Can God lie?

H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Derf said:
Ok, thanks for the explanation. I understand your point. However, in making your point, you averted addressing @Hoping's point, imo.
He said this:

after you said this:

It's similar to my point about integrity that you discuss more below. If lying isn't sin, and you're saying there needs to be other conditions for it to be sin, then you might be lying at any time, for some unknown righteous cause, and we can't tell the difference from you lying for an unknown unrighteous cause.


No, because if you lie all the time, even if righteously, you're destroying your integrity, defined by:
1. the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
Your view maintains the string moral principles, but not the being honest part.
Here's the accompanying usage example:
"he is known to be a man of integrity"
Note that in the example, it is a characteristic that others recognize in someone, I.e., you can't just tell someone you have integrity--they have to observe you in your dealings with people over some period of time. And if you tell lies (even for righteous reasons) all the time, you WON'T be known to be a man of integrity. What if Pharaoh had heard that the midwives were commonly telling lies for righteous causes, and then asked them why they weren't killing the Hebrew infants? Would he believe their story? The answer is an emphatic no. They were able to lie successfully because they didn't lie regularly, even for righteous causes. That makes lying a bad thing except when there are extenuating circumstances, which I've defined as a potential for greater evil

I'm not saying they did wrong in lying in the circumstances. My point is that the circumstances presented, as you've just pointed out, a GREATER evil that needs to be avoided.

I'm not sure that deception is the same thing as lying, but it might be. Deception in war is ok, for instance.

The principle was stated by Paul to address people that were saying, "if I sin more, then it makes grace more abundant, so the total amount of good in the world is increased by my sin."

The midwives were preserving their own lives by lying, but had already (prior to lying) preserved Hebrew lives by disobeying pharaoh.

I explained this to Clete. God didn't reward them for lying, He rewarded them for saving Hebrew children.

Same thing.

Are you saying that lying is a violation of law?

I listened to it all. It's not persuasive that lying is ever not a sin. Even the examples Bob gave pointed to extenuating circumstances when a law or commandment needed to be broken. That's ALWAYS the case when lying becomes necessary.
Click to expand...
Please keep in mind that there was no Law of Moses to break at the time of the midwives lies.
No Law, no sin.
 
H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
glorydaz said:
This may be off topic, but I've been wondering what you think of God sending a delusion so people would believe a lie?


2 These. 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
Click to expand...
When seen in 2 Thes 2:10-11's context..."And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion,..."...it is clear the delusion came as a result of their earlier rejection of the truth.
 
H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Derf said:
I never said it's unnecessary--I'm not the best judge of that. What I'm saying is that what might make it necessary are circumstances where a greater evil needs to be averted, and we humans don't have the knowledge or power to always avoid the lie. That doesn't mean that lying is a good thing, except where it is less of a bad thing than the other, and only 2 choices appear to be available. The whole circumstances are not wrong, because we need to avoid the greater evil. This is true in all the instances you've suggested.

The bible consistently portrays lying as a sin and to be avoided when using the terms "lie" and "lying". There's never a reference to a "good lie" or a "bad lie", just stories where the lying was done to save someone's life. Even Peter was guilty before Christ for denying Him...by lying to save his own life.

Notice the caveat above in bold. God DOES have the knowledge and power to avoid lying.
Click to expand...
Those reborn of God's seed are no longer merely "humans".
We are children of God.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
1Mind1Spirit said:
A half-truth is still part of the truth.
The verse states that no lie, is of the truth, period.
Therefore, the midwives did not lie.
Click to expand...
If a half truth is truth with some truth withheld to make people think some falsehood is correct (though without voicing the falsehood), then there might be a time when it is necessary, but I say that it's no different from the lie's sinfulness for the same reasons. If a lie is sometimes not sinful, then a half truth with the intent to deceive might be sometimes sinful and sometimes not--based on the circumstances.

You've focused on the midwives...what about Rahab's lies?
 
Last edited:
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Idolater said:
The context ipso facto limits it to such, else, why even bother considering context (and I mean generally)? Isn't that what context provides? The context is that the text is talking about X, so therefore, the text is talking about X. It's straightforward, isn't it?

Titus 1:2 doesn't say anything at all about another kind or another type of lying, it only talks about the kind of lying where you say, "Here's what's going to happen," and then that thing does not happen. God doesn't lie in that way, is precisely what Titus 1:2 says.
Click to expand...
So the kind of lying I proposed, where God says He doesn't lie but He really does lie, is NOT the kind of lie you say He doesn't do according to Titus 1:2. Therefore, even the kind of lie banned in Titus 1:2 is ok, since Titus 1:2 is a lie, potentially, and no longer trustworthy for determining whether God would lie in the other way.

Any lie God allows himself to do is a destroyer of his integrity/character, making him untrustworthy. Not so with humans, under threat from an evil authority, at least not always.
 
1Mind1Spirit

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Derf said:
If a half truth is truth with some truth withheld to make people think some falsehood is correct (though without voicing the falsehood), then there might be a time when it is necessary, but I say that it's no different from the lie's sinfulness for the same reasons. If a lie is sometimes not sinful, then a half truth with the intent to deceive might be sometimes sinful and sometimes not--based on the circumstances.
Click to expand...
Problem with that is one doesn't have a falsehood to lay at the midwives' feet.
Let's look at one of Jesus' parables.

The Parable of the Hidden Treasure​

44 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

Say I'm walkin' along and find something of greater value than anything I own on someone else's land.
I hide it so nobody else comes along and discovers it.
When I'm talking with them, am I telling a lie if I tell them I want their land because it is goodly, and I like it but don't tell them all the reasons I like it?
 
Last edited:
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
1Mind1Spirit said:
Problem with that is one doesn't have a falsehood to lay at the midwives' feet.
Let's look at one of Jesus' parables.

The Parable of the Hidden Treasure​

44 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

Say I'm walkin' along and find something of greater value than anything I own on someone else's land.
I hide it so nobody else comes along and discovers it.
When I'm talking with them am I telling a lie if I tell them I want their land because it is goodly, and I like it but don't tell them about the treasure hid on it?

Doesn't my knowledge belong solely to me?
Click to expand...
If the midwives were telling the truth, then they weren't needed for being midwives. Why would the Israelites keep calling for the midwives if they never got there on time. At the least they would have fired those midwives and hired new ones.

You haven't suggested any knowledge the midwives had they were keeping from pharaoh.

1Mind1Spirit said:
We're not done with the broad brushing of the midwives yet.
Click to expand...
But if you are saying the midwives didn't lie, then for you the story doesn't apply to this discussion. That's fine (for now), and so you need to move on to a story that does apply. I'm suggesting Rahab.
 
H

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Derf said:
Romans 5:13 KJV — (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should have written..."No Law, no imputation of sin."
And I will add what Paul said..."...for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom 3:20)
Without the Law telling them what was or wasn't a sin, they couldn't' be judged by the Law of Moses.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Hoping said:
Perhaps I should have written..."No Law, no imputation of sin."
And I will add what Paul said..."...for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom 3:20)
Without the Law telling them what was or wasn't a sin, they couldn't' be judged by the Law of Moses.
Click to expand...
We also know that not everybody sinned as badly as Adam did before the law, yet they still received the wages of sin, which is death.

Romans 5:14 KJV - Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

So they WERE judged--they received the judgment of God against sin. They just didn't know how bad they had it until the law came.
 
1Mind1Spirit

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Derf said:
If the midwives were telling the truth, then they weren't needed for being midwives. Why would the Israelites keep calling for the midwives if they never got there on time. At the least they would have fired those midwives and hired new ones.
Click to expand...
The midwives showed up for the Egyptians.
Or else they wouldn't know the difference.
Derf said:
You haven't suggested any knowledge the midwives had they were keeping from pharaoh.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.
You, @JudgeRightly @Clete and @way 2 go have.
Are you trying to invent a strawman?
My statements have not disagreed with that position.
Derf said:
But if you are saying the midwives didn't lie, then for you the story doesn't apply to this discussion. That's fine (for now), and so you need to move on to a story that does apply. I'm suggesting Rahab.
Click to expand...
I don't reckon you're the judge of what I need.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Hoping said:
To hold something as more valuable than God, is idolatry.
Click to expand...
Who's doing that? "What God, and Jesus, thought of lying" is not the same thing as God and Jesus. We're trying to discuss what exactly God, and Jesus, think about lying, and you are putting lying on a par with them, as if we are somehow worshiping lying.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
1Mind1Spirit said:
The midwives showed up for the Egyptians.
Or else they wouldn't know the difference.
Click to expand...
What does that mean?
1Mind1Spirit said:
Irrelevant.
You, @JudgeRightly @Clete and @way 2 go have.
Are you trying to invent a strawman?
My statements have not disagreed with that position.
Click to expand...
What position? That the midwives lied? I thought I understood you to say that they didn't lie. I could go find it.
1Mind1Spirit said:
I don't reckon you're the judge of what I need.
Click to expand...
For this thread I am.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top