You put a lot into that. God didn't lie to Abraham. He was testing him. He told him to sacrifice Isaac. That wasn't a lie. God foreknew that he wasn't going to require Abraham to go through with it. What was the lie? There wasn't one. Now, on Abraham's part, he didn't know that God was testing him. So to him, what God told him was misleading. But there was no lie. Now, you can try and say that God is unjust for testing Abraham in this way, but that's your opinion. A Christian trusts God and knows that his purposes and reasonings are just.
Interesting map and you have given me a good topic for my next post on Blogger. You know (without me saying it) that I take issue with your hypotheses. First...God did not create evil in this world. A study of the fallen angel (satan) shows that evil was a product of the fallen one and the spiritual war that took place between satan and his army of angels versus God. Satan, wanting to vault himself to be God, brought evil to man which God allowed as a test for man to show man either truly loved God or not.
As the previous comment stated...the test that Abraham endured was a test of his faith which then set Abraham apart as a special worker in service to God. No lie...by definition.
As far as hell...it was created for Satan and his followers and anyone who chooses to reject God and follow the deciet of the evil one. Not sure how that proves a lie theory.
@WAR_ON_ERROR - Ahh Haaa! He did want Abraham to offer Isaac and that is what Abraham set out to do. God wanted Isaac offered and Abraham offered Isaac. The fact that God intervened before the actual killing of Isaac does not qualify as a lie
@WAR_ON_ERROR - To further expound on my first comment. God said to Abraham at a point in time, to sacrifice Isaac. At a later point in time, God stopped Abraham from sacrificing Isaac. There was no lie. Now, if God would have said to Abraham, "Tomorrow, Isaac will be dead because you are going to sacrifice him", that would have been a lie. What God did say to Abraham was just a statement for Abraham to do something. He didn't prophesy that it would happen because he foreknew it would not happen. Is God allowed to test us? Of course he is. Once again, this is the difference between looking at scripture from a non-believing worldview as compared to a believer's worldview.
@oeshpdog2 - You can find your argument at "Rebuttal 3F."
@LSP1 - You can find your old version at "Rebuttal 3E" and your new version at "Rebuttal 3G." You definitely have the most spot on, least sloppy rebuttal of them all with that last one, Larry. I'm impressed, though I still have to disagree.
Here's the link to version 5. Let me know if I need to make any changes.
@LSP1 - I can either add a 3H or just leave it out, because my response would be that A: Whether God can test people is neither here nor there. There are many tests in life that do not involve lying. Or B: I'm not making an argument from evil here. I'm using the Abraham story as an observation that justifies what I am calling the "White Lie Hypothesis of Divine Providence."
So it isn't "God lies, therefore Christianity is false." Or "God lied to Abraham therefore he's a jerk." Or even, "The Bible contradicts itself." I understand my idea will not appeal to the conservative crowd, but perhaps some of the more moderate or liberal theologians might appreciate a less twisted excuse to reconcile what they believe is the proper balance of science, natural morality, and theology. And if even that is