Can God lie?

[JudgeRightly]

I never said it's unnecessary--I'm not the best judge of that.

I didn't say you did. I said that IF it is necessary, even once, then it is not always evil.

There is no such thing as "necessary evil."

Paul said "Do not do evil that good may come of it." (paraphrasing)

That means don't do evil! If it's necessary to do something in order to avoid evil, then what you do should not be evil itself!

What I'm saying is that what might make it necessary are circumstances where a greater evil needs to be averted,

A greater evil than what, Derf? Lying? That's called begging the question. You can't assume something that you're trying to prove.

and we humans don't have the knowledge or power to always avoid the lie.

Sure we do! It's called WISDOM!

You can even ask God for it!

That doesn't mean that lying is a good thing,

It doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad thing, either.

except where it is less of a bad thing

Begging the question.

than the other, and only 2 choices appear to be available.

This is a false dichotomy.

There's ALWAYS the option to NOT do evil.

This goes back to what I said. There is NEVER a time when you must break one moral law in order to not break another.

You can ALWAYS just do neither. That's your "third choice."

The whole circumstances are not wrong, because we need to avoid the greater evil.

Again, greater than what? If you are talking about lying, then, again, you're begging the question that lying is evil!

This is true in all the instances you've suggested.

Confirmation bias.

Take of the "lying is always evil" lenses for a moment, Derf.

What part of "do not do evil" do you not understand?

If Paul condemned doing evil that good may come of it, that NECESSARILY IMPLIES that he condemned doing ALL evil!

The bible consistently portrays lying as a sin

No, it doesn't, and this thread is proof of it!

and [portrays lying] to be avoided when using the terms "lie" and "lying".

You can't get around the fact that God rewarded the midwives for their lie.

You can't get around the fact that God rewarded Rahab for her lie.

You can't get around the fact that God deceived the people of Ai and ambushed them.

You can't get around the fact that Elisha, a man of God, lied to the blinded Syrians, and led them to Samaria.

You can't get around the fact that God sent a lying spirit to deceive a wicked king.

Corrie Tenboom lied to save innocent Jews from being killed by the Germans.
Harriet Tubman lied to Americans who would rob blacks of their freedoms.
The Allies deceived the Germans with fake armies in fields to aid the Normandy invasion...

The list goes on and on and on, where lying IS in fact a good thing to do, and NOT evil, especially when combatting evil!

Clearly, there are circumstances where lying and deception is a good thing!

There's never a reference to a "good lie" or a "bad lie",

False.

just stories where the lying was done to save someone's life.

Supra.

Even Peter was guilty before Christ for denying Him...by lying to save his own life.

What Peter did was, in fact, wrong. His lie was not out of fear of God, but out of fear of men.

Notice the caveat above in bold. God DOES have the knowledge and power to avoid lying.

And we can have it too, if we ask Him for wisdom!

 

[JudgeRightly]

Rapid fire time...

I will maintain my integrity, as my love for God far outweighs my love for anything else.
I will remember that God replaced the children Job lost at the beginning of his trials.
BTW, I will continue to pray that God keeps me from such a situation, like He has for the last many years.

@glorydaz Told ya!

Please keep in mind that there was no Law of Moses to break at the time of the midwives lies.
No Law, no sin.

So what?

They still lied.

No lie is of the truth.

It is true that the midwives lied to Pharaoh about why they didn't kill the male Hebrew children.

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.

That only applies to the Law of Moses.

The law of Moses is a subset of "the Law."

I'd hate to think you consider anyone's life more important than what God, and Jesus, thought of lying

God seemed to put the life of everyone in the world above His own. Why did He say, if what you are implying is true, that "there is no greater love than to lay down one's life for a friend"?

That they didn't lie.

The midwives did, in fact, lie. And God rewarded them for it.

Adam sinned against a different law, one that was no longer in force after they left the Garden.

If you haven't already, definitely consider reading Bob Enyart's "The Plot" (2nd edition now available!), or listening to "The Plot: The Tree" or "The Plot: The Law of Moses" Bible studies.

When God said He would destroy Nineveh, but then He didn't, was that a lie? Did this make Him untrustworthy? Isn't it exactly what Titus 1:2 said that He cannot do?

No, God did not lie. God fully intended to destroy Nineveh.

No, that was an implied conditional.

There was no condition given, and none was implied, that God would save Nineveh if they repented.

As was Hezekiah's impending death.

Same with Hezekiah. God told him flat out, "You're going to die," and did not give any alternative.

He didn't lie in EITHER case, but because the circumstances changed, God repented of destroying Nineveh, and repented of killing Hezekiah, and did not do that which He said He would do.

I agree, but the Adam example was not as good as Cain.

Adam is an even better example!

The law Adam was under was "do not partake of the law!"

It was the way out of being in God's presence. He broke that law, by partaking of it (by eating the fruit of the tree that God said not to eat of.

 

[Hoping]

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.

As the scrip' you kindly provided references ..."them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression,"... I think death is not the "judgement" for sins.
I can only agree with your post if the "wages of sin" is the second death.

 

[Hoping]

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.

Choose right now.
Which is more important to you...obedience to God, or your family?

 

[Hoping]

So what?
They still lied.

Without the Law of Moses, no sin is imputed. (Rom 5:13..."For until the Law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no Law."

It is true that the midwives lied to Pharaoh about why they didn't kill the male Hebrew children.

So what?
No lie is of the truth.

That only applies to the Law of Moses.
The law of Moses is a subset of "the Law."

What law?
Perhaps you can produce it?

God seemed to put the life of everyone in the world above His own. Why did He say, if what you are implying is true, that "there is no greater love than to lay down one's life for a friend"?

Did He lie to protect them?
No.

The midwives did, in fact, lie. And God rewarded them for it.

Yes they did.
But they were not under the Law, so it didn't make God look like a hypocrite.

If you haven't already, definitely consider reading Bob Enyart's "The Plot" (2nd edition now available!), or listening to "The Plot: The Tree" or "The Plot: The Law of Moses" Bible studies.

No thank you.
Sin, since the Law of Moses was in effect, cannot be justified.

 

[Derf]

As the scrip' you kindly provided references ..."them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression,"... I think death is not the "judgement" for sins.
I can only agree with your post if the "wages of sin" is the second death.

Is that what scripture says? God described which death He was talking about here:
Genesis 3:19 KJV — In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

If you say "the wages of sin is second death", aren't you adding to scripture? If that's the wages Jesus suffered in our place, then we can be resurrected from the second death, as He was. But I don't see that in scripture anywhere.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Without the Law of Moses, no sin is imputed. (Rom 5:13..."For until the Law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no Law."

This passage is talking about Christians, not unbelievers. It is only relevant to those under the dispensation of grace. Rahab was not under the dispensation of grace, but under the dispensation of law.

Sin is not imputed to Christians, because Christians are no longer under the law.

It's still imputed on the world, because, as Paul says, the world is under the law.

What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one;There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.”“Their throat is an open tomb; With their tongues they have practiced deceit”; “The poison of asps is under their lips” ;“Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”“Their feet are swift to shed blood;Destruction and misery are in their ways;And the way of peace they have not known.”“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference;for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. - Romans 3:9-26 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans3:9-26&version=NKJV

So what?
No lie is of the truth.

Irrelevant.

What law?
Perhaps you can produce it?

Why? So that you can deny it?

Go read Genesis 9.

Did He lie to protect them?
No.

Stay focused, Hoping. I know it's hard for you, but do put in some effort.

I was talking about your claim about considering someone's life being more important than (your claim) of what God thinks of lying.

Yes they did.

Thank you for conceding the discussion.

But they were not under the Law, so it didn't make God look like a hypocrite.

God would only be a hypocrite if lying were a sin.

They lied, and God rewarded them for it.

Simple as that.

No thank you.
Sin, since the Law of Moses was in effect, cannot be justified.

That wasn't addressed to you. Why are you responding to it as if it were?

 

[Idolater]

Choose right now.
Which is more important to you...obedience to God, or your family?

You are so gross.

 

[Hoping]

Is that what scripture says? God described which death He was talking about here:
Genesis 3:19 KJV — In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Good description of physical death, but are you certain it is what Paul wrote about?
There will still be a judgement for those folks, whereupon they will suffer a second death if their names are not found in the book of life.
Death is, as Rom 6:21 says, the wages of sin.
But many non-sinners have died too.
So physical death doesn't always entail sin.
Take babies for example.
What sins have they committed?

If you say "the wages of sin is second death", aren't you adding to scripture?

Not really as I did preface my remark with "I think...".
You are welcome to form your own ideas.

If that's the wages Jesus suffered in our place, then we can be resurrected from the second death, as He was. But I don't see that in scripture anywhere.

Did Jesus die in our place?
Why are the faithful still dying then?
Jesus died for our sins, so we will be able to hear our names read from the book of life and not experience the second death.

 

[Hoping]

This passage is talking about Christians, not unbelievers. It is only relevant to those under the dispensation of grace. Rahab was not under the dispensation of grace, but under the dispensation of law.

Rahab was under no dispensation, as she was not a Jew.

Sin is not imputed to Christians, because Christians are no longer under the law.

And they don't commit sin anymore.

It's still imputed on the world, because, as Paul says, the world is under the law.

Where did he say the unbelieving world in under the Law of Moses?

What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one;There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.”“Their throat is an open tomb; With their tongues they have practiced deceit”; “The poison of asps is under their lips” ;“Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.”“Their feet are swift to shed blood;Destruction and misery are in their ways;And the way of peace they have not known.”“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference;for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. - Romans 3:9-26 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans3:9-26&version=NKJV

Paul differentiates between Jew and Gentile pretty well in those verses, even adding that the Law is only over the Jews..."Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law".

Irrelevant.

Hardly.
You are trying to prove that lying is not anti-God, or anti-Law.
I am saying that without the Law there is no Law against lying.

Why? So that you can deny it?

Go read Genesis 9.

Here is the law you refer to..."But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." (Gen 9:4)
Got anything else?
How do you apply that to telling lies?

I was talking about your claim about considering someone's life being more important than (your claim) of what God thinks of lying.

Good.
Which is more important to God?
Loving God or loving something else?

God would only be a hypocrite if lying were a sin.

Correcto !
It wasn't imputed as a sin before the Law said it was a sin.

They lied, and God rewarded them for it.
Simple as that.

Yep.
And 80 some years later lying was outLawed.

 

[Hoping]

You are so gross.

Though not addressed to you, would you care to answer the question?

 

[Idolater]

Though not addressed to you, would you care to answer the question?

This is you:

"I'ld hate to think you consider anyone's life more important than what God, and Jesus, thought of lying "

"Choose right now.
Which is more important to you...obedience to God, or your family?"

What are you even doing? Why are you pitting the health and safety of our families against your deranged notions of morality?

Or did I answer my own question.

 

[Derf]

Good description of physical death, but are you certain it is what Paul wrote about?

"The wages of sin is death" seems to fit well with "If you eat of that tree you will die." that makes it look like Paul is talking about the same kind of offense and the same kind of punishment as Moses (Gen 3). Jesus suffered the same thing, without deserving it. Everything fits. If any one of those turns into "burning in hell forever with no chance for escape", it doesn't work.

There will still be a judgement for those folks, whereupon they will suffer a second death if their names are not found in the book of life.
Death is, as Rom 6:21 says, the wages of sin.
But many non-sinners have died too.

Only one adult that I know of.

So physical death doesn't always entail sin.
Take babies for example.
What sins have they committed?

Through one man sin entered the world, and death by sin. (Rom 5:12)
And death happened to everyone, even if they didn't sin like Adam did. (Rom 5:14)
Death (not the second death) happens to the whole human race because of Adam's sin. (Rom 5:17 and 18)
Sin happens because of death, and death happens because of sin. Its a vicious cycle. (Derf's commentary)

Not really as I did preface my remark with "I think...".

I'm just saying that to use that verse that way is to add the idea of "second" where it isn't provided in the context. And of course it's because "you think".

You are welcome to form your own ideas.

Did Jesus die in our place?

Yes

Why are the faithful still dying then?

Their bodies, the flesh, is not fixed/corrected by Jesus' death. That flesh is still of the seed of Adam. To become eternal requires a person to be born again of a different father.

Jesus died for our sins, so we will be able to hear our names read from the book of life and not experience the second death.

We won't be able to hear our names read if we're still dead. That's why we are resurrected first, then comes judgment--and we are pre-judged righteous by being in Christ, since He wasn't guilty of any sin.

 

[glorydaz]

No.

I don't mind.
I will maintain my integrity, as my love for God far outweighs my love for anything else.
I will remember that God replaced the children Job lost at the beginning of his trials.
BTW, I will continue to pray that God keeps me from such a situation, like He has for the last many years.

Yes, God is faithful to keep us from so many situations....even those we dream up in our own minds.

I see your point.

 

[Hoping]

This is you:

"I'ld hate to think you consider anyone's life more important than what God, and Jesus, thought of lying "

"Choose right now.
Which is more important to you...obedience to God, or your family?"

What are you even doing? Why are you pitting the health and safety of our families against your deranged notions of morality?

Or did I answer my own question.

What is your answer?
It may one day help you decide while you are under duress.

 

[glorydaz]

This is exactly why we are no longer under the law, but under grace.
We are led by the Spirit, wherever He may lead.

 

[Derf]

This is exactly why we are no longer under the law, but under grace.
We are led by the Spirit, wherever He may lead.

But not "lied to by the Spirit, wherever He may lie."

 

[Clete]

It's more on topic than most of this. The thread topic is asking whether God is able to lie. I started it with the idea that He doesn't lie, wondering if it's because He can't, or He won't. I didn't expect anyone to suggest that God actually does lie.
Titus 1:2 KJV — In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot [or "does not" in some versions] lie, promised before the world began;


Notice a few things about your citation. It starts with "and", which means there's an immediate context that needs to be considered. That context includes, at the very least, the previous verse, But here are several previous verses:
2 Thessalonians 2:8-11 KJV — And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

That tells me the ones being deluded have already rejected the truth from God. If the truth has been rejected, what is left, but lies?

Notice that it is in Satan's power the wicked one comes. Satan's power is wrapped up in "lying wonders", which I take to mean miraculous-looking events designed to deceive people into believing in a false god.

Notice also that God didn't send them a lie, but a delusion so they would believe a lie. It makes me think He sent them a deluding influence, not an actual lie, so it's similar to the Ahab and Micaiah story that has been discussed already.

We know from Job that God allows Satan to bring evil on people (Job in this case) and God still takes some credit for doing it, at least He didn't blame Satan for it when talking to Job.

From all that, it seems to me that God is allowing a deluding influence of some sort, because the people aren't willing to hear the truth.

"Allowing a deluding influence of some sort, because the people aren't willing to hear the truth" seems a bit redundant, doesn't it?

Hey, those people over there are blind, therefore, I'm going to poke their eyes out!
Hey, those people over there are refuse to listen, therefore, I'm going to break their ear drums.
Hey, those people over there refuse to allow the truth to persuade them, therefore, I'm going to cause them to be deluded!

Actually, that sounds very much like something God would do! He did, after all, satisfy the thirst of those in Noah's day with a very large drink of water! (Ezekiel 31:16) So, presuming that this is what happened, how does it help your case? Regardless of the motive, the text of God's word flatly states here that "God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie", does it not? In other words, your appeal to God's motive is OUR case, not yours. You're the one here defending the idea that lying is ALWAYS evil, no matter the motive. So, how does a discussion of God's motive change the fact that God sent them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie?

Clete

 

[Clete]

But not "lied to by the Spirit, wherever He may lie."

What are you even talking about? No one here has ever suggested that God would ever lie to one of His own!

 

[Derf]

What are you even talking about? No one here has ever suggested that God would ever lie to one of His own!

Why not? What if it's helpful in some way that you don't understand? "My ways are not your ways, etc."

If lying is sometimes not evil, then what's the harm? You're acting like lying is always evil.