White Lies Don't Count Though, Right?

Muhammad Rasheed – [shared link] That was awesome...

End Of The World Job Interview Prank

Harrison Wood - Hahahahahaha!

William H. Foster III - I'd be pissed the hell off!

Tony Villalba - yeah me too.. thinking I'm going there for a job and then ha! ha! we fooled you! better give me a little money for the time at least..

Jason McCammon - Some pranks go too far.....

Muhammad Rasheed - I would've just been happy that the world didn't end, and go home to kiss my wife & kids... lol

Muhammad Rasheed - That would've been a serious ass wake up call.

Muhammad Rasheed - I was feeling that shit just from watching it... putting myself in their shoes. "Let me pay off all my debts and get my life right before the Lord turns out the lights for real for real..."

Muhammad Rasheed - What if TODAY was your LAST day?

Muhammad Rasheed - It's not only a fun prank, but it has a serious life lesson built into it. It transcended "prank" and became "art."

Michael Daniels - I watched it earlier, but was unclear if it was actually a prank or a well acted commercial....And Who do you mean by Lord, Mo?

Muhammad Rasheed - ^lol This is why I wanted to hear your opinion of it, but you always, by default, take the opposite stance on any and everything I say. "Surely Deac will agree with me on THIS one. Let's test it..."

"Nope."

Muhammad Rasheed - hahahahahaha

Michael Daniels - Wait...Huh...What did I disagree with you about?

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "And Who do you mean by Lord, Mo?"

The One God of Abraham. The Supreme Creator of the universe. The Lord worshiped by Adam, Noah, Jacob & the Tribes, Moses, David, and Solomon. The same Lord that created the Christ Jesus, son of Mary from scratch in his mother's womb.

That Lord.

Was there supposed to be another? There is only One God.

Michael Daniels - In the Bible that LORD is addressed in all caps hence the confusion.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Wait...Huh...What did I disagree with you about?"

I asked your opinion of the comments and you decided to side step that and pick a fight. You're very contentious. I've been noticing that about you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "In the Bible that LORD is addressed in all caps hence the confusion."

All of them? All the bibles? Really?

Is this really your official stance? Curious.

Michael Daniels - I expressed confusion and asked a question foe clarification...Where's the contention there?

Michael Daniels - Nope it was a general statement not meant to be all inclusive.

Muhammad Rasheed - What was a general statement? That all bibles spell 'Lord' in all caps like 'LORD?'

Muhammad Rasheed - ???

Muhammad Rasheed - You really don't think that claiming 'confusion' as to what 'Lord' I meant because I didn't also capitalize the 'ORD' isn't inherently contentious?

Michael Daniels - That Bible Translators in general translate God's personal name this way. It's not exhaustive The New World Translation always renders the tetragrammaton as Jehovah.

Muhammad Rasheed - Are we suddenly no longer talking about the title 'Lord' and are now pretending the whole thing was about my failing to capitalize the Tetragrammaton? Is this a misdirection?

Michael Daniels - I was wondering if you might have finally converted to Christianity and might be referring to Lord Jesus Christ coming again. It wouldn't be the first time (or ten thousandth) time a prayer of mine was answered. 

Muhammad Rasheed - ^Hence the continuous contention.

Michael Daniels - My bad, Bruh....Btw the confusion I was actually alluding to was whether the posted video was a real reaction or well acted.

Muhammad Rasheed - For the record, I'm not interested in being a vile transgressor of faith, and condemning myself to hellfire for committing the unforgivable sin of giving the One God a partner/child.

You can wish that horror on someone else thanks. I don't want any.

Michael Daniels - Not a partner, but an aspect of Himself in human form....You always misstate the Christian position.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "My bad, Bruh....Btw the confusion I was actually alluding to was whether the posted video was a real reaction or well acted."

I know. But I specifically asked your opinion of the comments. So after you commented on the video, the second part was your contentious assessment of the comments, right? lol

Michael Daniels - The second part was a question...not an opinion.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Not a partner, but an aspect of Himself in human form....You always misstate the Christian position."

Do you consider Moses, Noah, Abraham to be "aspects of Him in human form?" The answer to that will solve all of our ideological issues right here & now.

Michael Daniels - Nope they were imperfect sinful men....Jesus was someOne else entirely.

Muhammad Rasheed - So Jesus was without sin according to your doctrine? Do you consider a lie to be a sin?

Michael Daniels - Yes!

Michael Daniels - Are you calling Jesus a liar?

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Michael Daniels - Are you laughing at Jesus?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jesus Christ was not a liar. But your book says he was. I find it difficult to accept it on that basis.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jesus didn't write your book, remember? So why would I be calling the messenger a liar?

Michael Daniels - Where in the Bible does it say Jesus lied? I've read it numerous times and must have missed that scripture.

Muhammad Rasheed - John 7:8-10

8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come.

9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.

10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

Michael Daniels - lol....Not even close, Bruh. But , I guess I can see how you could misconstrue it as such if you tried really really hard.

Michael Daniels - Jesus said...I'm not going there now, You guys go.

Jesus went there later secretly.

Muhammad Rasheed - Naturally I was looking forward to all the twisting, turning, backflips, and Neo/Matrix-like bullet dodging you were going to use to justify this.

Go ahead.

Michael Daniels - It's simple....Where is the lie?

Muhammad Rasheed - "But when his brethren were gone up..."

That means that he told them one thing, "BUT" did something different.

That would be a lie.

Try harder.

Muhammad Rasheed - At the moment it does not look like your 'divine god-son' figure was without sin.

You said a lie was indeed a sin with a resounding "Yes," remember?

Do a better job of explaining how that wasn't a lie, please.

Michael Daniels - No he did exactly as He told them. He said it wasn't time for Him to go Yet....He did go eventually though and kept His presence secret as there were people trying to kill Him.

Muhammad Rasheed - If that is supposed to be true, then what is the point of the "But when..." which means a lie was just uttered?

Muhammad Rasheed - In the English language in which it was translated.

Michael Daniels - There's no lie/sin there Muhammed. For you to call it that is ridiculous.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's CLEARLY a lie.

Muhammad Rasheed - Try harder, please.

Michael Daniels - When he had said these words unto them,HE ABODE STILL in Galilee.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, at the time he told them this, he was in Galilee. So?

Michael Daniels - "But when" means a lie...?...BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm going to log off to cook me some breakfast, Deac.

"But when Deac looked away, Mo did not log off."

Muhammad Rasheed - I LIED.

Muhammad Rasheed - "But when..."

Michael Daniels - So he stayed in Galilee until his brothers arrived in Jerusalem..then the went. It's quite a ways away by foot there was a big time interval in between the two events.

Muhammad Rasheed - It didn't say, "Then later, when the appropriate time was upon him, he went..."

It said "BUT WHEN..." which heralds the lie.

Muhammad Rasheed - Try harder, please.

Michael Daniels - Except it doesn't say "But when" directly after his statement. It says "But when" directly after "HE ABODE STILL in Galilee." The contrast is to the latter statement, meaning he was no longer abiding in Galilee.

Michael Daniels - Very simple.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol How does that make sense? "But when" negates what was said, so...

Muhammad Rasheed - What?

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Michael Daniels - He didn't go when they went, he went some time later which is exactly what he said He would do.

Muhammad Rasheed - Explain this "very simple" back flip.

Muhammad Rasheed - The narrator said he told them one thing and did something different from what he said. The "But when" heralded the lie.

Muhammad Rasheed - He went secretly because he didn't want THEM to see him there because he just told them he wasn't going.

Michael Daniels - Deacon said "I will punch Mo in the nose!" Mo was kickin it in Saudi Arabia. But when Deacon arrived there Pow right in the nose.

Muhammad Rasheed - Your twists & flips aren't very impressive. Is it your back?

Michael Daniels - WRONG read verse 1 "After this, Jesus traveled in Galilee, since He did not want to travel in Judea because the Jews were trying to kill Him."

Muhammad Rasheed - So you admit he lied to his companions so they wouldn't give it away that he was going to show up?

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes?

Michael Daniels - LOL

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes?

Muhammad Rasheed - Helloooo...?

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes?

Michael Daniels - Read the whole chapter, Mo... Jesus is up front with His brothers...He couldn't travel with His family because He would be recognized too soon. When it was His time He revealed Himself in the Temple.

Michael Daniels - When someone says they arent going somewhere YET...It means thay are going.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Read the whole chapter, Mo... Jesus is up front with His brothers...He couldn't travel with His family because He would be recognized too soon. When it was His time He revealed Himself in the Temple. "

Sure. 

And notice that he lied to his blabber-mouthed companions so they wouldn't give him away to his enemies.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels When someone says they arent going somewhere YET...It means thay are going."

Naturally. Yet here we find that because they wrote "But when..." it references a lie, so what you are describing isn't what was going on HERE.

Michael Daniels - No, it was His brothers and He told them why he wasn't travelling with Him.

Muhammad Rasheed - No. The "But when..." means he told them he wasn't going until waaayyy later.

Michael Daniels - But when does not always mean a lie it just mean a change in circumstance as illustrated by my very apt example which you chose to ignore.

Michael Daniels - Where did He EVER say he wasn't going? He had to go. It was required by Law and he always obeyed the Mosaic Law as it was intended to be obeyed.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "But when does not always mean a lie ..."

Sure. In this case it clearly does. You NEED it not to mean that to support your false doctrine.

Michael Daniels - You want it to in order to falsely accuse the Messiah, just as the Pharisees and the Romans that killed Him did!!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - No. I'm accusing the writers who ascribe onto the Christ that which is not true.

Muhammad Rasheed - Careful, you're going to run over your exclamation mark quota.

Michael Daniels - There's no need to lie about something as mundane as this. What motive could Jesus best friend, John, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit could possibly have had?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jesus knew his companions better than you do, right? He knew they were blabber-mouthed gossipers.

Muhammad Rasheed - You JUST pointed out his enemies were going to be up there in force.    I don't care whether that "But when..." line is in there or not; I don't believe Jesus was the divine son of God and shared in the God-head.  I just wanted to see you do your Gabby Douglas impression.

Muhammad Rasheed - That wasn't a mundane lie. It had purpose.

Muhammad Rasheed - (still a lie though) #oops!

Michael Daniels - It was His brothers....James and them (who you love)...And it wasn't that they would talk. They were His family. Everyone knew what family He was from.That's the first placed they'd look.

Muhammad Rasheed - Huh? What are you saying?

Michael Daniels - The other sons of Joseph and Mary...His literal human family.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes? What about them?

Muhammad Rasheed - Are you implying that the lie didn't count 'cause it was said to them?

Michael Daniels - You seem to think He was talking to His disciples.

Michael Daniels - His disciples were with Him. They were probably the ones helping Him stay concealed. It was His unbelieving family that He chose not to travel with...They were more interested in exposing Him.

Michael Daniels - I'm not implying anything, just setting the facts straight. There was no lie. This was Jesus telling His family He wouldn't go with them to the festival. He didn't even leave Galilee until they had already arrived.

Muhammad Rasheed - You're saying he lied to his treacherous family who were plotting to expose him to his enemies. I see.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "He didn't even leave Galilee until they had already arrived."

You're interpreting "were gone up" as "already arrived?" Why?

Michael Daniels - Not a plot...They were just incredulous that He was Who He was telling them He was. They didn't know there was a price on His head. To them He was suffering from dillusions of grandeur. They made the same mistake you're making now. Not recognizing the true Jesus.

After this, Jesus traveled in Galilee, since He did not want to travel in Judea because the Jews were trying to kill Him. 2 The Jewish Festival of Tabernacles[a][b] was near, 3 so His brothers said to Him, “Leave here and go to Judea so Your disciples can see Your works that You are doing. 4 For no one does anything in secret while he’s seeking public recognition. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world.” 5 (For not even His brothers believed in Him.)

Michael Daniels - Jerusalem was/is at the top of a hill. That's what it means. It doesn't say "while they were going up".

Muhammad Rasheed - "10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast..."

Michael Daniels - Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast:

Michael Daniels - Modern English versions say it more succinctly "10 AFTER His brothers had gone up to the festival, THEN He also went up, not openly but secretly."

Don't try to equivocate on the basis of old English, Mo.

Michael Daniels - "But when" is absent as well.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Modern English versions say it more succinctly..."

Modern English versions retcon history after their debates to tweak the doctrine in the direction they like. The way y'all usually do. lol

Muhammad Rasheed - It's been a looong tweaking process.

Muhammad Rasheed - "house of cards" technique.

Muhammad Rasheed - *nods*

Michael Daniels - No, some modern versions, certainly the one I use, have access to the most recently discovered of the original manuscripts. Plus it's in modern English so yahoos don't think every time someone says "But when" they're telling a lie.

Muhammad Rasheed - Right. "But when" meant something COMPLETELY different than it means now. Sure.

Michael Daniels - Just learn Aramaic and you'll know what was really meant.

Muhammad Rasheed - So, are we done? Was that the extent of your gymnastics floor routine?

Michael Daniels - I can't believe I spent this long on something so simple and trivial.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's not trivial. It's a sloppy hole in your "sinless divine son-god" doctrine.

Muhammad Rasheed - But modern versions of the text put some caulk in it, so no sweat, right?

Michael Daniels - No, it means the same thing, but when Accusers are looking for anything and everything they chose a clearer way to say it.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Michael Daniels - Well no...It's not ass asinine as say the Hadith system....But there are some translations that are more accurate than others especially considering how the English language evolves.

Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Text shows that "sinless divine son-god" lied

2.) Pauline Christian alter text

3.) Doctrine saved!

lol

Muhammad Rasheed - hahahaha

Michael Daniels - Pauline Christians (which are basically Christians) translated the King James version as well.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Well no...It's not ass asinine as say the Hadith system..."

It's actually exactly the same in every way, for the exact same reasons.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Pauline Christians (which are basically Christians) translated the King James version as well."

Of course.

Michael Daniels - You're kidding, right?LOL

Muhammad Rasheed - ^About the hadith thing? Nope.

Muhammad Rasheed - Try me.

Michael Daniels - I have a book here which quotes various Hadith having to do with Jesus, many of which have absolutely no connection to what the Quran says about Him.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes? 

You don't recognize the parallel in your own system?

Muhammad Rasheed - It's going to cause us to go over old Classic Mo vs Deac ground again...

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Michael Daniels - Different Bible translations are just that. People translating from the original languages into other languages. The source material is the same and the ideas are supernaturally preserved.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "...and the ideas are supernaturally preserved." 

Is that what retconning out "But when..." was? Supernatural preservation?

hahahahahahahaha!

Michael Daniels - They're not contributing brand new stories hundreds of years later. C'mon Mo, that's absurd.

Michael Daniels - No that's translating it more precisely from the original text. Are you saying you know Aramaic better than those who translated the Holman Standard Bible?

Michael Daniels - C'mon Mo...What's Aramaic for "But when"

Muhammad Rasheed - Your own (believing!) scholars recognize that the 4 gospels were not written by the men whose names they bear, but were written MUCH later by evangelicals influenced by Paul. This message is in conflict with what Jesus actually preached, in perfect imitation of the flaws in hadith.

Michael Daniels - Keep in mind I exposed your bias and false unstanding of basic English before I ever brought up what other translations say.

Michael Daniels - Not my scholars...Miraculously ALL of MY scholars agree with me completely!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "No that's translating it more precisely from the original text. Are you saying you know Aramaic better than those who translated the Holman Standard Bible?"

Michael Daniels wrote: "C'mon Mo...What's Aramaic for 'But when'"

Are you trying to say the surviving original source writings for the Gospel of John are in Aramaic? Is this true?

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Not my scholars...Miraculously ALL of MY scholars agree with me completely!!!"

You don't consider the scholars who actually compile & publish (and retcon text as needed) the bible itself to be "YOUR" scholars?

That's sounds like an uncomfortable position to be in...

Michael Daniels - Partial Aramaic/Koinia Greek

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Keep in mind I exposed your bias and false unstanding of basic English before I ever brought up what other translations say." 

WHOA! When did THAT happen??? Copy/paste, please. I thought I had been following closely.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Partial Aramaic/Koinia Greek"

What was the partial Aramaic part? Just the "But when..." line?

Michael Daniels - BAM!!!

"I'm not implying anything, just setting the facts straight. There was no 

lie. This was Jesus telling His family He wouldn't go with them to the 

festival. He didn't even leave Galilee until they had already arrived."

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "BAM!!! '"I'm not implying anything, just setting the facts straight. There was no lie. This was Jesus telling His family He wouldn't go with them to the festival. He didn't even leave Galilee until they had already arrived.'" 

lol Did I miss something? The text says that it wasn't his time yet and he wouldn't go up, but he went up anyway outside of a time frame he understood them to mean, which is why the narrator said "But when."

That meant he lied to them.

Later Christian scholars were disturbed by this, as it flew in the face of the false doctrine they were tasked to protect, as made uncomfortably clear by their debates with the Muslims, so they merely changed it to something more comfortable... 

...as they have willy-nilly been changing the message of God from the beginning. 

How you found a "BAM!!!" out of that is beyond me. Fix your sloppy false doctrine blasphemies better.

Michael Daniels - If He had said "I won't go up, Yet" and never gone up...Then He would have lied or misled His family...and broken the Law. He went up eventually which is what He said He would do. It's so simple to understand there are actually very few ways to explain it. He did exactly as He said He would do. You're intentionally reading way too much into the phrase "But when" for no good reason.

Muhammad Rasheed - What does "But when" mean when used outside of the pauline doctrine gymnastics tricks then?

Muhammad Rasheed - "I can't go up because my time has not yet full come."

But when they were gone up he sneaked up into the place. His time still had not yet "full come," thus the sneaking/lying.

Michael Daniels - I already gave you an example that took me, a modern writer, less than a second to conceive...I'm getting tired, Mo.

Muhammad Rasheed - Don't sweat it. Naturally I recognize your desperate need to force & shoe horn the text to mean what you need it to mean (since you lack the power to retcon it directly yourself).

I'm messing with you for your original contentious question.

Michael Daniels - His time referred to His death on the Cross. He didn't go with them because it was not yet His time to die for the sins of the world, but He did have to go, hence the sneaking and not lying about it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Wow.

I guess you did have more weird distortion gymnastics tricks up your sleeve.

Michael Daniels - I don't recognize your need to accuse an innocent man. That's just foul. He wouldn't do that to you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Again, I'm accusing the writers of saying things about the messenger that aren't true.

What kind of fallacy is that you're using every time you do that?

Michael Daniels - It's all explained in the chapter if you bother to actually read it instead of tearing it apart looking to accuse.

Muhammad Rasheed - How can I "tear it apart" without reading it?

Michael Daniels - The writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Either way you're accusing God of wrongdoing.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "The writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit." 

Then why are later writers changing it? [takes queen]

Michael Daniels - Do you mean why do people translate the Bible into other languages?

Muhammad Rasheed - Nooooo... why are English translators changing the text of previous English translators?

Michael Daniels - So that everyone can have God's Word in his or her own tongue. God has a history of making His word available in various languages.

Muhammad Rasheed - What's THIS fallacy called?

Muhammad Rasheed - Were not the previous English translators inspired by the holy spirit?

Michael Daniels - They didn't change anything. They translated the Bible based on the oldest and most reliable manuscripts into the English language currently spoken.

Muhammad Rasheed - So they DIDN'T take out "But when..." then?

So what was that you quoted?

Michael Daniels - The King James translators didn't have access to the Dead Sea Scrolls...Nor did they say things then like we say them now.

Michael Daniels - Nope "But when" were the words other people used to describe the incident....After and then were the words the more accurate modern writers used.

Michael Daniels - The King James version was not used to translate the Holman Standard Version. They are two separate entities

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "Nope 'But when' were the words other people used to describe the incident....After and then were the words the more accurate modern writers used."

So these "other people" who put it in the text weren't being spirit led?

Michael Daniels - You have the same thing btw with English translations of the Quran.

Michael Daniels - Only the original writings were Spirit led....

Muhammad Rasheed - How do you know which bible English translators are spirit led or not?

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels Only the original writings were Spirit led...."

Michael Daniels - None of them are...Only the source material.

Muhammad Rasheed - Ah. So the translations are flawed, and compiled by non-spirit led people.

Michael Daniels - If I write a version of the Quran am I spirit led?

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: "If I write a version of the Quran am I spirit led?"

I don't think any human being is in a position to proclaim whether another human has been led by the spirit or not. I suppose the fruits of that person's efforts would have to be the test.

Michael Daniels - Actually, I have no idea where any given translator stands with Christ. I do know that some of the scholars used to translate the Holman were Jewish Rabbis....so...probably not spirit led in te sense that the original Bible writers were.

Muhammad Rasheed - You don't think the original writers... based on your doctrinal understanding of who they were... were learned Jews?

Muhammad Rasheed - Curious.

Michael Daniels - My point is that every word used in every translation is not perfect. And some translations are out and out blasphemous.

Muhammad Rasheed - How do you determine which ones are bad and which are the good ones?

Michael Daniels - I don't think that modern Jews who deny Jesus as the Messiah can be inhabited by the Holy Spirit...However God can use anyone, even nonbelievers to accomplish His will......I'm tired.

Muhammad Rasheed - How could He use them to accomplish His will WITHOUT use of the Holy Spirit? I thought that WAS the way?

Michael Daniels - Spirit lead implies someone who is submitted to God and allows Him to guide them in what they do. If God is exerting external force to accomplish His will..That's something else...Spirit driven perhaps?

Muhammad Rasheed - Either way, the holy spirit is in use, right?

Michael Daniels - Two totally different concepts though. God might use an unbelieving doctor to help heal one of His people. But a person filled with the Holy Spirit may effect a supernatural healing though prayer.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Daniels wrote: " His time referred to His death on the Cross. He didn't go with them because it was not yet His time to die for the sins of the world, but He did have to go, hence the sneaking and not lying about it."

Hmm. I think I am going to accept this. He told them he couldn't yet go up because to do so would mean it was time for his ultimate 'divine son-god' super-sacrifice thing. But he went up there ANYWAY even though it wasn't yet time for that event.

He lied to them.

This is exactly what I said, and supports the fact that your version of Jesus did lie. Based on what he deliberately told them, they were under the impression that the time he was going up was of a different time frame than what he actually intended. Thus the "But when" and the sneaking around.