Home » Posts tagged 'logic'
Tag Archives: logic
What Is the “False Doctrine” of Only One Text of the Bible? (Part Two)
The average non-church going person and even church goers see the glut of English Bibles and often say, “There are different Bibles.” I’ve heard it dozens of times through the years. Is that true? Is there really more than one Bible? The answer is “no.” God inspired only one Bible, certain exact words, and then He also preserved one Bible with the same exact words in the same language in which they were written. The so-called existence of “many Bibles” undermines authority for the one and only Bible. Believing in one Bible doesn’t require an apology. That belief is a true one.
An Apology
Mark Ward just wrote the following:
One of my life’s long-term prayers is that someone of stature within KJV-Only circles will publicly apologize for promoting false doctrine.
Then he explained the reason:
Ultimately God only knows what moral culpability individuals bear for teaching things that aren’t true and thereby dividing the body of Christ. God only knows who is a victim and who is a perpetrator, or what proportions of perpetrator and victim a given person represents. But I just can’t imagine that all this untruth and division that’s been generated by KJV-Onlyism could occur without individual people sinning—sinning against the teaching of 1 Cor 14 that edification requires intelligibility, sinning against commands for unity and for sound doctrine, sinning against God’s providential opportunities for doing better study.
In part one, I examined Ward’s charge of division for which he prays for an apology. Above you can also see he charges men with not telling the truth. That I know of, I haven’t taught anything on this subject that isn’t true. No one has shown me one thing that I’ve said that is false, which is an important prerequisite for apologizing about saying something not true. That’s all I can say on that part as an answer to Mark Ward’s prayer. He’ll have to get more specific with me if he wants that particular apology. I’m a phone call away for any apology if he’s been praying for one.
Logic and Ambiguity
In recent days, Ward declared that KJVO leaders sin for having the KJV as their church Bible. For you reading, who don’t know much about Ward, this explains his use of 1 Corinthians 14. There is a kind of syllogism that with Ward gets this to the sin category for me and others. I’m trying to help you understand Ward’s thinking here. I’ve made his logic into a syllogism.
Major Premise: Knowing to do good and not doing good is sin.
Minor Premise: Edification is good and because unintelligibility prohibits edification, allowing or causing unintelligibility is not doing good.
Conclusion: Therefore, allowing or causing unintelligibility is sin.
I can agree with the soundness of the syllogism. What’s wrong? There’s an informal logical fallacy called, equivocation.
The equivocation fallacy refers to the use of an ambiguous word or phrase in more than one sense within the same argument. Because this change of meaning happens without warning, it renders the argument invalid or even misleading.
Intelligibility and unintelligibility of themselves are ambiguous. Like many other words and even concepts in scripture, someone can make them mean what he wants them to mean. A believer should define a word in scripture based on how the author uses it. Mark Ward defines intelligibility in a particular way that does not fit 1 Corinthians 14. Many people have explained that to him. I haven’t seen him listen on this and almost anything else. He has a bias toward his own thinking.
Language and 1 Corinthians 14
Paul portrayed a situation in 1 Corinthians 14 where someone spoke in an unknown language. People couldn’t understand it without a translator. Only with an accurate translation could someone understand a foreign language. The conclusion: stop speaking in an unknown or foreign language. There it is.
1 Corinthians 14 is in a three chapter section (12-14) on spiritual gifts. It especially deals with an abuse of the gift of tongues. The actual gift of tongues, as seen in Acts 2, means known languages. The point is understanding the language. Those chapters are not about semantical changes in the same language, but about reining in the abuse of tongues.
Semantic changes occur in the Bible itself and the Bible doesn’t sin when it does that or allows it. Words change in meaning as one reads through the Bible itself. Sometimes the progression of the biblical narrative results in some changes in meaning.
I’m not writing to protect semantic changes in an English translation of God’s perfectly preserved words. We want to know what those words mean and all the other ones too. 1 Corinthians 14 deals mainly with speaking in gibberish, that is, in a language that can’t be know at all. It’s not even a language. That doesn’t edify.
Real Concerns
Even if someone spoke an actual foreign language in a miraculous way, he wouldn’t edify the hearers if they didn’t know the language. That or unintelligible gibberish is the context of verse 9, when Paul says, “utter by the tongue words easy to be understood.” He is not talking about a word here and there of the same language as the hearers, which has endured a semantic change. Edification would still occur with that. I’m not saying it’s not a problem. It is. But it isn’t a sin.
Calling sin the continued endorsement of the King James Version as the English Bible for a church is such an exaggeration, so excessive, by Mark Ward, that it reminds me of the games Pharisees played with words, as recorded in the Gospels. It is blowing a concern way out of proportion.
I’ve written a lot about this through the years, but my bigger concern is a distortion of the gospel and perverted preaching. Many, many who use the King James Version for decades and longer have preached a false gospel and now for half a century at least have just used the King James. It’s not because of archaic words that they do this. They do it because of perverted theology and probably in many instances a lack of conversion. I hear almost nothing about that from Mark Ward. No. Even when he is with someone who massacres the true gospel, he says nothing as long as that person gives an inch on his false friend teaching.
More to Come
Messianic Israel / Jew Evangelistic T-Shirt: Shema & Isa 53
God loves Israel! He loves Israel far more than did the Apostle Paul, who wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit:
1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. … 1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (Romans 9:1-5; 3:1-2)
What does God say to those who harm Israel? “He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye” (Zechariah 2:8). As with the rest of mankind, Jews who do not believe the gospel will be eternally lost (Romans 11:28a), but nonetheless “as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” (Romans 11:28b-11:29).
What is the greatest blessing Jehovah has ever given Israel? The Messiah, the Savior of the world, God blessed for ever, Jesus! To that end, we have designed the T-shirts pictured below, which have been added to the collection of evangelistic T-shirts and other materials I posted about some time ago. Both sides of the T-shirt reference the evangelistic pamphlet Truth From the Torah, Nevi’im, and Kethuvim (the Law, Prophets, and Writings) for Jews who Reverence the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, which is online at https://faithsaves.net/Messiah/. The front has this evangelistic website as well as the text of the Shema, Deuteronomy 6:4:
שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָֹה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָֹה אֶחָד׃
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
While the back has the evangelistic website and Isaiah 53:8b: “For he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.”
along with, on both sides, the flag of Israel. (We did not see a way to design the shirt so that the vowels and accents could be included, although we recognize the Biblical and historical case for their inspiration and preservation.)
We believe that these shirts can be blessed by the God of Israel for Jews to embrace their crucified and risen Messiah, Jesus, as well as to help Gentiles come to repentance and faith in Him. If you get to evangelize Muslims because of this shirt, Isaiah 53 is good for them also, since Muslims deny the Lord Jesus died on the cross, claiming the Gospel accounts are fabrications. But Isaiah 53, which clearly predicts His death by crucifixion and resurrection, and which we have physical, pre-Christian evidence for in the Dead Sea Scrolls, cannot be so explained away by Muslims. This T-shirt can also help you explain the powerful evidence for the Bible from prophecy for agnostics and atheists and the powerful impact of Isaiah 53 to both Jews and Muslims. Furthermore, God promises to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel (Genesis 12:1-3). Do you want to be blessed by the living God? Bless Israel!
The immediate motivation for our making these shirts was a pro-Hamas, anti-Jewish rally we saw in Los Angeles. Jew haters there held signs such as “Resistance is not terrorism,” glorifying the murder of 1,200 Jews on October 7, 2023, the largest single-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust:
They also promoted “from the river to the sea,” advocating the destruction of the Jewish state and the murder of the Jews:
The protesters were part of the anti-Israel hate group, the A. N. S. W. E. R. coalition, who argue that to say “Hamas is a terrorist organization” is a “lie.” (By the way, if you need more reasons to stop using Google as a search engine, note the pro-terrorism, anti-Israel search results that come up first if you search for “answercoalition.org Hamas terrorism”; compare those results with what you get on Duck Duck Go, where the top result [as of the time I am writing this] is the Anti-Defamation League explaining why Hamas is a bloodthirsty terrorist organization that calls for the eradication of Israel.) The protestors also reproduced lies pumped out by Hamas about civilian deaths in Gaza, while saying nothing about the fact that Hamas wants civilians in Gaza to die and Israel does not. Of course, Islam allows Muslims to lie–after all, Allah is the best of deceivers.
They were blocking the street so that we could not keep going on the bus we were on in Los Angeles. Our destination was not far away–a museum in LA. We decided to get off the bus and walk there. A few blocks away we saw an orthodox Jewish man walking in the direction of the advocates of terrorism. We told him about the protest; he thanked us, and re-routed. After we got home from the museum we designed the T-shirts. It is right to stand against terrorism and for the Jewish people. It is especially right to stand for the greatest Jew of all, the resurrected Lord, Jesus.
We saw posters like the following a few blocks away. The anti-Jewish, pro-Hamas protestors did not say anything about these people.
They also said nothing about United States citizens killed by or held hostage by Hamas. They are also not important, it seems. (Let me add that the large majority of inhabitants in Gaza and the West Bank support Hamas’ murder of Jewish civilians–the large majority “extremely support” terrorism, while in a recent survey only 7.3% of survey participants were “extremely against” such terrorism, combined with 5.4% who are “somewhat against” it, for a total of only 12.7% of the population who are against terrorism; it is certainly possible survey results reflect some bias, but the overall picture is likely to be accurate.)
What about here in the USA? When asked if they support Israel or Hamas, 95% of those over 65 support Israel. The percentages get progressively lower the younger people are. Among 18-24 year olds, only 55% support Israel, while 45% support Hamas. This is a terrible trend, and awful evidence of the anti-God garbage taught in the public school and university systems. Maybe consider getting some of these T-shirts for yourself or as presents for others. Perhaps you are afraid of Muslim violence or anti-Jewish violence if you wear one, since true Islam in America–like all true Islam–is violent and bloodthirsty, not peaceful. Perhaps if you are living in Saudi Arabia or Iran it would be unwise to wear one of these shirts; but if you live in the United States of America, and you will allow threats of Muslim violence to curtail your free speech, something is very wrong. Obviously Christians have liberty to wear or not wear a T-shirt like this, and it is perfectly fine not to wear one, but our decisions must be made out of Biblical principle and for the glory of God, not out of fear. If you say you would have protected Jews in the Holocaust, but are afraid to stand for them and against their murderers now, why should we believe you would have stood were you in Hitler’s Germany? There are Biblical principles here. God’s love for Israel is not saying God loves everything the modern state of Israel does–but God still loves Israel, and Scripture still says to bless Israel. (By the way, if you are born again, God loves you with an infinite and special love, but He still does not love everything you do–He does not love your sin, nor does He love Israel’s sin.) Be salt and light: stand up for righteousness. Do not let the wicked pro-terrorist people be the only ones who are making their voices known. Stand for the God of Israel, for the Messiah of Israel, and for the nation of Israel.
Postscriptum:
As FLAME: Facts and Logic About the Middle East points out concerning anti-Israel, pro-Hamas bias in media reports about Gaza civilian casualties:
[T]he media insist on treating Hamas’s notoriously unreliable information feed as fact. Conversely, they refuse to give precedence to proven, reliable sources of information, such as the Israeli or U.S. governments, the latter of which confirmed Al-Shifa’s use as a Hamas headquarters. Israel presents photographs of Hamas blocking exit highways, so Gazans cannot leave the war zone . . . but Hamas denies it, says NPR. Such is the inane, “he-said, she said” pablum we are fed by the media.
The media also steadfastly refuse to ask the questions demanded by the story—and by any curious reader, listener, or viewer. When reporters interview Palestinians on the street or doctors in hospitals, the viewer cries to know: “Do you ever see any Hamas guys around here? Have you seen any tunnels?” But never does the reporter ask this, let alone questions like, “Do you support Hamas? Do you think there should be a Palestine next to Israel? What do you think about the October 7th attack on Israel?” These are obvious queries that responsible, curious, fact-hungry journalists would and should normally ask their sources. But they never do. Why?
The short answer is that if they asked these questions, the stories they tell wouldn’t fit the narrative they are trying to sell—the narrative in which the Palestinians are an oppressed people, Israel is an evil, colonial aggressor, and Hamas is a product of legitimate Palestinian resistance.
To sell their perverse narrative, international media swallow the wildly inflated death-toll numbers cranked out by the Gaza Health Ministry. For this reason, the media simply repeat the daily growing casualty figures Hamas gives them.
Reuters reports, for example, that as of November 22nd, Gaza’s Hamas-run government says at least 13,300 Palestinians have been confirmed killed, including at least 5,600 children. But Luke Baker, a former Reuters bureau chief who led the organization’s coverage of Israel and the disputed territories from 2014 to 2017, said on X (formerly Twitter), “Hamas has a clear propaganda incentive to inflate civilian casualties as much as possible.”
Moreover, the media almost never give a breakdown of the casualties. They don’t say how many were Hamas terrorists or how many were human shields, killed in residences schools or hospitals where Hamas were hiding. They never tell how many were killed—not by Israeli forces, but by Hamas and other terrorist groups—because of misfired rockets, or by Hamas shooting at Palestinian civilians heeding Israeli orders to evacuate.
In addition, it’s probable that a significant number of the “children” reported killed or wounded by Hamas are youths aged 13 to 18, who were located in Hamas facilities or even took an active part in the fighting.
If you are not aware of the connection between Soviet communist propaganda and modern anti-Zionist lies about Israel as a colonialist oppressor, please read the article here.
My Acceptance of Hell
Hell is a common atheist argument, usually made with disdain. It’s even got a name, “The Problem of Hell.” You’ve got to say it in mocking tones, because scorn is part of the argument. It can be done in one statement something like this: “You’ve got to love God or else He’ll torture you in Hell.” Or, “If God is so insecure, that He needs everyone to love Him, or He’ll send them to Hell, I wouldn’t believe in Him even if He did exist.”
The Hell argument against Theism sets the atheist up as morally superior to Bible believers and God Himself, justifying atheism. It could be a kind of dress rehearsal for an argument before God Himself at the final judgment. It could too serve as an emotional appeal to support a bankrupt position. Others will cheer this on.
Someone is judging in his judgment of Hell. What is this standard for judgment in a random world of matter and motion, atoms colliding with one another? How does someone put even two related thoughts together by a cosmic accident of naturalism? He doesn’t. How does naturalism cause the ability to provide a nuance of disdain? It doesn’t. The atheist mocking Hell borrows from theism by using words, which are abstract, nonmaterial ideas. He constructs a moral system to account for behavior that doesn’t exist in the arbitrary world of the naturalist.
Even so, Hell could at least feel difficult to defend in the world in which we live. The atheist frames it as though you enjoy the future pain and anguish. For that reason among others, people won’t talk about Hell. They call it perhaps eternal death or just eternal separation from God. Knowing how offensive it might sound, thinking it might just shut down a conversation, it’s given little mention, even though Jesus was the one who talked about it more than anyone. There is a Heaven. There is a Hell.
How some people have dealt with Hell is eliminating almost any opportunity for anyone to go there except for someone almost everyone thinks deserves it. Hitler comes to mind. A general audience might choose for a child molester or a serial killer. Almost everyone else goes to, you know, “a better place,” even if they don’t know what or where it is or why that person will go or should be going there. It’s not helpful to give someone false assurance related to Hell. Assigning someone to a better place, when he’s really on his way to Hell, hurts him in an eternal way.
I’ve titled this, my acceptance of Hell, because in a personal way, Hell is acceptable to me. There are general reasons for acceptability. The Bible teaches Hell. Jesus taught Hell. It is also taught in so many different ways. The opposition to Hell isn’t persuasive. It amounts to “I don’t want it” or “I don’t like it,” which is a version of rejection of justice for sin.
Here are my personal reasons for acceptance of Hell.
One, how bad we are.
People just don’t think they deserve Hell. This is very common. When I’m evangelizing, it’s the second greatest stumbling point. I ask, “Do you think you deserve Hell?” 90 plus percent answer, “No.” The idea here is the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. It’s way too severe, reflecting on the nature of God, His righteousness, and His justice. People do not think they’re bad enough to deserve Hell. That’s for very bad people, and few think they’re that bad.
I say I deserve Hell, and I accept that, because I do think I’m bad. How bad we are starts with the nature of God. The Bible compares us to God. I fall very far short of the glory of God. It’s not an accident. I also do the things offensive to God and then just don’t please God on a regular basis.
God created me for His purpose and not only do I not fulfill that, but I don’t want to do it. I want to serve myself. I can give many examples of this. Today at church, while someone was praying, I caught myself thinking about something else. I was thinking about something temporal and superficial and suddenly I awoke out of that trance, not even hearing what someone was praying. I’ve done that many times.
God’s judgment turns us over to our own lusts. Romans 1 uses the language of “gave them up” (vv. 24, 26, 28). God lets people have what they want. He lets them go. They’re getting what they want. They don’t want God. They don’t want what He wants. If you get that, it ends in Hell, because that path leads to where God isn’t. His love is absent from Hell. Where God isn’t, it’s a very terrible place. That’s how the Bible describes it. Hell is the final destination for those God gives up.
I think of this aspect too. In going my own way, I disobey, even ignore, the great command, to love Him with all my heart, soul, mind, and strength. God loves me. No one is better to me than Him. It’s not even close, but I live for myself.
Two, it’s a necessary motivation.
Sin ruined man. It ruins men. Men easily live for themselves. They move from one lust to the next. This is all so strong, that Hell is a necessary impetus to reject that.
I know there’s all the positive too: Heaven, God’s goodness, the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and the truth of the Bible. That’s all important. I still see Hell as necessary motivation in spite of all those good things, on the negative side. The flesh is that strong. Human desire is that strong.
You could call all that the world offers, what Jesus calls, gaining the whole world. Even if man doesn’t gain the whole world, the whole world is still out there offering its invitation. The eternal loss of a soul counteracts the lie of the world. It’s a nagging reality. Even if someone wants to block it out, it disquiets and afflicts.
When Jesus told the story of the rich man in Hell, someone sees a man who did have everything in his short lifetime, who would gladly give it all up for even a drop of water, while he’s in Hell. If there’s one thing he wants to do, even when he can’t escape Hell, it’s to get a warning to his brothers. This is a warning to all the living.
Hell is not over the top. Even with it, people still choose to go there with the knowledge of its existence. As severe as it is, it’s still not enough for a vast majority of people. Many atheists would rather mock Hell and God than receive the Lord, despite the reality of Hell.
Hell makes total sense to me personally for these two reasons.
Shame, Folly, and Conspiracy Theories
I have been thinking about this since writing my post on getting vaccinated for COVID and also my post “Satanic Conspiracy, COVID-19, and the Church’s Response.” I am not writing this to rehash the contents of those posts. I would encourage those who disagreed–and those who agreed–with the posts to consider the following Biblical principles before we are convinced by or share as true any conspiracy.
1.) Have I examined both sides of the case for the alleged conspiracy?
Prov. 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
Prov. 18:17 He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.
Before telling others, spreading on social media, or in any other way adopting or encouraging others to adopt a conspiracy as true, have I carefully examined both sides of the issue? Have I only read people who agree with the conclusion I am predisposed to, or have I read not just arguments for the conspiracy, but also strong arguments against it, and can I refute the arguments against it? If people challenge my belief in the conspiracy, do I take it personally and react to them emotionally–so that, perhaps, they are not even willing to bring problems with my view, and I place myself in an echo chamber where only those who agree with me are willing to say anything–or do I evaluate what contrary opinions say rationally and dispassionately?
If we do not do this, and promote something which is false because we have not read nor refuted the arguments for the contrary view, it is shame and folly.
2.) Have I exercised great care in my investigation?
Deut. 13:14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain …
Job 29:16 [T]he cause which I knew not I searched out.
Have I made sure that sources that allegedly prove the conspiracy are not taken out of context? Am I looking at the original source, or what someone said that someone said that someone said? Can I provide a rational mechanism for how what the conspiracy says happened could have taken place, and can I show that other, simpler or less extraordinary explanations fail? Are the sources reliable ones? Do I know the bias of the sources I am citing? We should be very, very careful before assuming a testimonial, a YouTube video, or some other source that would not make it in a high-school research paper or on Wikipedia is giving us the truth while published, peer-reviewed results by people with tremendous knowledge of the field they are writing about are telling us falsehoods. It is not impossible, but if we are going to make an extraordinary claim like this we need extraordinary evidence.
If we do not follow the two principles above we risk getting taken advantage of by shysters, con-men, and other liars. We risk bringing reproach to the name of Christ when we utter falsehoods as Christians. We can put at risk our lives, health, and livelihoods, and the lives, health, and livelihoods of others.
Consider also many of the principles in the Westminster Larger Catechism on the Ninth Commandment, “Thou shalt not bear false witness”:
Question 144
What are the duties required in the ninth commandment?
The duties required in the ninth commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, (Zech. 8:16) and the good name of our neighbour, as well as our own; (3 John 12) appearing and standing for the truth; (Prov. 31:8–9) and from the heart, (Ps. 15:2) sincerely, (2 Chron. 19:9) freely, (1 Sam. 19:4–5) clearly, (Josh. 7:19) and fully, (2 Sam. 14:18–20) speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, (Lev. 19:15, Prov. 14:5,25) and in all other things whatsoever; (2 Cor. 1:17–18, Eph. 4:25) a charitable esteem of our neighbours; (Heb. 6:9, 1 Cor. 13:7) loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name; (Rom 1:8, 2 John 4, 3 John 3–4) sorrowing for, (2 Cor. 2:4, 2 Cor. 12:21) and covering of their infirmities; (Prov. 17:9, 1 Pet. 4:8) freely acknowledging of their gifts and graces, (1 Cor. 1:4–5,7, 2 Tim. 1:4–5) defending their innocency; (1 Sam. 22:14) a ready receiving of a good report, (1 Cor. 13:6–7) and unwillingness to admit of an evil report, (Ps. 15:3) concerning them; discouraging tale-bearers, (Prov. 25:23) flatterers, (Prov. 26:24–25) and slanderers; (Ps. 101:5) love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requireth; (Prov. 22:1, John 8:49) keeping of lawful promises; (Ps. 15:4) studying and practicing of whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report. (Phil. 4:8)
Question 145
What are the sins forbidden in the ninth commandment?
The sins forbidden in the ninth commandment are, all prejudicing the truth, and the good name of our neighbours, as well as our own, (1 Sam. 17:28, 2 Sam. 16:3, 2 Sam. 1:9,10,15–16) especially in public judicature; (Lev. 19:15, Hab. 1:4) giving false evidence, (Prov. 19:5, Prov. 6:16,19) suborning false witnesses, (Acts 6:13) wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause, out-facing and overbearing the truth; (Jer. 9:3,5, Acts 24:2,5, Ps. 12:3–4, Ps. 52:1–4) passing unjust sentence, (Prov. 17:15, 1 Kings 21:9–14,10–11,13) calling evil good, and good evil; rewarding the wicked according to the work of the righteous, and the righteous according to the work of the wicked; (Isa. 5:23) forgery, (Ps. 119:69, Luke19:8, Luke 16:5–7) concealing the truth, undue silence in a just cause, (Lev. 5:1, Deut. 13:8, Acts 5:3,8–9, 2 Tim. 4:16) and holding our peace when iniquity calleth for either a reproof from ourselves, (1 Kings1:6, Lev. 19:17) or complaint to others; (Isa. 59:4) speaking the truth unseasonably, (Prov. 29:11) or maliciously to a wrong end, (1 Sam. 22:9–10, Ps. 52:1–5) or perverting it to a wrong meaning, (Ps. 56:5, John 2:19, Matt. 26:60–61) or in doubtful or equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice; (Gen. 3:5, Gen. 26:7,9) speaking untruth, (Isa. 59:13) lying, (Lev. 19:11, Col. 3:9) slandering, (Ps. 50:20) backbiting, (James 4:11, Jer. 38:4) talebearing, (Lev. 19:16) whispering, (Rom. 1:29–30) scoffing, (Gen. 21:9, Gal. 4:29) reviling, (1 Cor. 6:10) rash, (Matt. 7:1) harsh, (Acts 28:4) and partial censuring; (Gen. 38:24, Rom. 2:1) misconstructing intentions, words, and actions; (Neh. 6:6–8, Rom. 3:8, Ps. 69:10, 1 Sam. 1:13–15, 2 Sam. 10:3) flattering, (Ps. 12:2–3) vain-glorious boasting; (2 Tim. 3:2) thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others; (Luke 18:9,11, Rom. 12:16, 1 Cor. 4:6, Acts 12:22, Exod. 4:10–14) denying the gifts and graces of God; (Job 27:5,6, Job 4:6) aggravating smaller faults; (Matt. 7:3–5) hiding, excusing, or extenuating of sins, when called to a free confession; (Prov. 28:13, Prov. 30:20, Gen. 3:12–13, Jer. 2:35, 2 Kings 5:25, Gen. 4:9) unnecessary discovering of infirmities; (Gen. 9:22, Prov. 25:9–10) raising false rumors, (Exod. 23:1) receiving and countenancing evil reports, (Prov. 29:12) and stopping our ears against just defense; (Acts 7:56–57, Job 31:13–14) evil suspicion; (1 Cor. 13:5, 1 Tim. 6:4) envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any, (Numb. 11:29, Matt. 21:15) endeavoring or desiring to impair it, (Ezra 4:12–13) rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy; (Jer. 48:27) scornful contempt, (Ps. 35:15–16,21, Matt. 27:28–29) fond admiration; (Jude 16, Acts 12:22) breach of lawful promises; (Rom. 1:31, 2 Tim. 3:3) neglecting such things as are of good report, (1 Sam. 2:24) and practicing, or not avoiding ourselves, or not hindering what we can in others, such things as procure an ill name. (2 Sam. 13:12–13)
If we consider the two questions at the beginning of this post, and the principles found in the Ninth Commandment, we will in a greater way glorify the Lord. Let’s make sure we do this before we adopt, promote, share with others, or in any other way support conspiracy theories (and consider these principles in all other areas of our life as well that involve rational thought).
If after reading this post, your reaction is to post insults in the comment section, tell me that I am just a stooge of Big Pharma, QAnon, or whatever else, and try to promote some conspiracy that you have not read, much less been able to refute arguments against, and which fail the tests found in the verses in this post, kindly re-read the post and pay a bit more attention.
–TDR
Recent Comments