Can God lie?

[way 2 go]

For starters, lying in defense of the innocent seems to be fine, even worthy of rewards from God. Perhaps @Clete can come up with others?

if telling the truth would cause that person to sin

as in
lying to nazis or in slavers

 

[JudgeRightly]

Meaning that there is a great evil about to occur (the innocent will be condemned to death, for instance), and we are trying to prevent that evil?

Correct.

This is just one example, of course.

 

[Derf]

Correct.

This is just one example, of course.

And lying any other time is evil, right, besides one of these specially acceptable times?

 

[JudgeRightly]

And lying any other time is evil, right, besides one of these specially acceptable times?

I didn't say that.

 

[Derf]

I didn't say that.

Then please explain how we can know when lying is righteous and when it is evil. Because if it is evil some of the time and righteous other times, we need to know the difference.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Then please explain how we can know when lying is righteous and when it is evil. Because if it is evil some of the time and righteous other times, we need to know the difference.

Do not do evil that good may come of it. That's how you determine.

 

[Derf]

Do not do evil that good may come of it. That's how you determine.

So if you lie so good may come, then you're sinning and therefore lying, even in your examples, is not righteous.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So if you lie so good may come, then you're sinning and therefore lying, even in your examples, is not righteous.

You're begging the question that lying is, de facto, a sin. Get rid of that a priori belief, and the problem goes away entirely.

If it's not a sin, and you lie in order to, for example, protect the innocent, such as in the examples I gave, then you are not "doing evil that good may come," you are, in fact, doing good that good may come of it, and not doing evil.

 

[Hoping]

And lying any other time is evil, right, besides one of these specially acceptable times?

Acceptable by who, in the NT?

 

[Hoping]

You're begging the question that lying is, de facto, a sin. Get rid of that a priori belief, and the problem goes away entirely.

If it's not a sin, and you lie in order to, for example, protect the innocent, such as in the examples I gave, then you are not "doing evil that good may come," you are, in fact, doing good that good may come of it, and not doing evil.

What's that verse about calling evil good?
Isa. 5:20..."Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

 

[JudgeRightly]

What's that verse about calling evil good?
Isa. 5:20..."Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

Was it evil for the Hebrew women to lie to Pharaoh? God rewarded them by giving them families of their own. Surely you don't think such was evil?

What about Hagar? She was rewarded for lying to the soldiers by being included in the very lineage of Christ. Surely you don't think such was evil?

How about the other two examples I gave here in the following post? Would such actions be evil?

Two good examples I always think about whenever this topic is brought up:

It is not wrong to lie to the Nazi officer inspecting your house for where you have Jews hidden away, telling him there are no Jews anywhere in your home.

It is not wrong to lie to the slave owner looking for the slave he abused, telling him, "he isn't here," despite you hiding him directly beneath your floorboards, as you prepare to send him to the next stop on the Underground Railroad.

Oh, and another couple of examples, from the Bible...

Rahab lied to the soldiers where the spies from Israel went. She was rewarded for it by God including her in the lineage of Christ.

The Hebrew midwives lied to Pharaoh about how quickly Hebrew women gave birth, to protect the children from being killed. God rewarded them with families of their own.

Next time try reading the thread (it's literally only three pages long, do you not have the attention span for it?) before responding, so that you don't make a fool out of yourself.

You too, come to the table with an a priori belief that ALL lying is sin. Take off those glasses for a moment, and consider what was said.

 

[Derf]

Next time try reading the thread (it's literally only three pages long, do you not have the attention span for it?) before responding, so that you don't make a fool out of yourself.

 

[Derf]

You're begging the question that lying is, de facto, a sin. Get rid of that a priori belief, and the problem goes away entirely.

If it's not a sin, and you lie in order to, for example, protect the innocent, such as in the examples I gave, then you are not "doing evil that good may come," you are, in fact, doing good that good may come of it, and not doing evil.

Then God is depriving the world of some good by not lying, whether He can or not.
Titus 1:2 KJV — In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

 

[JudgeRightly]

Then God is depriving the world of some good by not lying, whether He can or not.

Why?

Does God HAVE to lie to accomplish His goals?

Titus 1:2 KJV — In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Amen!

 

[Clete]

If God is the absolute authority, and the bible, as His absolutely authoritative word to us, says He doesn't lie, why is it we feel we know better?

We are going in circles. Remember the point about when the bible tells us that God does not repent and I pointed out that He doesn't repent OF EVIL and how God cannot do evil in the sense that doing so would be against His will and no one has the ability to make God act against His own will and you agreed that it was a goop explanation? Remember all of that? Can you not see how it applies here or are you choosing not to see it?

In short, we "know better" by the EXACT SAME AUTHORITY THAT YOU YOURSELF CITE!!!!!

Does the bible contradict itself or is your doctrine false? Hmm?

What did God want to accomplish in this case? It wasn't just to establish Saul's kingdom, but to establish a good and righteous kingdom, eventually through His own Son. He's not going to fail.

This is irrelevant and ignores the plain reading of the text which contradicts your doctrine. "Would have establish your kingdom forever" is what the text says.

But God has a higher goal, a greater good, than just getting Israel to do what He wants done--He wants Israel to believe in Him. Forcing someone to believe is not getting them to believe, it's removing their personhood, making them no longer capable of belief, since they become a puppet. Puppets don't believe anything.

Quite so! I can tell you that you don't see it but you just gave away the farm with this statement. Love must be given freely. That is one cornerstone doctrine of open theism. All other forms of doctrines are forced to either reject that premise or accept contradictions.

Only "for good reason". God being mistaken is not a good reason.

Again, you seem blind to the text of scripture. The point is that God expected one thing and got another and so repented of the course He intended to go down. It happened with Sol, it happened with Nineveh, it happened on more than one occasion with Israel as a nation.

These examples don't say God didn't know the present conditions of Abraham or the Sodomites.

Yes it does.

What He didn't know was how they would respond to God's tests, whether Abraham would be willing to give his only son and whether the men of Sodom would be willing to repent. Do you think God can't read minds, but needs to actually visit a place to find out what they're thinking?

That's your doctrinal interpretation. The text itself couldn't be clearer. It explicitly states that God is going to go down and check it out and then He'll know, one way or the other. Read the passage to any third grader and ask him what its saying. He will get it right!

I listed things that I could see supported by scripture. You might have noticed they weren't in "omni" and "im" form.

Nobody cares what it's called. It's the concept that matters. A rose by any other name...

Choosing the lesser of two evils when no righteous choice is allowed is still choosing righteously.

This is foolishness of the highest order.

Not only that but it is your doctrine that has pinned you into such a corner that you would come right out and call evil, righteousness. That's as good a reason to drop a doctrine as I have ever heard of.

No. God isn't under any other authority.

Unresponsive.

Can you not see that you're talking out of both sides of your mouth here? Everyone else can.

The Muslims say that they are allowed to lie to an infidel. Are we allowed to lie to any unbeliever? Where is line drawn, and who gets to draw it.

There is no line, per se. It's called wisdom and discernment. You can start by understanding that avoiding telling a lie to an enemy at the expense of your brother's life, is not wisdom. Most teenagers would have enough discernment to figure it out that far. There are other situations that aren't as clear and would be difficult for anyone. We'll let God be the judge in such cases.

God asked for someone to persuade, not for someone to lie.

No, Derf. He commanded that the person be persuade by means of a lie. That is explicitly what happened. Why are you afraid of what the scripture plainly says?

The lying part was the other party's idea. God allowed it.

He didn't! He commanded it! "Go and do it." are the specific words that the scripture itself put into God's own mouth.

Someone asked permission to lie, and God granted it.

Thank you for conceding the debate except that it wasn't mere permission, God commissioned the lie for a specific purpose which was realized.

But He only granted it knowing that the truth would also be told (by Micaiah). Therefore God did not lie to Ahab, but gave him an option to believe or disbelieve God.

Your "therefore" doesn't follow, Derf. You're grasping for straws here and ignoring the text.

And for what reason?

Well, not if your mind is already made up.

No, I disagree.

You missed the point, Derf.

Do you understand what "begging the question" is? It happens when you make an argument that presupposes the question that is being debated. My point was that your argument was question begging because you made the argument assuming that lying is always a sin, which is the point being debated. The reason it's a fallacy is because all I have to do to refute it is to assert the opposite presupposition, which I did. Your only possible response is the one you gave, "I disagree" and we're back were we started.

Do you think Satan was commanded by God to tempt Adam and Eve, to lie to them? Why or why not?

No, of course he wasn't.

Because Adam and Eve were not God's enemies.

It isn't wrong to deceive your enemies in a righteous fight. That seems to be the clear teaching of scripture. Adam was not God's enemy nor would God attempt to trick someone into doing evil in any case.

Incidentally, Lucifer, was not yet Satan when he was in the Garden. Had he been, it isn't likely that God would have permitted him into the Garden to begin with but Lucifer, the Archangel would have had freedom to go where he liked.

Do you think Satan tempted them without permission?

Lucifer, yes, without question. There is no evidence to the contrary.

Lying, in and of itself, is not a goodly and godly thing to do.

It is, if it done for the right reasons. So says God's word, as has been repeatedly established.

Only in context can it be thought of as goodly or godly.

Lying, in and of itself, is not an evil thing to do. Only in context can it be thought of as evil or ungodly.

Rip it out of context, and it is an evil thing.

This is true of most things evil. Just as darkness is a negation of light, so evil is a negation of the good.

If it is evil without the context, then it is evil in the context, but greater evil makes it the better choice, in context.

Meaningless nonsense. Every concept that language can communicate is context dependent.

God wasn't choosing evil.

Agreed. No one here has ever suggested otherwise. This is you begging the question again by presupposing that telling a lie is always evil.

He allowed someone to lie to Ahab, but He also made sure Ahab was told the truth. Similar to Adam and Eve in the garden.

There's your doctrine and then there's God's word.

 

[Clete]

When is it not a sin to lie to someone in authority?

Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

 

[Clete]

Meaning that there is a great evil about to occur (the innocent will be condemned to death, for instance), and we are trying to prevent that evil?

No! That's your question begging presupposition again!

It very simply is NOT a lesser evil. Telling a lie to protect the innocent is one biblical example of an act of righteousness - NOT EVIL!

 

[Hoping]

Was it evil for the Hebrew women to lie to Pharaoh? God rewarded them by giving them families of their own. Surely you don't think such was evil?
What about Hagar? She was rewarded for lying to the soldiers by being included in the very lineage of Christ. Surely you don't think such was evil?
How about the other two examples I gave here in the following post? Would such actions be evil?

Of course I think of it as evil, but God can use the deeds of the evil as well as the deeds of the righteous for His own agenda.

Next time try reading the thread (it's literally only three pages long, do you not have the attention span for it?) before responding, so that you don't make a fool out of yourself
You too, come to the table with an a priori belief that ALL lying is sin. Take off those glasses for a moment, and consider what was said.

I do indeed agree with Jesus, (John 8:44), and Paul, (Eph 5:9, 1 Tim 1:9-11), that lying is sin.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Of course I think of it as evil,

So God rewarded evil?

How blasphemous can you get!?

but God can use the deeds of the evil as well as the deeds of the righteous for His own agenda.

Of course He can.

I do indeed agree with Jesus, (John 8:44), and Paul, (Eph 5:9, 1 Tim 10:9-11),

Funny how you won't quote the verses, you'll just reference them, as if to hide them so that no one will go and look them up, and find out that they don't quite say what you want people to believe they say.

Here they are:

You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. - John 8:44 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:44&version=NKJV

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light(for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth),finding out what is acceptable to the Lord.And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light.Therefore He says: “Awake, you who sleep, Arise from the dead, And Christ will give you light.” - Ephesians 5:8-14 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians5:8-14&version=NKJV

There is no "1 Timothy 10," so I presume you meant chapter 1.

But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully,knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. - 1 Timothy 1:8-11 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy1:8-11&version=NKJV

Did ANY of the people in the examples I gave fit ANY of the descriptions in ANY of those verses?

that lying is sin.

Again, Your position has God rewarding people who sin, not punishing them.

That makes YOU wrong. God does not reward evil acts.

 

[Hoping]

So God rewarded evil?
How blasphemous can you get!?

Were Rahab or the birthers under the Law?
No.

Of course He can.

I am glad we can agree on that.
If those woman had no Law to break, how could they be Law breakers?

Funny how you won't quote the verses, you'll just reference them, as if to hide them so that no one will go and look them up, and find out that they don't quite say what you want people to believe they say.

Too much work for you?
I have been to other sites where one can just tap on the verse listed and it will display the verse.
I will keep that in mind, here, in the future.
I even went back to add the verses.

Here they are:
You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. - John 8:44 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:44&version=NKJV

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light(for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth),finding out what is acceptable to the Lord.And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light.Therefore He says: “Awake, you who sleep, Arise from the dead, And Christ will give you light.” - Ephesians 5:8-14 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians5:8-14&version=NKJV

There is no "1 Timothy 10," so I presume you meant chapter 1.

Yes, thanks...

But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully,knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. - 1 Timothy 1:8-11 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy1:8-11&version=NKJV

Did ANY of the people in the examples I gave fit ANY of the descriptions in ANY of those verses?

Rahab? The birthers?
Neither were under the Law so the question is moot.

Again, Your position has God rewarding people who sin, not punishing them.

As it is written..."...for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom 3:20)
No Law, no sin.

That makes YOU wrong. God does not reward evil acts.

If men act on their own consciences, but don't have the Law's guidance or definitions, how can something be determined as evil?