Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Lying for the sake of life

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
    Oh, I very much agree that God does not need them, but throughout scripture God uses sinful actions of people to accomplish His will.
    Granted. However, that in no way undoes the sinfulness of the actions. The behaviour of Joseph’s brethren led, regardless of their intentions, to great good for Joseph and for them. But that in no way redeems what they did. It was still wrong, and is shown to be wrong.

    The good result of an evil act or intention does not justify the evil. “Shall we do evil, that good may come ?” St Paul did not think so.
    Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 12-29-2017, 04:50 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
      But God cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Heb. 6:18), therefore Jesus could not have lied, therefore lying is always a sin.

      "No lie was found in their mouths; they are blameless." (Rev. 14:5)

      Blessings,
      Lee
      Lying is wrong, by the very fact of being a lie, surely ? Actions other than lying, that a lie sometimes accompanies - Rahab’s hospitality to the spies, that was defended by a lie, for instance - are often praised. Lying is never praised. It is however often condemned, sometimes in very strong language. There is no place in the Jerusalem that comes down from Heaven for the person “who loves and makes a lie” (Rev 22.15). God is totally Faithful and Trustworthy - can Christians be like that, if they defend lying ?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
        Lying is wrong, by the very fact of being a lie, surely ? Actions other than lying, that a lie sometimes accompanies - Rahab’s hospitality to the spies, that was defended by a lie, for instance - are often praised. Lying is never praised. It is however often condemned, sometimes in very strong language. There is no place in the Jerusalem that comes down from Heaven for the person “who loves and makes a lie” (Rev 22.15). God is totally Faithful and Trustworthy - can Christians be like that, if they defend lying ?
        I remember a talk by Paul Kurtz on situational ethics. He gives an example of a friend in the hospital, and the doctor comes to you and tells you "there is no hope, he is going to die". You go into your friend's room, and your friend asks "what did the doctor say". "In that case", says Kurtz, "clearly I would lie".

        You would not have to lie, you could simply say something like, "he's not very optimistic, but doctors have been wrong before". You are under no obligation to pass on what the doctor said to you in a personal conversation.

        (in Kurtz' example, I don't really see a doctor being that openly negative to a non-family member, but that was his illustration)
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
          Granted. However, that in no way undoes the sinfulness of the actions. The behaviour of Joseph’s brethren led, regardless of their intentions, to great good for Joseph and for them. But that in no way redeems what they did. It was still wrong, and is shown to be wrong.

          The good result of an evil act or intention does not justify the evil. “Shall we do evil, that good may come ?” St Paul did not think so.
          All this is true, but I do not see lying to save an innocent life as sinful. Saving a life is not evil.
          Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

          Comment


          • What is a lie? Is it in the words themselves, or the meaning, or the intent?

            Considering the fact that words are extrinsic to God, merely an accommodation to human limitations since we don’t have God’s absolute knowledge and perfect communication, words are just a tool invented for humans to partially and imperfectly translate our thoughts and desires to someone else (and that communication is always partial and imperfect). Therefore, if there is an underlying principle that touches on God’s own nature and perfect eternal will, it must deal with communication, the actual conveying of meaning and intent, much more primarily than with the tools, the words that were actually used.

            The meaning of words is fluid; it changes constantly with context, with culture, with body language, and with intent. Whether they are true, false, sincere, or deceptive can change from one second to the next and from one utterance to the next. And even when words are false, there is a whole moral gamut, from innocent mistakes to bending the truth, from making and expressing assumptions and uncertainties (as if they were certain, and with varying levels of purity or malice behind the assumptions) to self-deception (where you yourself believe it’s true but you really shouldn’t). At what point does untruth become a lie?

            Words that are false can convey truth (as in metaphors, hyperbole, idioms, and sarcasm), and words that are true can convey falsehood (as in half-truths, equivocations, and deceptive use of true statements). And actions, body language, shrugs, nods, hand signals, or even the absence of any response at all can communicate just as much, just as clearly, and just as deceptively as a word can. Is deception any more or any less a lie and a sin because you didn’t use sounds from your mouth to communicate it? Is a word held to any different standard of judgment by God than anything else you do to express what’s in your mind?

            It seems to me that the essence of a lie must be deceptive meaning or intent, not the words themselves. But if God judges intent, not words, then could there not be times when the words are not true yet the intent is pure? There are times when a person has a pure and loving reason to withhold information from someone who would either misuse it or be hurt by it. It may be impossible to withhold that information without deceiving someone, misdirecting them, or at the very least making them think you don’t have the information, which itself is deception. If your intent is to make the other person think anything other than what is the truth, how would using words to do so be any more or any less sinful than any other means?

            God cannot lie. But the passages that specifically say he can’t are each about God breaking a promise, not that God can never say or do anything that is untrue or would mislead. Even when God makes a direct statement about the future, it is not always an unbreakable or unchangeable truth or promise. He tells us that, if he says he is going to bless or curse, and then an individual either sins or repents, as the case may be, then God’s blessing or curse may be reversed (Ezek. 33:13-15). What God said would happen, doesn’t happen, yet he didn’t lie when he said it would (even though he already knew at that time that it wouldn’t). He said he was going to curse a nation; they repented; he didn’t curse them. Jonah was sent to Nineveh with the message, “Forty more days, and Nineveh will be destroyed.” It didn’t happen. Or was that not the message God commanded him to preach? So should Nineveh have executed Jonah as a false prophet? (When he spoke, we’re not told that Nineveh believed Jonah; we’re told they believed God). How were his words not a lie, if a lie is defined by the objective truth value of the words themselves? If it is not defined by the objective truth of the words, how is it defined?

            God cannot lie, but he can do things intended to obscure the truth or even to mislead: He used deception as a form of judgment when he commanded Israel to lay an ambush against Ai. But an ambush is deceptive; it tricks the enemy into thinking a small feint is the main attack. God himself used righteous deception when he created the sound of a mighty army, where none was coming, to scare away the Arameans (2 Kings 7), and made water look like blood to trick the Moabites into making a rash advance (2 Kings 3). He told Samuel to tell a half-truth, when he went to anoint David as king but claim he was there to perform a sacrifice. When God sent a prophet with a lying spirit to deceive wicked kings in judgment against them (1 Kings 22), how was he not responsible for the lies they told?

            Deception can be a righteous weapon of judgment against unbelievers; it can also be a valuable and righteous tool on behalf of believers. When God told Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, God did not actually want Abraham to do it; he just wanted to test and strengthen his faith. When Jesus treated the Syro-Phoenician woman as if he didn’t care about her or her daughter and called her a dog, it was deceptive because he did care, but he wanted to draw out her faith to the fullest by his act. When the risen Christ appeared to people in a form they did not recognize, was that not a form of deception? He wanted them to think he was somebody else. His main intent was to merely withhold the truth for a time, but he could not withhold the fact that he was Jesus without making them think he was someone else (a gardener or a stranger visiting Jerusalem). Is it okay for Jesus to intend for people to believe something untrue as long as he doesn’t cross a certain line? If so, where is that line exactly? How can he be true if his intent is untrue? Unless you insist that a lie is only and specifically words, and you can explain why words deserve a different standard than actions, it seems to me that deception is sometimes righteous and loving, worthy even of God himself.

            God cannot lie. He will never break an eternal gospel promise or be untrue to his own perfect and unchanging nature. And the same standard applies to us: Always be true to your God, to your new and holy nature, to your responsibilities to do what is loving and helpful. But that’s not the same as saying, Never ever say or do anything that will cause someone to think something that’s not true.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
              All this is true, but I do not see lying to save an innocent life as sinful. Saving a life is not evil.
              No, but lying is evil--what other sins would be allowed in order to save an innocent life? Stealing? Adultery? Murder?

              But I believe we will never be put in the place of having to choose between sins, otherwise 1 Cor. 10:13 would not be true, there would be temptations with no way of escape.

              Source: 1 Co 10:13

              No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

              © Copyright Original Source



              Blessings,
              Lee
              "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Just Passing Through View Post
                When the risen Christ appeared to people in a form they did not recognize, was that not a form of deception? ... Is it okay for Jesus to intend for people to believe something untrue as long as he doesn’t cross a certain line? If so, where is that line exactly?
                "Some said it thundered" (John 12:29). So indeed it's not God's will to correct us of every false notion, even about what he has said or done. You raise some good points! What is a lie? What is it that God cannot do?

                "If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth." (1 Jn 1:6)

                So one lie is a false claim to fellowship with God.

                "Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ." (1 Jn 2:22)

                So the quintessential lie is to deny that Jesus is the Christ, to deny what is true.

                "No lie was found in their mouths; they are blameless." (Re 14:5)

                So I think we know what lying is, it's speaking what is not true, and that is what is forbidden.

                "Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator." (Col 3:9-10)

                How were his words not a lie, if a lie is defined by the objective truth value of the words themselves?
                As Augustine noted, Nineveh was overthrown, but by repentance, rather than by judgment.

                God cannot lie. He will never break an eternal gospel promise or be untrue to his own perfect and unchanging nature. And the same standard applies to us: Always be true to your God, to your new and holy nature, to your responsibilities to do what is loving and helpful. But that’s not the same as saying, Never ever say or do anything that will cause someone to think something that’s not true.
                Agreed.

                Blessings,
                Lee
                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                Comment


                • Luke 14:5 comes to mind here. Under the Old Covenant, it was generally sinful to work on the Sabbath. However, Jesus indicated that in an emergency situation, the natural thing to do would be to make an exception. The same could be said about other actions that are normally sins.
                  "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                    Luke 14:5 comes to mind here. Under the Old Covenant, it was generally sinful to work on the Sabbath. However, Jesus indicated that in an emergency situation, the natural thing to do would be to make an exception. The same could be said about other actions that are normally sins.
                    But we shouldn't be thinking we can commit adultery in an emergency! Transgressing the moral law is a sin, though the ceremonial law may be set aside as needed...

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      But we shouldn't be thinking we can commit adultery in an emergency! Transgressing the moral law is a sin, though the ceremonial law may be set aside as needed...

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      Obviously there are probably no circumstances when adultery could be committed.
                      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                        Obviously there are probably no circumstances when adultery could be committed.
                        No, but I'm sure someone will come up with some very creative movie plots to try...
                        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                        My Personal Blog

                        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                        Quill Sword

                        Comment


                        • I think killing/murder is probably a better test case. The case of Jael and Sisera in Judges (where Jael tricks Sisera into a tent under the guise of hospitality where she drives a tent stake through his head) would normally be considered cold blooded murder but there were extenuating circumstances here. This also has relevance for the discussion on lying because she was somewhat deceptive in how she went about it. The text even says that God subdued the Canaanites through this action so it was clearly justified.
                          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            I think killing/murder is probably a better test case. The case of Jael and Sisera in Judges (where Jael tricks Sisera into a tent under the guise of hospitality where she drives a tent stake through his head) would normally be considered cold blooded murder but there were extenuating circumstances here. This also has relevance for the discussion on lying because she was somewhat deceptive in how she went about it. The text even says that God subdued the Canaanites through this action so it was clearly justified.
                            I would classify Jael's actions as an act of war, like the feint of setting an ambush for Ai. And I would agree that not all deception is lying.

                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              I remember a talk by Paul Kurtz on situational ethics. He gives an example of a friend in the hospital, and the doctor comes to you and tells you "there is no hope, he is going to die". You go into your friend's room, and your friend asks "what did the doctor say". "In that case", says Kurtz, "clearly I would lie".

                              You would not have to lie, you could simply say something like, "he's not very optimistic, but doctors have been wrong before". You are under no obligation to pass on what the doctor said to you in a personal conversation.

                              (in Kurtz' example, I don't really see a doctor being that openly negative to a non-family member, but that was his illustration)
                              Ha! When my dad had lung cancer they went in and did exploratory surgery to see the extent of it. When the doctor came to see us he said basically, "The cancer is beyond our control. You are going to die" - pretty much that bluntly. I took the doctor out into the hall and let him have it. A couple of nurses came up to me afterwards and told me what a total jerk that doctor was and that he treats patients and even other staff like they don't matter.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                                No, but lying is evil--what other sins would be allowed in order to save an innocent life? Stealing? Adultery? Murder?
                                Could you steal a loaf of bread from a Nazi if you are feeding a starving child?
                                Can you kill someone to defend yourself?

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X