Joshua’s long day

[Zmouth]

Yes. That would be my assumption.

It is not an assumption, it is based upon the principle of 'lex sicut forma'.

 

[Scrobulous]

If all things are possible with God then that obviously must include lying. If God can't lie then all things wouldn't be possible for God then would it? And if those who don't believe that all things were possible God will definitely dismiss the possibly that God could lie since the is written that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, as written in Hebrew 6:18;

That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: Heb 6:18

But it isn't written that the LORD will deceive the prophet, merely that if the prophet is deceived then you will know the reason why

Are you saying God is a liar?

 

[Scrobulous]

It is not an assumption, it is based upon the principle of 'lex sicut forma'.

It is an assumption. There is no law in the eternal expanse.

 

[PS]

Are you saying God is a liar?

It depends how we measure time. It took millions of years for the planets to form and settle into their orbits, remember the earth is a planet also, and if we allow yome to mean an age or process of time, then the Bible, science, God, and our understanding are correct.


H3117
יוֹם
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.
Total KJV occurrences: 2295

 

[Zmouth]

Are you saying God is a liar?

If you are asking then you must not think it isn't possible that the LORD could deceive the prophet...

 

[Zmouth]

It is an assumption. There is no law in the eternal expanse.

So why did you ask me if God is a liar if there is no law of truth in the eternal. So there is no law of truth in the eternal, then what does that no trespassing sign mean.
1 Tim 6:16

Who only hath immortality,
dwelling in the light which
no man can approach unto;
​

 

[Scrobulous]

If you are asking then you must not think it isn't possible that the LORD could deceive the prophet...

I ask because I wish to know what kind of person you are. How a person interprets a text has little to do with the intellect and everything to do with their moral compass. So, I ask again, do you conclude that the logic of this verse tells us that God is a liar?

 

[Scrobulous]

So why did you ask me if God is a liar if there is no law of truth in the eternal. So there is no law of truth in the eternal, then what does that no trespassing sign mean.
1 Tim 6:16

Who only hath immortality,
dwelling in the light which
no man can approach unto;
​

To say there is no physical law in the eternal expanse is a very different thing from saying there is no spiritual law in heaven. But semantic games, rather than a serious effort to establish the truth, seem to be your speciality.

 

[PS]

I ask because I wish to know what kind of person you are. How a person interprets a text has little to do with the intellect and everything to do with their moral compass. So, I ask again, do you conclude that the logic of this verse tells us that God is a liar?

Jesus said, "
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (Joh 8:44 ESV)

If the devil is the Father of lies, my God is the father of truth.

However a lot of people including the Pharisees and most people of every nation do worship at the throne of the Father of lies, including the cults and those who knowingly distort the word of truth and I include among them those people who say the earth is only 10,000 years old and was created in 144 hours.

 

[Scrobulous]

Jesus said, "
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (Joh 8:44 ESV)

If the devil is the Father of lies, my God is the father of truth.

However a lot of people including the Pharisees and most people of every nation do worship at the throne of the Father of lies, including the cults and those who knowingly distort the word of truth and I include among them those people who say the earth is only 10,000 years old and was created in 144 hours.

PS.
You keep replying to messages I am sending to ZMOUTH.
ZMOUTH and I are discussing different subjects.
I am not asking you, if you are calling God a liar, I am asking ZMOUTH this question.
I replied to your post linking the days of creation to different geological ages.

 

[Zmouth]

I ask because I wish to know what kind of person you are. How a person interprets a text has little to do with the intellect and everything to do with their moral compass. So, I ask again, do you conclude that the logic of this verse tells us that God is a liar?

I have never once said that the verse told you anything much less that God is a liar, yet if it is written that "if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing then I the LORD hath deceived that prophet." however if my belief that all things are possible with God is telling you that God is a liar then your logic is warped. Maybe God sent you a delusion that you should believe a lie since God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent.

To say there is no physical law in the eternal expanse is a very different thing from saying there is no spiritual law in heaven. But semantic games, rather than a serious effort to establish the truth, seem to be your speciality.

If not mistaken you are the one who said "there are no law in the eternal expanse" yet now you are saying that there is no physical law in the eternal expanse.

Yet if ".. the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power." (1 Cor 4:20) then if the word is spirit, then what is the physical reality that the Kingdom of God is in power?

There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God any you yourselves thrust out. Luke 13:28

 

[PS]

PS.
You keep replying to messages I am sending to ZMOUTH.
ZMOUTH and I are discussing different subjects.
I am not asking you, if you are calling God a liar, I am asking ZMOUTH this question.
I replied to your post linking the days of creation to different geological ages.

Thanks for that, they did not make a lot of sense to me, the other guy must be on my ignore list. I won't do it again. Sorry

 

[Scrobulous]

Thanks for that, they did not make a lot of sense to me, the other guy must be on my ignore list. I won't do it again. Sorry

No problem!

 

[Zmouth]

If the devil is the Father of lies, my God is the father of truth.

Is that why it is written whosoever commits sin is of the devil?

 

[Scrobulous]

I have never once said that the verse told you anything much less that God is a liar, yet if it is written that "if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing then I the LORD hath deceived that prophet." however if my belief that all things are possible with God is telling you that God is a liar then your logic is warped. Maybe God sent you a delusion that you should believe a lie since God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent.



If not mistaken you are the one who said "there are no law in the eternal expanse" yet now you are saying that there is no physical law in the eternal expanse.

Yet if ".. the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power." (1 Cor 4:20) then if the word is spirit, then what is the physical reality that the Kingdom of God is in power?

There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God any you yourselves thrust out. Luke 13:28

You are being disingenuous, ZMOUTH, as you well know. You also seem impervious to context. So, this is what I said:

“It is said God cannot lie. I don’t see this as a limitation, but it illustrates that the blanket statement, God is all-mighty is a simplification. Clearly God limits himself and is constrained by the choices he makes. For example, God wants to make a creature capable of love. This forces God to allow the creature free will, since if love is forced, it isn’t love at all. So, even God cannot do anything. It wouldn’t make sense if God said 2 + 2 = 5. This would create an alternate reality. Since God has already created this reality in which 2 + 2 = 4, why would God subvert his own purposes?”

You cut out the the first sentence “ it is said God cannot lie”
And quote a single verse that says “I the Lord have deceived that prophet”
So, the implication is clear and your attempts to worm your way out of this are plain to see.
My logic is not warped, yours is.
And how is it warped? You play semantic games. Language has its limitations. All things are not possible with God as I explained above. God chooses to constrain himself. To make sense of what God mean’t by deceiving the prophet requires more than taking a single verse and drawing nebulous conclusions.

You are playing the same game with the eternal expanse. I am talking about science and it is plain that in this context, I am not considering spiritual laws. But you are not interested in what I am trying to say. You are playing with language, trying to score points and show us how smart you are. I don’t say you have an unclean spirit, just that you are not helpful or constructive.

 

[LaJolla]

Hi folks,

I have been very surprised to read about the controversies surrounding Joshua’s long day and the various explanations put forward to explain how God could stop the sun and moon. It is plain that stopping or slowing the Earth’s spin would create havoc, as the inertia of the oceans and atmosphere would rip the landscape to shreds: A thing there is no archeological or historical evidence to support.

So various other ideas, ranging from the text being poetical, to confusion with an eclipse, a miracle of refraction, the sun ceasing to shine rather than ceasing to move, even that the verses were a quote from the book of Jasher and not real scripture, have all been tendered. Really, you have to admire the ingenuity!

Even NASA have made a contribution, suggesting that the effects described In Joshua 10 could be achieved by moving the sun itself, but add, in the condescending manner we have come to expect, that there is no evidence of such a thing! NASA, to be fair, only weighed in on the issue, because some desperate soul peddled a rumour to the effect that NASA had uncovered a missing day when their computers were plotting the location of the planets in the distant past. This is one of the famous ‘urban myths’.

As soon as one admits that there is a God, things like stopping the sun and moon are all in a day’s work. But if you take such a view you miss many lessons!

The miracles of God are always instructive, not gratuitous. The miracles have to be understood in terms of a revelation of the kingdom of God. In other words, when the kingdom comes; that is the presence of God is localised, the situation changes. The sick are healed, because in the kingdom of God no one is sick. The blind see and lepers are cleansed for the same reason. There is abundance, not poverty, so a multiplicity of loaves and fish. The fig tree was cursed because it was not fruitful. Jesus’ tetchy attitude towards a tree shows that he does not compromise with a fallen world. Demons flee and the dead are raised because these are the normal rules of heaven. You don’t get God making fire breathing dragons or flying horses! The miracles are simply a tweak of the existing laws of nature.

Walking on water and the ascension could be seen as a violation of natural law, but both events were, in my opinion, performed for illustrative purposes and applying a force under Jesus is not breaking a physical law.

So where does this leave us with Joshua’s long day?

God could very easily stop the sun and moon by slowing time. Slowing time in the sense that time passes normally on the earth, but outside the earth, time was passing much quicker, at the normal rate in fact. For the scientists among you, this is exactly what happens in relativity. If we are in a spaceship travelling very fast or in a ship that approaches a super massive object, time slows down. This doesn’t mean we all start moving in slo-mo. The result would be exactly what was described in Joshua. The time would pass normally on earth, so Joshua’s army could continue fighting. But the sun and moon, being outside the frame of slowed or stopped time, would appear from the earth, not to move.

Certainly a miracle was involved, namely slowing time, but this is not a violation of nature. Time can slow down as part of natural physics.

I am curious to know why this view about time is never offered as an explanation for Joshua’s long day, when obviously phoney explanations, like an eclipse are? Perhaps lots of people have suggested slowing time and I just haven’t found them?

Dear Scrobulous, (what's in a name?)
I agree with your comments and questions; particularly, "The miracles of God are always instructive, not gratuitous."
Like fish in the ocean, which sense nothing of the atmosphere, dry land, or 'out of water' things never known, we are in a 'sea of time'. Our time domain is all we are allowed to perceive by our nature. It's a massive error to anthropomorphize our Eternal Creator, to limit Him to human domains.

From Isaiah 28, there is another hint of Holy anger and the dimension-altering aspects of this prophecy, especially verse 20, which I take literally:

15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
16 Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.
20 For the bed is shorter than that a man can stretch himself on it: and the covering narrower than that he can wrap himself in it.
21 For the Lord shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act.

The long day of Joshua is fact. It's just a glimpse of the power and Holiness of the Father who cares for our souls.

 

[posthuman]

The universe exists in the human mind and when sin was found in the human mind, all creation (universe) decays (2nd law of thermodynamics) because of sin in human mind.

the idea that entropy in the physical universe is the result and/or judgement of sin is fascinating, and i'm warming to it. it has profound implications raising important questions about how we ((now)) measure time.

i don't know how to logically defeat solipsism ((except perhaps with the incompleteness theorem? which leaves two entities: God and man)) -- but pragmatism dismisses it. even if i am the only intelligence that exists apart from God, i have two choices before me: madness, or act in such a way as though all you others indeed do also exist. this latter avenue is in fact as God instructs, 'to love one another' implies a perceived 'other'

 

[posthuman]

I have a question about light or photon propagation:

How is it that photons can travel past a 1m thick clear glass and emerge on the other side still travelling in a straight line and in the same speed (no much interference) but can not pass through a a 0.1mm fabric or paper board or metallic sheet?

the short answer is that light, acting like a particle, collides with and reflects off a substance, or acting as a wave of a certain frequency, interferes with a substance whose density relates to the wavelength of the incoming ray so that it is either absorbed, slowed or refracted.

the speed ((color)) of the light and the physical properties of the substance at a very small scale determine how much of the light is backscattered, absorbed and transferred to heat, changed to slower, differently colored light or passes through relatively unimpeded.

 

[Zmouth]

You are being disingenuous, ZMOUTH, as you well know. You also seem impervious to context. So, this is what I said: “It is said God cannot lie."

Again with the personal insults by accusing me of being disingenuous and dense, yet in the following quotation of that exchange one will find the following:

It is said God cannot lie. !

"... if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, ..." Ezek 14:9

So in reality if you got a problem with what is written then you got a problem with the one who said it, so I would suggest that you take that up with the one who said it. While it might prove that I am disingenuous and/or dense I will still suggest thatthe one you want to speak to isn't Ezekiel.

You cut out the the first sentence “ it is said God cannot lie”

So how did I cut out out the first sentence when that is the segment I quoted in my initial response to your quote that it wasn't logical to believe that all things are possible with God.

So therefore I will conclude by saying that it is only logical to believe all things are possible with God unless one find themselves claiming to believe in God as they tell you that nothing existed before the universe.

Spoiler

Before the universe existed there was nothing.

I don’t see this as a limitation, but it illustrates that the blanket statement, God is all-mighty is a simplification. Clearly God limits himself and is constrained by the choices he makes.

 

[Scrobulous]

Again with the personal insults by accusing me of being disingenuous and dense, yet in the following quotation of that exchange one will find the following:



So in reality if you got a problem with what is written then you got a problem with the one who said it, so I would suggest that you take that up with the one who said it. While it might prove that I am disingenuous and/or dense I will still suggest thatthe one you want to speak to isn't Ezekiel.



So how did I cut out out the first sentence when that is the segment I quoted in my initial response to your quote that it wasn't logical to believe that all things are possible with God.

So therefore I will conclude by saying that it is only logical to believe all things are possible with God unless one find themselves claiming to believe in God as they tell you that nothing existed before the universe.

I called you disingenuous because that is what you are. It is not a personal insult. I did not call you dense, I said you were impervious to context and you verified the correctness of both these assertions in the rest of your post!
Being selective, or taking a line from a body of text and then matching it against another line from a different text is not representing anyone. You have not represented Ezekiel you have misrepresented him. If you read the whole passage Ezek 14:7-11 the context is clear. One does not build doctrine on a single verse or even a passage, one looks for the main exposition of the theme. This is found in James chapter 1.

13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;
14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed.
15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

If you match this against what Ezekiel is saying the situation is clear. He is talking about a false prophet, one whose own evil desire entices him to utter a prophecy that has not come from God. So what does God say? He will not intervene. He will hand the prophet over to his own deception.
To understand this text you have to understand causality. When God says he entices the prophet, what does it mean? That he deceives a man who is seeking the word of the Lord? No! It means he is confronted by a man determined to give a false prophecy from God. So God is actually the passive agent in this context. God is the agent through whom the prophet is enticed. The passage in James describes this mechanism.

But you take verses out of context and join them together to make insinuations that you don’t have the courage to explicitly express. You implied that God is a liar. Do you realise the consequences of this? Have you any idea?

I would recommend that you apologise to God because you are on a slippery slope.