Can God deceive, or does that contradict His very Nature?

[cornbread_r2]

“Same time” being the key words here. God who is outside space and time has chosen, on occasion to allow miracles outside of time these are not lies. St. Padre Pio was known to bi-locate and was seen in two places at the same time. Other miracles are things that seem to defy time, your example of the miracle of the sun at Fatima is a perfect example. Could a group of people see the sun dance the same time others saw it immobile in the sky? Yes, the same way people saw Padre Pio in two different places at the same time. This was not a contradictory lie this was God’s way showing his power over space-time of which He is outside of.

Contradictory would be a round-square or for God to sin He can’t He is pure love hope that makes sense.

If it’s contradictory for an object to be both circular and not circular at the same time, then I’m not seeing how the Sun dancing and not dancing at the same time would not also be contradictory.

As I understand it, truth cannot contradict truth. Accordingly, if the Sun truly danced at Fatima, then it seems that it cannot also be true that the Sun didn’t dance everywhere. If some people didn’t see the Sun dancing, it wasn’t because the Sun wasn’t dancing, it was because God caused them to perceive that it wasn’t dancing – and I regard that as an act of deception on God’s part.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

We’ve got to see the background Abraham was coming from. In that part of the world sacrificing one’s offspring was standard worship. Even a thousand years later, an Assyrian king sacrificed his adult son.

Either when God got through to Abraham to sacrifice to Him, he understood that he was to actually make the burnt offering of Isaac as was the done thing in those days, or God thought Abraham wouldn’t take him seriously if He put it any other way. Maybe Isaac awakened in him a wondering when he enquired after the lamb.

In any event I think the narrative is meant to convey a jolt in the way worship was conceived.

At any rate Isaac had to be offered in some way because Abraham had been putting store in him as the solution to his intestacy problem.

God sometimes has to use an indirect path to lead us to something. Maybe the memory of it will teach us something valuable for tougher times ahead. If we always think we can rely totally on ourselves plus those around us, what will happen when that is no longer the case?

Maybe the Israelites and Hebrews didn’t experience such an emphatic concentrated transition in experience ever after. One or two did but there was always a crowd with more diluted belief and faith. In the New Covenant this is now an individual experience again, with added Paraclete!

In other cases of “deception” allowed by God, certain people have become seriously hard hearted and deep down, don’t want God to try very hard to help them. He then takes them at their word. May you and I remain hungry for His help!

 

[jonathan_hili]

I suppose it depends how you are defining “deceive”.

If we take deceive to mean X performs an action which Y understands falsely and X knew Y would understand it falsely beforehand and permitted this false understanding, then I think God can certainly deceive us.

If we take deceive to mean X performs an action which Y understands falsely and X knew Y would understand it falsely beforehand and intended this false understanding, then I think it is a bit more difficult, as it might may God akin to a liar.

Perhaps, though, if Y is innocent and/or has a right to a correct understanding, then problems occur. If Y is guilty and/or has lost his right to a correct understanding then I think God is off the hook.

 

[NeedImprovement]

•Could God have just created us for sick pleasure, using Israel as a pawn and even taking deception as far as the cross?

. . . but I’m wondering if I can get some closure here first. I’m not a troll, I’m a kid looking for answers. If you look at my previous posts you will know that.

As that question above stands, it’s incomplete, unsubstantiated, and quite frankly inflammatory (though perhaps inadvertently so). I don’t see how whatever it is attempting to assert/ask, can be answered.

Any possibility that it could be reformulated to present a nice coherent argument - perhaps something similar in structure to JapaneseKappa’s presentations ?

Hints:

• How is God sick ?
• How is Israel supposed to be considered a pawn ?
• How are we as humans supposed to provide Him with sick pleasure ?
• (Most important one)What is the deception in the Cross which is being claimed ?

Please, if anyone wants to suggest the possibility that God is a* liar* - do it in a way that is very clear - otherwise, you can end up wearing that label yourself

Thanks.
NI

 

[NeedImprovement]

An excerpt from the Novena to St. Joseph published by St. Joseph’s Oratory.

From: FIRST DAY, St. Joseph, Model of Faith

**Your virgin spouse conceived without human intervention and a child was born who was God ; you adored Him ; you protected Him. These events were upsetting, even astounding, and for those without faith they would seem to have been impossible.

But you knew that when speaking to a man, God does not try to mislead him. Without challenging or questioning God’s will for you, you went ahead placing your confidence in the light which only He provides . . .**

 

[NeedImprovement]

Although technically it could be argued that, as Catholics, we are not obliged to believe in the message of Fatima, neither are we permitted to discourage or dissuade anyone else from believing Our Blessed Mother’s words.

Fatima’s message is just as important and applicable to our present-day world . I believe we as Catholics have a responsibility, anytime someone just waltzes onto the thread deciding that they are going to ridicule our faith and insult God simultaneously : If we can prove how thoughtless the ridicule and insult to God is, and how devoid of reasoning the post is , it appears in our better interest to post such a response. I believe I may have such a response to a post which calls God a deceiver. That we may be sure God is not a deceiver, I present my reasoning (in 2 parts) to refute the post directly below.

PART 1

If it’s contradictory for an object to be both circular and not circular at the same time, then I’m not seeing how the Sun dancing and not dancing at the same time would not also be contradictory.

As I understand it, truth cannot contradict truth. Accordingly, if the Sun truly danced at Fatima, then it seems that it cannot also be true that the Sun didn’t dance everywhere. If some people didn’t see the Sun dancing, it wasn’t because the Sun wasn’t dancing, it was because God caused them to perceive that it wasn’t dancing – and I regard that as an act of deception on God’s part.

Even by those, um, standards, that still wouldn’t account for the people living on the other side of the planet who were in the darkness of night while the sun was out at Fatima - would it ? Leading up to miracle of the sun we are told that it had been raining at the Cova da Iria, and that the clouds were dark in color - I wonder how much of the world which was in daylight at that same moment also had overcast skies that day as well (which would’ve obscured their view of the sun) ?

We should first, from the outset clarify an important point according to Scripture :

That to call God a deceiver, is to impute to Him the properties of the antichrist ; together with those of Satan and his wiles.

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 John 1:7 )

And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. (Revelation 12:9 )

So, to begin with, calling God the Devil - is ,by comparison, the ultimate in calling something both circular and not circular at the same time ; particularly when the nature of each is considered.

It is neither commendable , nor even logical.

 

[NeedImprovement]

PART 2

The main contention of that post claims that God is a -]deceiver/-] because not everyone in the world saw the* miracle of the sun* which took place at the Cova da Iria on October 13, 1917 .

There are a whole load of good reasons why not everyone in the world saw the miracle of the sun which took place at the Cova da Iria on October 13, 1917 . I would like to offer 3 of them, which I think will suffice in laying to rest this terrible suggestion that God is a -]deceiver/-].

First, several facts pertaining to the* miracle of the sun* at the Cova da Iria in 1917:

• The crowd who gathered at the Cova da Iria and who witnessed the miracle of the sun is estimated as between 40,000 to 100,000 people ( EWTN’s source says *70,000 or so *).
• It was the children who requested (July 13, 1917) that a miracle be performed so that the crowd would believe Our Lady was appearing there.

Lucy said " I want to ask you to tell us who you are, and to make a miracle for the crowd to believe that you appear." She Answered: "You continue to come here. In October I will tell you who I am, that which I want, and I will perform a miracle that all can see and believe. Sacrifice yourselves for sinners, and say often this prayer, especially during any sacrifice: ‘O my Jesus, I offer this for love of Thee, for the conversion of poor sinners, and in reparation for all the sins commited against the Immaculate Heart of Mary.’ "

• Generally, the* miracle of the sun* could be seen up to 18 kilometers from the Cova da Iria.

Three Good Reasons Alluding Possibly to Why the Miracle of the Sun Was Only Seen Within the Vicinity of the Cova da Iria :

**I **

God is not a-] deceiver/-]. The first person of the Most Holy Trinity is a loving Father who created us with free will. He knows that we cannot be coerced into loving Him. For our love of God to be genuine , it mustn’t be forced; it must be free.

What happened at Fatima was necessary - when Our Lady appears, it’s because we need her Motherly correction. The message of Fatima is an exhortation to prayer, but it is also a warning. Some of its elements can shake us (such as the childrens’ account of their vision of Hell) .Consider now, this account of someone who witnessed the miracle of the sun 18 kilometers away from the Cova da Iria :

“I feel incapable of describing what I saw. I looked fixedly at the sun, which seemed pale and did not hurt my eyes. Looking like a ball of snow, revolving on itself, it suddenly seemed to come down in a zig-zag, menacing the earth. Terrified, I ran and hid myself among the people, who were weeping and expecting the end of the world at any moment.” – Rev. Joaquim Lourenço, describing his boyhood experience in Alburitel, eighteen kilometers from Fatima.

II

John 20:29

Jesus said to him, "Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed."

III

If the miracle of the sun had been seen the world over,so to speak, instead of only in the vicinity of the Cova da Iria - where the people had gathered to see the miracle which Our Lady had promised them, how could the miracle then be ascribed to Fatima ?

 

[Timothy524]

God knew Abraham had the faith to do what was going to be instructed of him. Abraham did not know it yet. Abraham had to be told in the moment that he was about to deliver the blow to his son to stop. In that moment, he knew what God knew all along. He was not tested, because God did not have Abraham carry out His request. Abraham was able to be the man he was created to be, because of the sacrifice and love he showed to our King. God just wanted to show Abraham how much Abraham loved God. Does that make any sense?

I am dealing with a lot of battles in my mind right now. The evil one tries to convince me that God might be deceiving me. He tries to tell me that God just put me in this world to be a footstool to everyone. Then I start becoming fearful and resentful towards God as though, “This is all you have planned for me…I want more…I want better.” But it’s not about what I want and who am I to say that He even plans for me to be a footstool or if I am even close to having things right. I barely know myself.

 

[Gregory_Olson]

God, through his command, caused Abraham to believe that God wanted Isaac sacrificed. God did not actually want Isaac sacrificed. Therefore, God decieved Abraham.

A very fine distinction here: God, through his command, caused Abraham to believe that God wanted him to obey his command to sacrifice his son Isaac. God did want Abraham to obey his command to sacrifice the thing most important to him, but also did not want Isaac to die. In the end God got both things he wanted: Abraham did everything in his power to obey God’s command, and Isaac did not die. The point is God’s commandment wasn’t necessarily deception, Abraham could have believed either that God wanted Isaac sacrificed or that God wanted his commandment obeyed. The distinction between them is fine, but in the end it was all-important.

 

[JapaneseKappa]

A very fine distinction here: God, through his command, caused Abraham to believe that God wanted him to obey his command to sacrifice his son Isaac. God did want Abraham to obey his command to sacrifice the thing most important to him, but also did not want Isaac to die. In the end God got both things he wanted: Abraham did everything in his power to obey God’s command, and Isaac did not die. The point is God’s commandment wasn’t necessarily deception, Abraham could have believed either that God wanted Isaac sacrificed or that God wanted his commandment obeyed. The distinction between them is fine, but in the end it was all-important.

The other interpretation is the Islamic one, where we must submit to God’s commands regardless of whether or not we understand them. Who are we to judge the goodness of God’s plans? If God commands us to do things that seem evil or wrong, we must do our best anyway, after all we don’t know if he is just testing us or not.

So your position is fine, but it has implications for how we have to interpret God’s commands. Under this interpretation, God’s commands are to be obeyed blindly. To try to reason about “what God wants” or “what God intends” is a fruitless endeavor, because we cannot know anything beyond “God wants us to obey.” God is allowed to have ulterior motives, or contradict his commands later. Perhaps the protestants are right, and God sends us each our own angel with a private revelation about which scriptural commands he wants us to obey.

Could you sincerely tell me that you actually interpret God’s commands this way? Is “do this in remembrance of me” a simple command and not a basis for any theological understanding?