Is God a Deceiver?

It's a strange argument but I hear it often – if the world is only 6,000 years old then God created false clues in order to make the world look much older. In other words, to believe in a literal creation is to believe God is a deceiver! Imagine this hypothetical conversation:

GOD: “Adam, do you see all these trees? I just made them two days ago.”

ADAM: “But, Lord, trees like this take years to grow. So when you said, 'two days' I know you meant many years because you are not a deceiver.”

Isn't that bizarre? Yet people use this argument every day. One example I hear is concerning radiometric isotopes. Scientists measure the amount of radioactive decay that has occurred in a rock sample and then extrapolate it backward to estimate how old the sample is. Such a method is riddled with assumptions but when their estimated age conflicts with our understanding of Scripture, it's the Scripture that they suspect is wrong. Then these people have the nerve to say that the radiometric dating must be true because God would not have planted false evidence to make the rock look older. Well, wouldn't that make His revealed word “false evidence”? If God created the universe over billions of years, then told us He made it in six days, then really He would be a deceiver!

Imagine if someone found a note from his mother that said, “I went to the store. I'll be back in an hour.” Being a curious person, he wanted to know WHEN she wrote the note. He rubs the ink to see if it smudges. He sees a cup of water on the counter and notices that it's room temperature. He asks himself what she might have meant by “hour.” He finally concludes that she actually wrote the note yesterday and so has already been to the store and back. Suddenly, his mother comes in and surprises him.

He asks, “Where have you been?”

She answers, “To the store. Didn't you see my note?”

He replies, “Yes but it looked to me as if you had written that yesterday. Why were you trying to deceive me?”

A belief in an old earth is as strange as the imaginary story above. Why would someone completely ignore the plain words of Someone he claims to trust, seek an answer that completely contradicts the truth, and then act as though the Author who told him the truth plainly is somehow trying to deceive us?

If someone claims to believe the Bible, he should use his understanding of Scripture as the starting point when considering the evidence. Imagine this final scenario:

A man returns home and finds a note from his mother that says, “It's one o'clock and I had to step out. I'll be back in 15 minutes. I baked a pie but be careful because it's still hot!” It's only 10 minutes after one now and he touches the pie and notices it's not hot; in fact it's cooled off. What does this mean? There are at least 3 possible explanations:

> His mother said the pie was hot but didn't really mean it.

> His mother said it was one o'clock but didn't really mean it.

> His mother told the truth and something has made the pie cool off quickly.

Now, some people might start with the assumption that their mothers are lying but I trust my mother more than that. Likewise, I will trust the word of God. When I look at the world, I will start with the conclusion that things are as God said they are and I will use that to help me understand what I find. In the case of distant starlight, for example, I would ask, “How did the light from stars millions of light years away reach the earth in only 6,000 years?” I would not ask, “Why does the Bible suggest the world is only 6,000 years old when we know light from stars took millions of years to reach us.”

Indeed, God is not a liar. When faced with a dilemma where we must choose between the conclusions of men and the plain reading of God's word, we should trust God every time.