A Real and Significant Biblical Contradiction?

[spockrates]

Ritualistic cannibalism???

Eating the Passover lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, they say.

---

God can not lie, deceiving and lying are not necessarily the same.

Interesting piece of sophistry. A basic definition of lying is to deliberately deceive another. 'White lies' , half truths and deliberate omissions to deceive are all lies.

If God sets out to deliberately deceive,he is lying,period.

Padraic:

The Sophists were adversaries of Socrates and other true philosophers. Many of them prided themselves in being able to win an argument, no matter how difficult to defend. Some showed their prowess in debate by taking a side in an argument and defeating all challengers. After so winning the debate, they'd take the opposite position of the argument and win the debate, again! Winning was everything to them, and they often deliberately made a bloody sacrifice of the truth to gain their victories. Many of the students of these Sophists used what they learned from their teachers to become successful lawyers and politicians in ancient Greece.

But we're after the truth, here. We want to capture it alive, not slaughter it! So let's carefully consider the question of whether every deception (without exception) truly is a lie. I suppose I'd ask this to find the answer: Is it possible to lie without speaking, or writing a word? Can one say, or write nothing and still lie? If so, please give an example.

Or if you prefer, explain how GC's, or CS's examples of deception are actually examples of telling lies. For example, does one tell a lie by playing chess?

---

in the case of war or the game of chess.

I repeat; sophistry,to deliberately deceive IS to lie. However, I do not argue that lying is always immoral..

IF you accept the concept of a 'just war', (I do not) Sun Tzu's precept that war is about deception is perfectly moral. To argue that it is OK to deceive/lie under some circumstances is to argue moral relativism,or that God is above his own moral laws.

My position is that of moral relativism,based on the sensible notion that the ends justify the means. Pretty sure those are not Christian ideals.

Indeed! Ask a Christian if it is OK to lie, she'd likely say no. Ask her if deceiving is the same as telling a lie, she'd probably say yes. Ask her if one can tell a lie without saying a word, or writing any words, and would she change her mind?

I guess that even if we were to all come to an agreement on this, we would still have another question taunting us: Is it ever right, just and good to deceive without saying a word? Or if you like: Is it ever wrong, unjust and evil to reveal the truth to one we know is deceived?

---

IF you accept the concept of a 'just war', (I do not) Sun Tzu's precept that war is about deception is perfectly moral. To argue that it is OK to deceive/lie under some circumstances is to argue moral relativism,or that God is above his own moral laws.

That's not necessarily true. Perhaps God has a kind of authority that does not require divulging certain kinds of truths--just as there are state secrets which the government is not required to divulge. Or perhaps God has a particular relationship to humans that justifies withholding the truth--just as a parent is not required to divulge, say, details of their sex lives to their children. If you're going to argue that God had an obligation to divulge the truth, you're going to need to show it.

Yes, or maybe it's a matter of Utilitarianism: Deceiving one to save many from the harmful consequences of deception? Is the God portrayed in the Bible a Utilitarian? Hmmm.