Is God a liar?

[Hoghead1]

I agree, Lapanto, that the Discovery Institute is a joke. I have long studied the creation-science movement and I find it is generally little better than a propaganda mill that generates sometimes deliberately falsified information. I agree that Denton dos have a point in that I believe evolution would be impossible without God. However, this rest of his material I find misleading. OK, suppose science moves beyond evolution. Now the quest for knowledge always goes forward, not backward. So whatever new approach would come along, it would definitely not be a return the static universe and natural theology that was the reigning paradigm at the time of Darwin. I will say that at lest Denton has bona fide credentials . More than one creation-science authority has sported bogus mill-degree doctorates.

 

[Hoghead1]

Farout, you need to be careful about casting aspersion onto the character of your opponents here. Your response didn't impress me at all. It simply demonstrated you don't know how to provide a solid rational rebuttal and so decided to attack your opponent's character and said he or she just doesn't want to learn.

 

[SkyWriting]

All the scientific evidence points to an ancient earth. Furthermore, the fossil records support the slow change of species over time, such as dinosaurs to birds. *IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right? So then this begs the questions...
Did God lie?
And if God lied, why?
What do you believe?

The scriptures, even creation passages, describe an "old" earth.
So, no problem. But all history is a matter of faith in the
storyteller, either in holy writing, or a scientist.

 

[SkyWriting]

We _do_ have overwhelming evidence against YEC.

That's just one story teller over another.

 

[SkyWriting]

Also, God created out minds, our ability to reason and deduce conclusions from evidence.

The scriptures cover the issue of human bias extensively.

 

[pat34lee]

All the scientific evidence points to an ancient earth. Furthermore, the fossil records support the slow change of species over time, such as dinosaurs to birds. *IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right?

This is like someone learning a few foreign
words and thinking they know more than those
who speak that language natively.

God cannot be wrong. Therefore, anyone
who says he is wrong is either misguided,
lying or delusional.

 

[farout]

Farout, you need to be careful about casting aspersion onto the character of your opponents here. Your response didn't impress me at all. It simply demonstrated you don't know how to provide a solid rational rebuttal and so decided to attack your opponent's character and said he or she just doesn't want to learn.

I CLEARLY stated it was MY Opinion. There should be no issue with that. However I am VERY clear to state at anything that might be seen as casting anything on anyone that it is my opinion. Thus is what I was instructed to do and say.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Let me give my own answer to my question, and perhaps that will clear things up a bit.

1. God is not a liar. "God is not a man that he should lie." Numbers 23:19
2. The earth has a plethora of overwhelming evidence i.e. that it is ancient: radiometric dating, ice layering, meteor crators, continental drift, Y-chromosomal ancestry, seeing starlight that has taken billions of years to reach us, and so much more. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_against_a_recent_creation
3. If the earth were young, it would mean that God created it with all this "evidence" in tow, thus creating lies ....
THEREFORE
4. Young Earth Creationism cannot be true because it makes God a liar.

The question may be, does the overwhelming evidence, if it is really is that, make God a liar at all?

God has chosen to tell us that in the beginning, he did this that and the other thing, what beginning? our beginning only? maybe. Just the fact there are no doubt dinosaurs, tells me something was up, but God chose not to go into any of that and I'm just not going to get carried away with speculation there. He did say what he did from the time he said it, and I believe he did it, he did it the way he said he did, and nothing he may have done prior to that changes a thing.

Once we have faith in ourselves and not so much his word, we read things wrong and think we see problems with the whole thing, some tend to run with thatr, and some to the point where they have disproved God partially or even completely. So for me, I can imagine what may have been, but I draw no conclusions because God simply didn't go there so I don't know, I can't know. I'm not going to create a past from speculation...I'll just wait for the answers to any question I might have, and believe the part I was made privy to.

 

[BobRyan]

The scriptures, even creation passages, describe an "old" earth.
So, no problem. But all history is a matter of faith in the
storyteller, either in holy writing, or a scientist.

Until you read the actual Bible --

It should at least call into question whether we've understood God rightly.

That's an "old one"

And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?”

Originally Posted by BobRyan =========================================
One leading Hebrew scholar is James Barr, Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University and former Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University in England. Although he does not believe in the historicity of Genesis 1, Dr. Barr does agree that the writer's intent was to narrate the actual history of primeval creation. Others also agree with him.

"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; . . . Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know. "

James Barr, letter to David Watson, 1984.

=====================

"Six days you shall labor... for in SIX days the LORD Made..." Ex 20:8-11

Spoken by God and written in "legal code" not in "parable"

 

[BobRyan]

I agree, Lapanto, that the Discovery Institute is a joke.

Says the guy that rejects the 7 day creation week, the world-wide flood, the virgin birth, the resurrection of Christ the ascension of Christ and pretty much anything in the Bible that an atheist would not approve of.

Is this supposed to be convincing??

Open Heart said: ↑
Let me give my own answer to my question, and perhaps that will clear things up a bit.

1. God is not a liar. "God is not a man that he should lie." Numbers 23:19
2. The earth has a plethora of overwhelming evidence i.e. that it is ancient: radiometric dating, ice layering, meteor crators, continental drift, Y-chromosomal ancestry, seeing starlight that has taken billions of years to reach us, and so much more. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_against_a_recent_creation
3. If the earth were young, it would mean that God created it with all this "evidence" in tow, thus creating lies ....
THEREFORE
4. Young Earth Creationism cannot be true because it makes God a liar.

so to Hoghead1 I would say that apart from your agreement with OH - what "else" do you have to support your position?

 

[Colter]

The Hebrews who created the creation story for a scattered Israelite audience were motivated by the desire to hold the faith and traditions of their people. It worked but it's outdated and doesn't work anymore for wise, critical thinkers in this age.

 

[SkyWriting]

Until you read the actual Bible --

Trees, dirt, fruiting trees , animals, sun, start, sky,
all showing evidence of full maturity. Scriptures
talk about the ancient mountains and everlasting hills.

Deuteronomy 33:15 with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains ...
with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains and
the fruitfulness of the everlasting hills; ...
//biblehub.com/deuteronomy/33-15.htm - 17k


Habakkuk 3:6 He stood, and shook the earth; he looked, and made ...
... The ancient mountains crumbled and the age-old hills collapsed-- but he marches
on forever. ... The ancient mountains were crumbled. The age-old hills collapsed. ...
//biblehub.com/habakkuk/3-6.htm - 18k


Genesis 49:26 Your father's blessings are greater than the ...
Your father's blessings are greater than the blessings of the ancient mountains,
than the bounty of the age-old hills. Let all these ...
//biblehub.com/genesis/49-26.htm - 19k


Psalm 76:4 You are radiant with light, more majestic than ...
... You are the radiant one. You are more majestic than the ancient mountains. .... ...
//biblehub.com/psalms/76-4.htm - 16k

Deuteronomy 33:15 with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains ...
with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains and
the fruitfulness of the everlasting hills; ...
//biblehub.com/deuteronomy/33-15.htm - 17k


Habakkuk 3:6 He stood, and shook the earth; he looked, and made ...
... He stood and measured the earth; he looked and shook the nations; then the eternal
mountains were scattered; the everlasting hills sank low. ...
//biblehub.com/habakkuk/3-6.htm - 18k


Genesis 49:26 Your father's blessings are greater than the ...
... The blessings of your father are mighty beyond the blessings of my parents,
up to the bounties of the everlasting hills. May they ...
//biblehub.com/genesis/49-26.htm - 19k


Psalm 76:4 You are radiant with light, more majestic than ...
... Thou enlightenest wonderfully from the everlasting hills. .... ...
//biblehub.com/psalms/76-4.htm - 16k

 

[SkyWriting]

The Hebrews who created the creation story for a scattered Israelite audience were motivated by the desire to hold the faith and traditions of their people. It worked but it's outdated and doesn't work anymore for wise, critical thinkers in this age.

Which work did it accomplish?

 

[BobRyan]

Trees, dirt, fruiting trees , animals, sun, start, sky,
all showing evidence of full maturity. Scriptures
talk about the ancient mountains and everlasting hills.

God did not create a 1-day old zygote -- name it "Adam" and leave it here to "fend for itself" -- according to the actual Bible - He created Adam and Eve - as adults - not zygotes.

On day 3 God created plants and on day 5 and 6 - animals were eating them. So they too were created fully mature.

Bible students do know this. And God was not doing this to "lie to atheists" or to "lie to blind-faith evolutionists".

This is irrefutable.

 

[BobRyan]

The Hebrews who created the creation story for a scattered Israelite audience .

What atheist could not have penned that statement??

Fine - I don't argue that atheists and agnostics cannot have their own religion of evolutionism.

But what about Christians who refuse to attack the Bible?

 

[SkyWriting]

God did not create a 1-day old zygote -- name it "Adam" and leave it here to "fend for itself" -- according to the actual Bible - He created Adam and Eve - as adults - not zygotes.
On day 3 God created plants and on day 5 and 6 - animals were eating them. So they too were created fully mature.
Bible students do know this. And God was not doing this to "lie to atheists" or to "lie to blind-faith evolutionists".
This is irrefutable.

Your either brilliant, or you've read one of my posts before.

 

[Colter]

Which work did it accomplish?

The work if maintaining the faith of the Israelites who were then devastated after the loss of their national pride.

 

[SkyWriting]

creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; . .

Maybe. Maybe that's not the intended message.

 

[BobRyan]

Maybe. Maybe that's not the intended message.

"Legal code" is pretty hard to "mess up " to the level of confusion you require for that statement.


Originally Posted by BobRyan =========================================
One leading Hebrew scholar is James Barr, Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University and former Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University in England. Although he does not believe in the historicity of Genesis 1, Dr. Barr does agree that the writer's intent was to narrate the actual history of primeval creation. Others also agree with him.

"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; . . . Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know. "

James Barr, letter to David Watson, 1984.

=====================

"Six days you shall labor... for in SIX days the LORD Made..." Ex 20:8-11

Spoken by God and written in "legal code" not in "parable"

 

[SkyWriting]

The work of maintaining the faith of the Israelites who were then devastated after the loss of their national pride.

OK, What led you to decide that was the purpose?