Truth is an important unifying theme in the Bible. In fact, the Bible itself is referred to in places as the “word of truth” (2 Tim. 2). We are admonished to think about those things which are true, and noble and just. (Phil. 4). We are warned not to be taken captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy which depend on human traditions, rather than on Christ, and we are told that whoever “lives the truth comes to the light, so that his works may be clearly seen as done in God.” (John 3) Jesus talks repeatedly about the truth, referring to himself as “the Truth” (John 14) and to Satan as the opposite of truth, the father of lies, who has no truth in him. (John 8) Jesus also tells us that by living according to his word, we will know the truth and the truth will set us free. (John 8)Christianity also teaches that man, in his fallen and sinful condition, has rejected the truth. More precisely, men through their wickedness suppress the truth and “exchanged the truth of God for a lie.” (Romans 1)
So why, then, with such emphasis on truth within its pages, does the atheist accuse the God of the Bible of being a liar?
The first reason, I suspect, is that he has not fully contemplated what his accusation means. Truth, after all, is that which conforms to the way things really are. If I say that the earth revolves around the sun, I am making a true statement. It conforms to reality. The way to test truth is to discern the extent to which the statement or belief corresponds to the actual corresponding reality. But what is behind all reality? What grounds reality and provides its contours and limits? None other than God, the creator of all that there is. God, then, is the standard for truth, because he is the reality behind all that there is.
Now think for a moment about what a lie involves. First, it is not a matter of opinion; I don’t lie by saying that chocolate is the best flavor for ice cream. Second, it is not merely being mistaken. I don’t lie by saying that I saw Sally earlier today when I have mistaken Susie for Sally. A lie, by contrast, is a deliberate misstatement of the way things really are. And why do people lie? Because they seek to obtain some benefit from doing so. Perhaps they wish to avoid detection for some wrongdoing, or they seek to obtain some advantage that would otherwise not accrue to them. Behind every lie, then, is a limited being who hopes that his misrepresentation will confer a benefit upon him.
Seen in this way, then, it is easy to understand why God refers to himself as total truth. For God, with unlimited power and knowledge, would never need to lie. The way he "really is" is not only true, but also best, complete, without limit or liability. He needs no advantage, has no motivation to conceal truth and derives no profit from misleading his creation. He offers his love freely and undeservedly to us, and wants and needs nothing from us in return. It stands to reason that he would be true in himself, and to himself, and also true to his spoken word.
The second reason has to do with the approach the skeptic takes. In recent posts, skeptics have cited several Bible verses they claim support their position. But, as in most such challenges, they proceed from an erroneous assumption. They treat the Bible as if it were a collection of “true statements” standing alone. Take a sentence from the Bible and ridicule it, or argue that it is false, is the approach they take. But the Bible is much more than that. The passages must be read, not in isolation, but as part of a whole; it must be understood to be a rich and complex fabric upon which the story of God’s people and God’s plan for salvation has been woven. It is not always easy to understand, but it is profitable for man to ponder and to attempt to plumb its depths. Take, then, the three examples the skeptic claims proves that God is a liar. The first is 1 Kings 22:23 – “Yahweh has put a lying spirit into the mouth of all these your prophets.”
The context of this passage is the conversation between Ahab, king of Israel, and Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, regarding whether Jehoshaphat will join Ahab in attacking the city of Ramoth-gilead. Ahab’s prophets told him what he wanted to hear; Ahab had already decided what course of action he wished to pursue and was not interested in God’s view of it. Jehoshaphat insisted that Micaiah’s opinion be obtained. The quoted passage comes from words attributed to Micaiah. He is, essentially, conveying that Ahab’s “prophets” have deceived him and are not speaking God’s truth. This, then, is a literary device Micaiah is using, a parable of sorts, in which he uses imagery to convey to Ahab that the information his prophets are giving him is false. Far from making God a liar, God had provided a truthful witness, but Ahab refused to listen. And eventually died.
The second example comes from Ezekiel 14:9 - “And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.” This passage is, similarly, talking about God removing his guidance from false prophets and abandoning them to their false beliefs. Similar to the language used by Paul in his letter to the Romans, the thrust of this passage is that God will eventually abandon a person to his wrongful beliefs.
The third passage cited is 2 Thess. 2:11 – “For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.” Read the entire letter and you will see that, in context, Paul is talking about those who have been exposed to the truth but who have rejected it. This passage, like the previous one, reveals that God will eventually stop trying, and will abandon people to their evil desires and beliefs. In other words, he will not overcome their free will and make them believe the truth.
These reflections are, of course, not meant to be a full treatment of the cited texts. Much more can be said. But hopefully they help show that the skeptic's claim - that the God of the Bible is a liar - is a variant of the straw man fallacy. Propping up a "false" God by picking and choosing passages and then knocking that "God" down is an example of fallacious thinking. And, sadly, it leaves the challenger no nearer the truth that he claims to be seeking.
Posts
11 comments:
"He is, essentially, conveying that Ahab’s “prophets” have deceived him and are not speaking God’s truth."
Yet he SAYS “Yahweh has put a lying spirit into the mouth of all these your prophets.” - so is Micaiah lying and slandering your god? If your interpretation is correct then Micaiah is claiming that your god has done something that you say he hasn't.
Let's move forward
"This passage is, similarly, talking about God removing his guidance from false prophets and abandoning them to their false beliefs. Similar to the language used by Paul in his letter to the Romans, the thrust of this passage is that God will eventually abandon a person to his wrongful beliefs.
"
Again, you make a claim that isn't borne out by the text "I the LORD have deceived that prophet". If your god was abandoning the individual to his own, wrong, beliefs, why doesn't it say that? Is your god deliberately trying to create the wrong impression by guiding the supposedly inspired writer to use words that present YWHW as lying? Your explanation merely brings us back to a god who is dishonest.
Final verse...
"This passage, like the previous one, reveals that God will eventually stop trying, and will abandon people to their evil desires and beliefs. In other words, he will not overcome their free will and make them believe the truth."
Again, your explanation doesn't actually explain anything. The verse “For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.” is very clear, YWHW has fooled the non-believers so that they will believe a lie. This is the exact opposite of your claim that he'll not "overcome their free will" - what else is he doing if not forcing them to believe a lie by 'send[ing] them a powerful delusion'?
All you've done in this article is show that some believers will go to extraordinary lengths to deny what the text of the Bible says is what it means.
Alex,
In each instance, Al has shown that YHWH told the people the TRUTH, but did not force them to believe it. Would you have Him do otherwise?
I see a lot of excuse-making. The plain language says that the biblical god deceives. I do not dispute the claim that only a limited being would have cause to deceive. The logical conclusion is that the biblical god is a limited being.
In Matt. 5, Jesus warns that one should tear out his eye if it causes him to stumble, for it is better to lose a part of the body than to have one's whole body thrown into hell.
By the type of reasoning you are employing, you would have me conclude that Jesus was advocating self mutilation, and that he did not know much about the body since people don't see things with just one eye.
If I come along and say that Jesus was speaking figuratively and that this warning is consistent with his overall message, you would continue to accuse me of "making excuses."
But the Bible uses figurative and metaphorical language to convey its message, just as people do when they speak to one another. You are, of course, free to believe what you wish, but mining scripture for phrases that you insist be read literally so that you can make your point betrays a lack of understanding of the Bible's message - which identified God with truth and the devil with falsehoods. It also brings you no nearer the truth about Christian teaching, which must be assessed by considering what the writers intended to communicate and not insisting on forcing your meaning on a particular word or phrase.
With further reflection, this concept may begin to "dawn" on you, and no, I am not referring to the rising of the sun.
Al, I know full well what metaphorical language looks like, the passages cited are not using it, IMO.
Explain which parts of those verses are metaphorical.
i find it interesting that Al has suddenly flipped over to claiming the passages are metaphore, having made no mention of that in the article.
Check out Joel's comments in response to your challenges in "Can God Make a Square Circle?"
I think he explains in context quite well what the writers are doing.
You don't get away with it that easily, Al!
Please tell me two things - 1. why did you swap to claiming the language was metaphor after making no mention of that in your original post, and 2. in what way is the language in those verses metaphorical?
You also claim that Jesus was using metaphor when describing self mutilation, but you have no way of knowing that he was - it is merely theological convention that the more unpalatable parts of the scripture are dubbed 'metaphor'. In reality you have no idea whether Jesus meant it literally or not.
Al, I've read what Joel has to say, and the context of the verses doesn't change the meaning at all.
Please answer my two questions to you -
1. Why did you change tack and start claiming that metaphorical language was being uses in the cited verses?
and
2. In what way is the language used in those verses metaphorical?
I didn't say in the original post that the language was metaphorical because I don't believe it is. In my later comment about Matt. 5, I tried to make the point that applying a literal understanding to spoken words can lead to a mistaken conclusion. Those words were not metaphorical either. But there is metaphor in the Bible, and there is figurative speech. There are other literary devices as well. The Bible must be assessed as a whole, and as Joel pointed out, it speaks quite cohesively despite being written by numerous people over a span of centuries.
My point remains: the passages do not convey the message that God is lying to people. They are speaking of people using their free will to resist the truth, and God eventually abandoning them to these delusions.
So, if there is no metaphor in those verses, why bring it up at all? The wording and context of the cited examples clearly show your god being dishonest, nothing you've said so far has convincingly argued otherwise.
Post a Comment