A Protestant assertion about the apocrypha

[Maccabees]

Read the primary Rahab story in Joshua again (not the NT name drop) she clearly lies in order to protect teh Jewsih spies the King of Jericho sends his men to ask her where they are she does I dunno and she gets rewarded.

This is scripture is it not?
So whatever allusion to lieing in the dueterocanonicals does not in of itself disqualify it as scripture.

I know the post-nicean fathers teach we are not always oblidged to tell the truth but on the other hand we are forbidden to tell lies.

I really wonder how the early pre-nicean fathers would view such questions as they were like the Jews hunted down and in hiding for thier beliefs. A Roman might aske them where the other christians are and if he tells the truth they are all goners. The Post Nicean fathers could afford to live in their ivory towers but the early christians could not unfortunately I don’t know of any such writigns of the earliest fathers as they usually deal with the most basic of christian beliefs and not such specualtive questions as the later fathers.

I’ll give you an example on how this might be important the earliest fathers were against the death penalty. (becasue they were suffering from it) the post nicean fathers favored the death penalty. (they were no longer dyeing for their beleifs in fact they were now in power to kill pagans) so we see how sociology affects theology. Practicality and ivory towers can lead to two different conculsions. It’s nice to live in ivory towers of theological speculation. But when a lie means others are saved I think God gives you pass for that one.
Does Oscar Schindler rot in hell for lieing to the Nazis? does Corrie Ten Boom rot in hell for lieing to the Nazis?
Oh what an evil God you worship Gottle who would make such a judgement!
I turst in the mercy of God to overlook the normative law of not to tell the lie in such a situation.
I would lie to save a thousand jews heck I would do it to save one Jew.
Jesus broke the Sabbath to heal the sick was he the legalist no it was the Pharisees as they failed to see the bigger picture and kept to the letter of the law.
Gottle you see the letter of the law and not the bigger picture.

 

[MaggieOH]

djrakowski:

I’ve found it: Read the references to the Book of Judith.

Dan

hi Dan,

I read the information regarding the Book of Judith and the “lie”. I cannot see that God helped Judith to lie. On the other hand she did pray for strength to do what was necessary to help her people to be saved from the enemy.

In my view it is a pity when Protestant pastors cannot teach the simple truths in the story of Judith. I, for instance do not like the fact that a woman is praised because she killed a man in a blood thirsty way, neither am I over fond of the idea that she used a bit of subterfuge to lure Holefernes to her tent for a meal. He obviously thought that he was going to get more than a meal from Judith (nudge nudge) and like a fool he was only too willing to come along to her tent for that fateful meeting

As has already been stated we have to look beyond the petty detail in the story of Judith to find the Truth, or the purpose for this story being included in the canon. The purpose of the Scripture is not to provide a literal historical account of everything that happened before the birth of Christ, let alone give us a perfect history of the time that Jesus was on earth . It’s purpose is to give us an account of Salvation History, and the story of Judith fits into this category. This is a story where Jerusalem is under seige and about to be sacked by the enemy. Judith calls upon God to help her to find a way to overcome the enemy. What Judith did, she did for the sake of her people, and when she was successful in her undertaking she gave praise to the Lord, because the Lord chose a woman to strike down this enemy of the Chosen People.

Just as one could comment upon the “lie” that was told, one can also comment upon the faith that Judith showed in the Lord. In order to undertake her bold plan she showed a strength of faith in the Lord. I believe that this is the real purpose of the story of Judith, that is to show how salvation comes about by putting trust and faith in the Lord alone.

Maggie

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Maccabees:

Read the primary Rahab story in Joshua again (not the NT name drop) she clearly lies in order to protect teh Jewsih spies the King of Jericho sends his men to ask her where they are she does I dunno and she gets rewarded.

This is scripture is it not?

So whatever allusion to lieing in the dueterocanonicals does not in of itself disqualify it as scripture.

What has the canonical status - or otherwise - of books to do with this ? Nothing - because I don’t recall questioning it.​

Rahab was not rewarded for lying - the story in Joshua has her being rewarded for hiding the spies: which is a somewhat different matter. ##

I know the post-nicean fathers teach we are not always oblidged to tell the truth but on the other hand we are forbidden to tell lies.

I really wonder how the early pre-nicean fathers would view such questions as they were like the Jews hunted down and in hiding for thier beliefs. A Roman might aske them where the other christians are and if he tells the truth they are all goners. The Post Nicean fathers could afford to live in their ivory towers but the early christians could not unfortunately I don’t know of any such writigns of the earliest fathers as they usually deal with the most basic of christian beliefs and not such specualtive questions as the later fathers.

At least we agree about something.​

There is a discussion of Patristic (and other) attitudes to lying, mental reservations and economy with truth in Newman’s "Apologia pro Vita Sua". - go to chapters 7 and 8. ##

I’ll give you an example on how this might be important the earliest fathers were against the death penalty. (becasue they were suffering from it) the post nicean fathers favored the death penalty. (they were no longer dyeing for their beleifs in fact they were now in power to kill pagans) so we see how sociology affects theology. Practicality and ivory towers can lead to two different conculsions. It’s nice to live in ivory towers of theological speculation. But when a lie means others are saved I think God gives you pass for that one.

Does Oscar Schindler rot in hell for lieing to the Nazis? does Corrie Ten Boom rot in hell for lieing to the Nazis?

[continue…]

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

[continue…end]

When I’ve become God Almighty and have universal knowledge of the souls of all men, you can ask me that. Not before. All I know is, that lying is hateful to God, and is unambiguously forbidden by the CCC. And it’s frivolous to expect people to judge people who have had to meet challenges one has not had to meet oneself - which is why Corrie ten Boom’s temptations whatever they may have been, cannot be judged by others that Corrie ten Boom or God: they are part of her story, not mine. It is enough that lying is detestable, is forbidden by Christ, is contrary to the ethical character of God, is very unfitting for Christians (who should not emulate the father of lies if they are children of the God of truth), and so on. IOW - we have quite enough to do without proposing to ourselves moral dilemmas which are not ours, so it’s idle to speculate about people whose temptations are not ours. So please don’t expect me to play God ​

Oh what an evil God you worship Gottle who would make such a judgement!

I turst in the mercy of God to overlook the normative law of not to tell the lie in such a situation.

I would lie to save a thousand jews heck I would do it to save one Jew.

Jesus broke the Sabbath to heal the sick was he the legalist no it was the Pharisees as they failed to see the bigger picture and kept to the letter of the law.

Gottle you see the letter of the law and not the bigger picture.

The duty to keep the Sabbath is not on a par with our duty to avoid lying. The latter flows from the very character of God, the former, from someyhing He did that He might have done otherwise. Which is why the duty to avoid lying has been made more strict, not less - whereas the Sabbath has been superseded by Sunday. God can change a feast set by Him; that he has done so, proves this - He cannot become a God of lies. He could as soon become the devil as do that.​

I find it very disturbing that Catholics treat abortion as unthinkable, but are prepared to justify lying. What is the good in condemning one work of satan, and excusing another ?

As for my “legalism” - don’t the example of Christ, of the Saints, & the teaching of the CCC, count for anything ? I’m not trying to fulfil law - I can’t: that is why the Gospel is one of grace, & not law. But grace is no excuse for sin - it’s a superb reason to run from it. Truthfulness without exception is essential because it is an excellent protection against falsehood; it is a means of self-protection; for lying is a temptation when it is not yet a sin - that is why it is to be avoided. The very fact that a thing (lying, for example) is a temptation, proves it to be evil and wicked and hateful - & what Christian is there who thinks we should give in to temptation ? ##

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

BibleReader:

In the beginning of Exodus, the Hebrew midwives lie through their teeth to pharaoh to save the lives of Hebrew babies. God rewards them. Exodus 1:15-21.

Are you going to give up Christianity altogether because even the Pentateuch does this?

We live in a complex world. Sometimes it is a sin to not lie.

Re the Deuterocanonicals, which you call the “Apocrypha,” be aware that Christ himself paraphrases both Sirach and Wisdom repeatedly.

Who was that addressed to ?​

If to me - I’ve answered all of these objections already

JLove -about this:

"Are all lies bad?

I think others have made it clear that from biblical examples that all lies are not always bad (dare I say sinful).

My view coming from a slightly different direction.

Looking at the Ten Commandments we have all the “Thou Shall Not’s.” One thing I found interesting is that Ex. 20:16 where we get thou shalt not lie says that, ‘that shall not lie TO YOUR NEIGHBOR.’ (my paraphrase) It does not say “thou shalt not lie” like the others before. I would suggest that fibbing to “enemies” is permitted. I think this is crucial. Also, I think this is made evident with all the other examples given." -

…good thinking: except that Jesus Christ says “Love your enemies” - he even forbids oaths (as does James). If polygamy was allowed “because of the hardness of your hearts”, and has now been superseded by the “law” of charity, why should the exemption suggested not be superseded by the words “Love your enemies” ?​

IOW, Christians can’t treat the Decalogue and it words - or even the whole Torah - as the final revelation of God’s Will for us: For Christ is that final Revelation, and He has radicalised the Torah, by making it not harder to fulfil, but impossible So the very basis of our meeting God is transformed from being law-based, to grace-based. Which leaves no room for lying or enmity at all. ##

 

[Maccabees]

Gottle of Geer:

What has the canonical status - or otherwise - of books to do with this ? Nothing - because I don’t recall questioning it.​

Rahab was not rewarded for lying - the story in Joshua has her being rewarded for hiding the spies: which is a somewhat different matter

[continue…]

Due the topic of the thread is "A Protestant assertion about the apocrypha" not Gottle of Geer’s hangup about lieing to the Nazis. Oh gee we should just tell the truth to Nazis, Al Queda, Sadaam. So what if it might cost innocient lives. One thing for sure Gottle you could never be in the spy game.
The whole topic is does an allusion to lie disqulify a book from being canonical. As I have deomonstrated it does not as lies are elsewhere as well in Protestant OT canon as well. And yes Rahab lied how else do you think she hid them ?

What part of the lie don’t you understand.

Joshua 2:2-6

2 The king of Jericho was told, “Look! Some of the Israelites have come here tonight to spy out the land.” 3 So the king of Jericho sent this message to Rahab: “Bring out the men who came to you and entered your house, because they have come to spy out the whole land.” 4 But the woman had taken the two men and hidden them. She said, “Yes, the men came to me, but I did not know where they had come from. 5 At dusk, when it was time to close the city gate, the men left. I don’t know which way they went. Go after them quickly. You may catch up with them.” 6 (But she had taken them up to the roof and hidden them under the stalks of flax she had laid out on the roof.)

She knew where the men had came from they told her, she knew which way they went they were in her house.
They had not left as she told the King’s men.
She lies at least 3 times here! Not one time. ANd you don’t see the lie here? What kind of Bible are you reading?
Look this is the ultimate Nazi asking where the Jews are scenario here and Rahab demonstrates from scripture on how to handle such a situation. There is no other part of the New Testament or the cathechism that addresses this specific situation it rather deals with normalative teaching where of course lieing would be wrong. You have 2 commandments working against each other here thou shall not kill and thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor. To me my neighbor would be the friend I am trying to protect and not the Nazi nor the king of JEricho. Sorry I see a loophole here.

 

[Digitonomy]

I notice that the CCC defines “lie” rather narrowly, so that some white lies would not qualify.

A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving…To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error.

If you meet an archenemy in business or whatever field, you may politely say “It’s a pleasure to meet you,” when it is anything but. However, since this falsehood carries no intention to deceive, but is merely a polite formality, it does not meet the standard required by the CCC.

The Nazi thing seems more difficult to escape objective sinfulness by the CCC definition, but the fact that you are saving people from concentration camps would seem to be a strong mitigating factor in the seriousness of the sin.

Also, I can’t jump on Gottle’s boat just yet, as the teaching authority of the Church is not to be found completely in the Catechism. This is not the only discussion of the issue by the Church, and a canon lawyer may be able to point to a number of authorative documents which more fully explain the extent of those CCC sentences. I suspect there’s a bit of wiggle room.

 

[TheGarg]

Maccabees:

The Lord works in mystererious ways he commanded Abraham to kill his own son! Protestants are no shocked by this but gee a white law hey that can’t be scripture of course the Israelistes where hidden err lying by Rahab a prostitute. Moses sister was err lying when she preteneded she didn’t know who Moses was and of course Moses mohter was err lying to not admitting that was her son.

I love you Maccabees, but sometimes I just wonder if you drink before you type

Peace, I am just funning ya. I love your (name removed by moderator)ut!

 

[Maccabees]

Beeeeer!:clapping:

My typing is awful. I will admit that.

 

[Maccabees]

The ultimate white lie has to be when your wife or girlfriend ask you honey does this make me look fat?

I wonder how Gottle has handled this one?

Oh Gee honey it does make you look fat I can’t tell a lie.
Heck everything makes you look fat you need to hit the gym.

 

[TheGarg]

Maccabees:

Oh Gee honey it does make you look fat I can’t tell a lie.
Heck everything makes you look fat you need to hit the gym.

Hey, if the shoe doesn’t fit, then your probably right

People shouldn’t ask things that they don’t really want answers to

 

[Traditional_Ang]

djrakowski:

My wife and I have been studying to determine if we should convert to Catholicism. She recently came across an article from a Protestant apologetics organization that makes the following assertion: that somewhere in the apocrypha, there’s an account of God assisting someone in a lie. Unfortunately, there’s no citation for this assertion. Can anyone help me either confirm or refute it?

I suggest you get a few books about some of the “Lies” modern Christian Martyrs have found themselves forced to ell when lives were on the line. Start with Corrie ten Boom’s The Hiding Place corrietenboom.com/ and ask yourself what you would do if a jackbooted murderous thugs came to your door demanding the wherabouts of some INNOCENT people you’ve got hiding in your attic. Realize the thugs will murder these people if they get hold of them.

The read God’s Smuggler, by Brother Andrew, John Sherrill and Elizabeth Sherrill.
amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0451151232/002-8368228-9362446
While reading this, ask what you would do when Soviet Guards ask you if you have any “Contraband” (Bibles and Religious literature) with you. While considering that, realize the penalty would be 10 years in the Gulag or a Psychiatric Facility underdoing Electricshock, various drugs and such like.

Something to think about.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Katholish:

All lies are bad.

Lets get a working definition here:
Lie: A false statement or implication with an intent to deceive.

Lying is my nature sinful. Even in a case of Nazi officiers asking if you are hiding Jews (which is the classic example used as a situation to illustrate the point in debates on lying), you should not lie.

Pope Pius XII answered that questions and did not work by your definition. He and his "Co-conspirators (including Cardinal Giovanni Roncalli - Pope John XXIII) instead decided it was more important to save human beings who were made in the image of God than to tell the Nazis where the Jews were.

Doing it their way, they were able to save over 830,000 jews from the ovens of Auchwitz.

They knew where the Nazis would take the Jews and what the Nazis would do with them if they got their hands on them, and figured that the Nazis had no right to do this and no right to the information that would allow them to do this.

Are you saying that you disagree with Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII on the basis of a general instruction?

Are you saying that you would have given the Nazis the information or stayed absolutely silent, which would have made them more suspicious?

That is one situation where it would have been far more sinful to have been scrupilous about telling the truth, causing those people to be slaughtered, than to tell use the deceptions needed to save their lives. Any potential violence doen to the truth would have been far outweighed by the actual violence the Nazis were doing on our fellow human beings born in the image iand likeness of God.

Blessings.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Maccabees:

The ultimate white lie has to be when your wife or girlfriend ask you honey does this make me look fat?

I wonder how Gottle has handled this one?

Oh Gee honey it does make you look fat I can’t tell a lie.
Heck everything makes you look fat you need to hit the gym.

I agree with you on this one, too.

I can’t do the beer because of the Meds I have to take…But I also am a wretched typist. Hopefully, I’m not such a bad writer.

I also think you’re right about the Little “fibs” we tell our wives, and the ones they tell us, that seem designed to spare each other’s feelings and preserve each other’s dignity

There are situations where brutal honesty just isn’t called for.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

"Are all lies bad?

I think others have made it clear that from biblical examples that all lies are not always bad (dare I say sinful).

My view coming from a slightly different direction.

Looking at the Ten Commandments we have all the “Thou Shall Not’s.” One thing I found interesting is that Ex. 20:16 where we get thou shalt not lie says that, ‘that shall not lie TO YOUR NEIGHBOR.’ (my paraphrase) It does not say “thou shalt not lie” like the others before. I would suggest that fibbing to “enemies” is permitted. I think this is crucial. Also, I think this is made evident with all the other examples given."

Michael,

Your paraphrase of the Commandment if simply wrong. I’m basing this on Rabbinical sources who’ve come up with the concept of La’ash A’Torah based on that Commandment.

1. The Actual Commandment has to do with LEGAL TESTIMONY against another person - Rabbinical Sources have expanded it to include any GOSSIP, or doubious commentary about another person ousdie of a legal of business context. And Many Sages have included even true commentary where it would be damaging to another person when that commentary is not necessary of called for.

As I’ve said previously, I was brought in to the Church by an Orhtodox Rabbi. I hope I learned something from him,
Gottle of Geer:

IOW, Christians can’t treat the Decalogue and it words - or even the whole Torah - as the final revelation of God’s Will for us: For Christ is that final Revelation, and He has radicalised the Torah, by making it not harder to fulfil, but impossible So the very basis of our meeting God is transformed from being law-based, to grace-based. Which leaves no room for lying or enmity at all. ##

Remember, Jesus made the entirety of the Covenant impossible to keep so that we would realize our need for GRACE and GOD’S FORGIVENESS! He didn’t do this to create an impossible to keep Covenant.

Regarding the rest, we have to remember jesus word’s about the Sabbath, “the Sabbath is made for man and not man for the Sabbath.” The same goes for the Church’s Laws, and we are required to look at their effect on HUMAN LIVES and whether the execise allows us to SAVE LIVES or puts us in a position that allows evil men to SLAUGHTER THE INNOCENT!

In other words, the Church has alway seen a hierarchy of Laws, among those Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII themselves who lied to save the lives of over 830,000 Jews from the Nazis.

That’s NOT a hypothetical,

Goodnight and Good Bless.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

**A CHANGE OF SUBJECT & A QUESTION FOR “GOTTLE OF GEER” (and for anyone else who might care to answer):

Michael,** I think you’ll find this to be a situation that a Catholic in the USA might deal with far more frequently than the one we’ve been talking about (Say, every 5 years or so at the minimum)…

While I was “on the road to Jericho”, I was in the Auto business. During that time, I had a manager (Fleet Auto Sales) who used to tell his customers to go to RETAIL Auto Dealerships, LIE to the salespeople (telling them they were going to buy cars from them), WASTE their time (One of only Three commodities salespeople actually have) and then leave without buying ANY cars after they had decided which cars they were going to buy from “Fleet Auto Sales”.

At that time, I was an UNBELIEVER, and my manager was a “FAITHFUL CATHOLIC” (he went to Mass weekly). I used to cringe every time he said this, because I knew that a Retail Salesperson was being kept from making a living whenever he/she “waited” on one of my manager’s customers. (Remember, he/she is on COMMISSION - he/she won’t EAT if he/she doesn’t SELL.)

Was my manager acting consistently with the CCC or not? If his customers were Catholics, were they? or, Did the fact that he told them to do this absolve them from LYING to the salespeople and WASTING their time, thereby making it impossible for them to make a living as long as they were “WAITING” on my Manager’s customers as unpaid employees of my manager?

And, while we’re at it…Is it OK to LIE to an Auto Salesperson??

What says the CCC about that??

In Christ, Michael

 

[Maccabees]

TheGarg:

Hey, if the shoe doesn’t fit, then your probably right

People shouldn’t ask things that they don’t really want answers to

You must be divorced!

 

[MaggieOH]

Traditional Ang:

Michael,

Your paraphrase of the Commandment if simply wrong. I’m basing this on Rabbinical sources who’ve come up with the concept of La’ash A’Torah based on that Commandment.

1. The Actual Commandment has to do with LEGAL TESTIMONY against another person - Rabbinical Sources have expanded it to include any GOSSIP, or doubious commentary about another person ousdie of a legal of business context. And Many Sages have included even true commentary where it would be damaging to another person when that commentary is not necessary of called for.

As I’ve said previously, I was brought in to the Church by an Orhtodox Rabbi. I hope I learned something from him,

Remember, Jesus made the entirety of the Covenant impossible to keep so that we would realize our need for GRACE and GOD’S FORGIVENESS! He didn’t do this to create an impossible to keep Covenant.

Regarding the rest, we have to remember jesus word’s about the Sabbath, “the Sabbath is made for man and not man for the Sabbath.” The same goes for the Church’s Laws, and we are required to look at their effect on HUMAN LIVES and whether the execise allows us to SAVE LIVES or puts us in a position that allows evil men to SLAUGHTER THE INNOCENT!

In other words, the Church has alway seen a hierarchy of Laws, among those Pope Pius XII and Pope John XXIII themselves who lied to save the lives of over 830,000 Jews from the Nazis.

That’s NOT a hypothetical,

Goodnight and Good Bless.

In Christ, Michael

they did not lie about the Jews in Rome. What really happened is that there were a large number of new recruits to the Swiss Guard, and the convents and seminaries were full to over-flowing with new residents.

MaggieOH

 

[Traditional_Ang]

MaggieOH:

they did not lie about the Jews in Rome. What really happened is that there were a large number of new recruits to the Swiss Guard, and the convents and seminaries were full to over-flowing with new residents.

MaggieOH

Maggie:

Until the Nazis took over Italy (and Rome) in May, 1944, after the surrender of the italian Government to the Allies, They didn’t have to.

However, that doesn’t say anything for what the heads of Catholic Monesteries, Seminaries and Churches said and did from 1940 to 1945.

If you study the history of the Holocaust or go the Yad Vashem, You’ll find they used a “Remarkable Economy of the Truth” to keep the Jews in their custody safe from the Nazis, who had no right to the truth because of their intent to slaughter the INNOCENT.

According to the RABBINIC interpretation of the 8th Commandment, that was well within the bounds, because the “Lie” was NOT used against the INNOCENT.

Speaking of which, What do you say about LYING TO AUTO SALESMAN?

Blessings>

In Christ, Michael

 

[MaggieOH]

Traditional Ang:

Maggie:

Until the Nazis took over Italy (and Rome) in May, 1944, after the surrender of the italian Government to the Allies, They didn’t have to.

However, that doesn’t say anything for what the heads of Catholic Monesteries, Seminaries and Churches said and did from 1940 to 1945.

If you study the history of the Holocaust or go the Yad Vashem, You’ll find they used a “Remarkable Economy of the Truth” to keep the Jews in their custody safe from the Nazis, who had no right to the truth because of their intent to slaughter the INNOCENT.

According to the RABBINIC interpretation of the 8th Commandment, that was well within the bounds, because the “Lie” was NOT used against the INNOCENT.

Speaking of which, What do you say about LYING TO AUTO SALESMAN?

Blessings>

In Christ, Michael

Michael,

my reply was tongue in cheek because I think that how the Vatican and others managed to hide the Jews was a good thing. I believe that it was a very noble thing. I think that I learned about the Swiss Guard swelling in ranks from Jewish sources. It is a known fact that the chief Rabbi in Rome converted as a result of the actions of the Pope at that time

As for the car salesman. Well, I live in another country and I guess we have different rules about the purchase and leasing of company cars. It is a whole different ball game over here. However, where do you draw the line between negotiation tactics and what you call lying to the car salesman. I find it is the other way around that the salesman tends to lie to the customer in order to get a sale. This is especially true when negotiating a trade-in value for a car and claiming that they cannot bring the price down any further.

When I am working I am involved in accounts receivable work and that means collection calls. So what do you think about people who say the cheque is in the mail, and the cheque fails to turn up two weeks later?

Maggie