people on Sabbath isn't breaking Law? Do you even have curiosity about Lord's actions and why?

If murderer during police investigation doesn't lie, but implies somebody else did murder, how is that right?

Your moral system needs upgrade if you are fine with above situation. But he didn't sin by lying, so obstruction of justice is right.

People will choose to believe others who maliciously or not generate a reality to them.
So Palatine did not overtly lie/sin in that regard. We have to be discerning with who/what we believe. If I withhold some information from someone because I choose to even though they can benefit from it I am not committing a sin of lying.

He did deceive people by hiding stuff he should be executed. He didn't accidentally make small mistake.

Again, if you moral system is OK with someone deceiving whole population in order to become dictator because no sin is make, your moral system needs replacement.

I am just saying that the words you were using also have a more explicit meaning. Of course it does mean general lying as well. Lying often hurts others.
Palpatine didn't hurt anybody by deceiving. He just didn't say whole truth.

Using Fauci is a terrible example. He was explicitly harming others/his neighbor with his lies.

Oh, he is perfect example.

To remind you:

Also, false witness is different then generic lying. It is the intentional slander and puttingbdoen of someone's good name or reputation.

In that case Fauci didn't slander anybody.
 
Even if group's fruits are very bad, it doesn't necesarry implies everything they do is wrong. It only implies higher probability that every activity is wrong.

So it's possible to learn something useful from everybody including Satan himself.*

Real issue is how profitable is getting to pure truth without picking also falsehoods.

*Satan can quote Scripture
You didn’t read my whole reply.
While the fruit of the RCC is generally bad, they didnt exactly produce sour grapes with their translation of the Decalogue. They left it alone.
 
You didn’t read my whole reply.
While the fruit of the RCC is generally bad, they didnt exactly produce sour grapes with their translation of the Decalogue. They left it alone.
I did read whole reply.

I just decided not to comment on Decalogue and RCC in detail.
 
I did read whole reply.

I just decided not to comment on Decalogue and RCC in detail.
Which was the main point of my post.
You just chose to troll one part of it for your own kicks and pleasure.
 
Start with Laban lying about marriage order of daughters.
Please provide the references where it says this order wasn't a cultural expectation. Jacob didn't call Laban out but accepted it and worked the additional seven years.
 
Because lying is easiest way to do their job without harming babies or mothers.

Do some game theory. Besides, I already explained.


Where is Bible says that WARNING:LYING IN PROGRESS is mandatory? Sometimes you have to figure it yourself.

Start with Laban lying about marriage order of daughters. Then visit Potifar wife. You can also visit Jacob's sin lying about whereabout of Joseph.

In all cases described situation as what was happening isn't same as what people has said. So this implies lying. Again, there is no need to say somebody lied.
All of the scriptures you just quoted are explicitly detailing out how those situations were and when a lie happens.

The midwife story does not have the context to justify your implication. If we read scripture with the lens you are asking us to use every person in bible would be considered guilty of lying till proven without a doubt innocent.
 
Last edited:
Because the underlying premise coming through in this thread appears to be one where acting contrary to God’s laws and instructions can be justified when it suits, I'll not contribute further. Seeking to find fault with various biblical characters, when God doesn't find fault, is not a good practice. It is written in Proverbs 17:15, He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, Both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord. Shalom
 
You just chose to troll one part of it for your own kicks and pleasure.

No, we are all free to ask questions but we do not get to require the other person to answer the way we want or to answer the question at all.
 
No, we are all free to ask questions but we do not get to require the other person to answer the way we want or to answer the question at all.
Sure, we’re all free to reply in any way we want.
We’re equally free to evaluate the quality and/or motives. Freedom isn’t a one way street.
 
Because the underlying premise coming through in this thread appears to be one where acting contrary to God’s laws and instructions can be justified when it suits, I'll not contribute further. Seeking to find fault with various biblical characters, when God doesn't find fault, is not a good practice. It is written in Proverbs 17:15, He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, Both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord. Shalom
I agree that this thread isn’t necessarily the best use of time, but ethics, and situational ethics is a thing people debate. When is it proper to violate one law to uphold or prevent another law from being broken?
 
When is it proper to violate one law to uphold or prevent another law from being broken?

When is it proper to overthrow a government to prevent fundamental human rights from being trampled?

As we see in the UK right now. :oops:
 
Man, let's do basic logic.

Bible says Lord is sinless and sin is breaking Law. So Lord must never break His own Law, otherwise He has done sin and therefore He isn't anymore sinless.

Do you understand that Lord limiting Himself is one of basic Christian ideas?

Genesis 9:11

And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

Do you get it? Lord Himself saying what He won't do again, therefore reducing number of allowed action by Him by one.

If Lord again tries to flood Earth, He is liar.

So by what logic, healing people on Sabbath isn't breaking Law? Do you even have curiosity about Lord's actions and why?
In prophecy the one of the traits of the Messiah is that He will be sinless and blameless, thus not committing any sinful action. Jesus healed on sabbath. He never sinned. Healing on Sabbath is not a sin.

I'm not sure how much more logic you need.
If murderer during police investigation doesn't lie, but implies somebody else did murder, how is that right?

Your moral system needs upgrade if you are fine with above situation. But he didn't sin by lying, so obstruction of justice is right.

Implicating someone else is guilty is clear case of false witness against your neighbor, lying. It doesn't matter if no specific person is being called out.
He did deceive people by hiding stuff he should be executed. He didn't accidentally make small mistake.

Again, if you moral system is OK with someone deceiving whole population in order to become dictator because no sin is make, your moral system needs replacement.


Palpatine didn't hurt anybody by deceiving. He just didn't say whole truth.
There is no general sin of withholding information in the bible. Withholding information that will lead to others injury or death is wrong. There are other circumstances which withholding information may be either right or wrong, this is a matter of biblical discernment. The point I was making is that withholding information is not necessarily the equivalent of the sin of lying.
Oh, he is perfect example.

To remind you:



In that case Fauci didn't slander anybody.
Slander is not only form of lying. That is one form and definition of it. Lying is wrong and sinful and condemned throughout the bible. I was just pointing out that the terminology you were using had a specific meaning. It is often used as a blanket covering for lying in general. I never claimed that lying at large was not a sin.
 
In prophecy the one of the traits of the Messiah is that He will be sinless and blameless, thus not committing any sinful action. Jesus healed on sabbath. He never sinned. Healing on Sabbath is not a sin.

Healing on the Sabbath is not a sin but it did break the laws of man who forbade any kind of work or labor on the Sabbath.

Jesus clearly didn't care about this law.
 
When is it proper to overthrow a government to prevent fundamental human rights from being trampled?

As we see in the UK right now. :oops:
Since this is a thread on Christian rules, I’ll take a stab:

Never?

Serious, theologically conservative scholars have proposed that even our American Revolution was unscriptural. I know John McArthur, among others held that view.
 
Since this is a thread on Christian rules, I’ll take a stab:

Never?

Serious, theologically conservative scholars have proposed that even our American Revolution was unscriptural. I know John McArthur, among others held that view.
Questions that I have struggled with, without resolution.
 
Since this is a thread on Christian rules, I’ll take a stab:

Never?

Serious, theologically conservative scholars have proposed that even our American Revolution was unscriptural. I know John McArthur, among others held that view.

I rather detest people who denounce American independence and sovereignty all while using the liberties it provides to condemn America.

In any case, I suggest that you read the Declaration of Independence and realize that it was put forth by Christian men. For your convenience:

*************************************

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
 
Back
Top