I think you’ve misunderstood the point of my post. The point is that sometimes God asks us to do things that look evil for the greater good. Our problem is that we have caused ourselves to judge between those two (Tree of knowledge) rather than listening to the spirit, which Rahab clearly did. Does the crucifixion of an innocent man look evil? You bet it does, and yet it accomplished the greatest good possible!
At the risk of sounding overly simplistic about this, the truth is not a thing, it is a person. Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life.
I think it’s ironic that Pilate was staring right at the answer when he asked this question.
It is good that you recognize the difference between ‘bearing false witness’ and ‘lying’.
Famous Liars who were blessed by God either in direct relation to their lies, or their lies were not issue or held against them by God:
Abraham
Sarah (Wife of Abraham)
Jacob (Israel)
Joseph (Coat Kid)
Moses
Rahab (misdirected an enemy)
Joseph (Jesus’s step-father)
etc.
There is a particular lie which is forbidden and it was and is to bear false witness against your neighbour. Why was this important?
Deuteronomy 19:15
“ A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.
To bear false witness, that is being one of those to ‘witness’ to a person’s iniquity or sin that did not occur, usually ended up with that person being punished for a crime that he did not commit and in most cases that person’s death. Hence why it was it was a particularly strong transgression to bear false witness, because it is equivalent to murdering that person.
There is far more on this.
What! You forgot the Hebrew midwives – my favorite liars of all! 
Absolutely. 
The whole ‘lying’ is a sin thing, is hilarious because it flubs up everyone who believes all this time the Law said “Thou Shalt Not Lie” when it never did. I particularly find it interesting to tell a religious Christian (whether ECT or UR believing) that lying isn’t a sin, and see them get outright mad when I start showing them how their main Bible Heroes lied consistently and a few times were blessed directly by God for it.
Shock stage: Initial paralysis at hearing the bad news.
“What?! Your kidding right?”
Denial stage: Trying to avoid the inevitable.
“That isn’t what it says, lying is a sin! How could God bless someone for lying.”
Anger stage: Frustrated outpouring of bottled-up emotion.
“You are the liar! You are twisting the Scriptures to suit your wicked thoughts! Get out of my life!”
Bargaining stage: Seeking in vain for a way out.
“There has to be another way to read Scripture to show us that God did not condone lies and bless them for it. God wasn’t’ blessing the action, they were blessed by faith, and God over looked their transgression.”
Depression stage: Final realization of the inevitable.
“That still means lying isn’t as big of sin as I thought. I mean, Scripture does say outright, they were blessed for the lies they made!.”
Testing stage*: Seeking realistic solutions.
“Okay, so where did I get this idea that lying is a sin? There isn’t even a commandment against it.”
Acceptance stage: Finally accepting the Truth.
“Geez, I gotta rethink my entire doctrine.”
. Would you be able to expound your view on God being part evil and its biblical/philosophical merit?
there are several texts that point in that direction they certainly cause traditional Christianity a headache 
one classic has already been posted , try this one Isaiah 45:7 ‘‘forming the light and creating darkness . making peace and creating evil’’ 
David’s rant was an intense (and humanly justifiable) rant as those heathen did unspeakable things to Israeli men women and Children YET we recognize today that such retaliation is NOT the Spirit of Christ even though it is purported that David was speaking from the Spirit of Christ. I say - he was (obviously) not.
*I for one recognise the instances where a text is merely recording an historical event *
So - your God given conscience and societal norms and what Jesus is purported to have said in that same “book” (actually a collection of separate writings) AND current human laws all contradict what some want to see as an objective written moral standard.
Selah?
*I’m not necessarily referring to morals , but arriving at defining what is truth , again I don’t believe that is possible without an objective standard *
I believe I said ‘‘the loving thing to do’’
*very profound and while I certainly don’t disagree with you , none the less something that is true is by its very nature objective *
diagonally parked in a parallel universe
A big tangent indeed! Everything in this plane we are experiencing operates through polar opposites. We judge everything as good or evil (or somewhere in between) because we see it all through the lens of the forbidden tree. That’s just the way it is, yet we have an inkling of things beyond this plane which are not subject to these plus and minus polarity laws.
You keep mentioning the forbidden tree, firstborn. I don’t want to get off topic here, but I’m going to start a post about the Tree of Life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Wanted to mention this because I’d like to hear your take on what they are/represent . . . if you’d be interested in sharing that.
Thanks for that Craig, enlightening stuff.
Now what do we do with the injunctions against lying in the NT, or have we misunderstood those too? I’m thinking specifically of Colossians 3:9, which is probably the clearest and most direct example.
Did Yahweh ever ask anyone to lie, or explicitly commend their deceit? I started going through your list Craig, but gave up (you’re going to have to provide me with references to make it worth my time). Deceit is always costly. Just ask Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). I mean, take Abram/Abraham. He lies twice (Genesis 12:11-20 and 20:2-17) and both are not particularly wonderful expressions of faith. The first time, Abram plots deceit to secure his own life but drags everyone into suffering and danger. He uses his own initiative (deceit) to take care of his own future, erroneously thinking Yahweh needs him to deliver His promises in his way (deceit). This is a belief we see tragically resulting in bitterness and several broken relationships in his immediate family (between himself, Sarah, Hagar, Ismael and Isaac) and we can trace this sort of thinking as a persistent problem throughout Hebrew scriptures (and in Christianity throughout history actually). Of course, Abram’s way starts to unravel when Sarai is immediately absorbed into the royal harem of the Pharaoh. Brilliant plan! Yahweh is roused enough to personally intervene to secure Abram’s wife (someone He is particularly concerned about, as evidenced in 12:17). After severe famines had already decimated the land (12:10), Yahweh sends great plagues. Pharaoh is rightly pissed and takes it as a profound offense from Abram. This pagan King then rebukes Abram’s dishonesty. Ouch. That did not turn out well. Between his two lies, I should note that Abram makes a promise to Yahweh, the Owner of heaven and earth, that he will not accept anything from Empire and War (14:22-23; as any good Anarchist would ). The second instance of lying is just as tragic. Abraham lies to Abimelech, king of Gerar and again the king takes Sarah into his royal harem. Fortunately, Yahweh intervenes once more and again, this pagan king rebukes Abraham’s dishonesty: “What have you done to us? How have I offended you, that you have brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? … What did you have in view!?” (20:9-10). Abraham offers his excuse which is essentially a lack of faith in Yahweh to preserve him. Ablimelech is then obliged to provide Abraham with sheep, oxen, male and female servants and a thousand pieces of silver; gifts which Abraham had previously promised to reject, but out of obligation (or perhaps directly out of disobedience) he accepts. There’s not much in these two accounts that can be considered particularly favourable. And Sarah arguably lies in Abraham’s deceit, but most notably lies directly to Yahweh in 18:12. After laughing to herself at Yahweh’s promise (which Yahweh takes personal offense to 18:14), she then denies it out of fear. Yahweh, in contrast to her deceit, rebukes her with truth. I’m struggling to see how any of this shows that lying is acceptable or commendable. Or as stuartd is claiming that this lying somehow originates from Yahweh, when every example of deceit I know originates with men (or the Devil). We clearly know that the Devil (literal or not) “is not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar (one who misrepresents, falsifies) and the father (***patér***3961, meaning originator, imparting life to, committed to, passing likeness to) of lies” (John 8:44).
There is no record of Yahweh criticizing Lot’s drunken incest, and he was still considered a righteous man of faith. But I still presume He expects us to work it out that He was pretty disappointed in it. Throughout all scripture, Yahweh subversively turns (our) wickedness into good without commending it – you see this most clearly in the crucifixion. (Mel, sorry to have misunderstood your post earlier, but the crucifixion of an innocent man is evil, isn’t it? Yahweh said it was foolish for the Jews and rulers put Him to death; 1 Corinthians 2:8 and Acts 3:13-17. But He did accomplish the greatest good possible despite it – saving us through our active sin).
The only reason Yahweh doesn’t hold their sin against these great prophets (or us today) is because He is abundantly merciful. This is where Islam stuffs up, in my opinion. They don’t really get radical grace, so they can’t understand how these great prophets, used of a God with radical standards, could get drunk and randy. So they have to go edit the scriptures to make them more saintly then they are. I’m a liar (and a drunkard, idolater, adulterer, etc.) blessed by Yahweh, but not with any shrug to my sin. My Yahweh hates my sin. Lying included.
…Anyway, I’m willing to be shown truth on this issue and adjust any theology and practice to suit. But you’re going to have to explain Colossians 3:9-10 (as Mel said), and Yeshua’s commentary on bearing radically true witness, John 8:44, Proverbs 6:17 (which doesn’t qualify lying within a legal context or by its intent) and Revelations 21:8.
Corrie Ten Boom tells a story in one of her books about lying to the Nazis about the Jews in their basement. Her sister wouldn’t lie (Corrie was willing to lie). The entrance to the secret basement was under the dining room table, which stood on an area rug. Sis (don’t remember her name), when asked, said, “They’re under the dining table.” It was the only place the Germans didn’t look. Corrie explains that she still didn’t feel it would have been wrong of her to lie, but it worked out in any case.
I’m up in the air about all this. I don’t want to be legalistic, and something in me agrees with Corrie. If I were hiding people from harm, I would lie if necessary unless God told me not to. On the other hand, I don’t feel free to just up and tell any lie, white or otherwise, just because. I’m very careful to be not only truthful, but not to exaggerate or even imply something that isn’t quite accurate. For me, in a situation where I could cause harm, this is a gray area and I would ask God what to do. That said, it has never come up and possibly never will, which makes it a fairly academic point. The only lies I’ve told have been ones I had to later repent.
How can the truth be a person? If I tell the truth, I am not telling “a person”. I am telling what is true.
Did Jesus say, “I am the truth” or did He say, “I am reality”? — indicating that only by knowing Him can we experience reality; otherwise we are living in a dream world. The Greek word “αληθια” should sometimes be translated as “reality”.
I think this business of lying is a good illustration of the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law.
The spirit behind not lying is presumably to avoid taking unfair advantage of a situation for one’s own gain, or some other type of ‘one upmanship’ for physical gain or psychological advantage etc.
In the situation of the hidden Jews telling the truth would actually have been informing the soldiers that the Jews were hidden under the floor, under the table. Really telling them what appeared to be the truth was calculated or hoped to convey something other than where they were reallly hiding.
Preservation of life would surely supersede truth telling. Similarly who would condemn a mother for stealing to feed a starving child if there was no other recourse?
I think the major point is that situational ethics do apply here, and that it is a mistake to rigidly define certain actions as sin.
It seems fairly obvious from the biblical examples that it is not always ok to lie, but that sometimes it clearly is.
Excellent
in a similar way to the use of force [or violence] to protect an innocent victim to be legalistic and morally superior and state that all lying is forbidden utterly fails to take into account other factors