Ethics Question

[Don]

Yeah, that is what we are doing. I'm just walking around all day looking to lie to dangerous, murdering enemies of God in order to take the gospel to the unreached so that I can put my life and freedom in danger. We just enjoy putting out lives and freedom in jeopardy by lying as much as possible to as many people as possible, so if only we could find some justification for our lies then it would be okay to go around risking our lives and lie as much as possible!

My response, that you're so casually deriding, was to a post about those that disagree with the position that lying in certain situations is acceptable are legalists.

Of course, if that's how you also believe, then your derision is understood -- as should be my response, which shows the opposite ludicrousness of the point.

 

[John of Japan]

But, you are making that statement in hopes that he will hold the gun to your head because you know you have a better chance to disarm him when he does. So, you have tricked him by telling you hate something that you really desire for him do.

Are you kidding me? Do you actually think I would be lying if I said, "Please don't hold a gun to my head. I hate it when that is done"???? And he deceived himself by misinterpreting my actions. That is precisely the point of misdirection: creating a situation wherein the opponent deceives himself.

The simplest kind of misdirection is a shoulder feint in boxing. The boxer simply moves his shoulder in such a way that the opponent thinks a certain punch is coming, and reacts. The first boxer then gains information about his opponent's style. But surely no one in the world would call a boxing feint a lie!

Now, suppose the roles are reversed. Suppose a criminal breaks into a home of an innocent man who is not trained in martial arts, but the home owner gets his gun and stops the man before he gets away. Now, suppose the criminal says, "Please, I hate it when someone puts a gun to my head." or "Hey, what's that over there?!" And it causes the homeowner to be 'misdirected,' so that the criminal can disarm the man and continue his escape.

No one would claim that what the criminal did was not sinful. His crime was sinful, his 'misdirection' to disarm the homeowner was sinful and his escape was sinful. What made it sinful? His intent. That is the point here. You can call it 'misdirection' but still if it is done for a wrong or evil motive it is SIN.

Well of course the criminal's misdirection would be sin!! Why in the world would I think otherwise?? "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin."

 

[John of Japan]

That is my point too. The truth was not the most important, but honoring God was. She had a higher calling than her words, her God. If she were to have told the men what they wanted wouldn't she have enabled Satan to destroy. She had faith that God would protect her when she lied to the men and honored God. She was looking at God not man.

For example if the people who were hiding Jews in their home were to give the enemy what they wanted the people would have been an instrument of destruction. When the officers came to their home and asked if they were hiding Jews what should their answer have been? The truth would have said "Yes." To honor God would have said, "No." Isn't that much like what Rahab did? We must be instruments of righteousness not of destruction and enable the enemy. Obviously the officers were misled to a lie. Do we enable them to continue to act on their lies or do we resist them?

If God is the single person I must honor then anything less is not honoring God. God gives life and Satan seeks to take that away and destroy.

I do not know the answer but I would wonder how many officers became believers by what they saw in those who hid the Jews?

Okay, I'll go this far to agree with you. It was more honoring for Christians to lie as a means to protect and hide the Jews, then it would be for someone to tell the truth and thereby send an innocent person to their death. We have a Christian responsibility to protect innocent people (Prov. 24:11-12).

 

[Don]

No. The lesson is that if you believe in God, even at the risk of your own life and freedom, he will reward you. She deceived the enemies of God in order to serve God. I say she is a hero and so does the scriptures.

Look, I understand what you're trying to say. I think we should be like David, and be men (and women) after God's own heart. But that doesn't mean I should be exactly like David: I shouldn't commit adultery, I shouldn't murder a woman's husband so I can have her for my own, etc. Or should I?

Hebrews 11 also commends Abraham for his faith. Does that mean we should tell others our wives are our sisters, so that we won't be murdered?

Hebrews 11 also commends Moses' faith; but does that mean we should be able to murder a man and hide his body in the sand?

Were each of these rewarded for their acts? Or were they rewarded for their faith?

All I'm saying is that the argument presented that lying can be acceptable is based on the premise that faith "excuses" certain acts--in the case of this thread, lying. If that's true, then what acts are excused, as long as we have faith? Shouldn't pedophilia be excused? Abortion? As long as the individual performing the act has faith--as long as we can show that performing such acts somehow honor God--shouldn't they be excused?

 

[freeatlast]

Ask yourself is there a difference between the spirit of the Law and the letter of the Law? Jesus addressed that in the Sermon On The Mount.

Do you think that a deceived man would thank you for allowing him to continue in his deception when he becomes a believer? That is a serious problem we have in the church today.

Is Proverbs 22:6 a principle or a promise?

If someone came to your door and asked if you were hiding Jews and if you told them you were you knew it meant their death would you lie to them and honor God or tell them the truth and dishonor God? Which is the higher calling of God?

I doubt anyone would ever come to me after they were saved and be ungrateful that I saved them from the horror of killing Christians because I lied to them and honored God by not telling them where they were because they were deceived.

The legalist would fulfill the letter of the law and forget the spirit of the law. The strange thing is that from what I have seen in business is that we often find the legalist to be the most dishonest.

I think in your scenario you forget one possibility and that is you could remain silent and not tell them anything and honor God by paying the consequences of your silence yourself instead of lying and dishonoring God with the lie. No lie of honoring God. Let me ask you this in regards to this same scenario. You hide them and you know the possibilities that someone will come by and ask if you know anything. Why not just shoot or stab the person who comes and asks and hide their body? If doing the good justifies or nullifies the sin then the type of sin should not matter.

 

[gb93433]

Okay, I'll go this far to agree with you. It was more honoring for Christians to lie as a means to protect and hide the Jews, then it would be for someone to tell the truth and thereby send an innocent person to their death. We have a Christian responsibility to protect innocent people (Prov. 24:11-12).

You said it better than I thought of. Recently I read a book where the author talks about how far our words can heal and how far they can hurt. In the book he wrote about the idea of truth not being the highest aim. I had to think about that a lot and it made me think for several days about the far reaching impact our words can heal. So then I thought about what our highest aim should be. I came up with one thing--honor God first.

As I thought about things more I began to think about the idea of Satan as a deceiver and should I play into his hands by telling him what he wants to know when he wants to know it?

So far I have come to the conclusion that my words and actions must honor God first. I must think about what he would want most. It is the idea that God places certain things above others.

 

[Skandelon]

Are you kidding me? Do you actually think I would be lying if I said, "Please don't hold a gun to my head. I hate it when that is done"????

Did I say that? No. I explained that 'misdirection' if done for an evil motive is equally as sinful as a lie in the same situation would be. Its about the motive. Plus, who decides what is a lie and what is purely misdirection. I think a good analogy was used earlier in the thread where someone spent money given for a oil change on going to the bar. That person never lied, but his use of misdirection was tantamount to a lie because of the evil motive behind it.

Well of course the criminal's misdirection would be sin!! Why in the world would I think otherwise?? "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin."

Exactly. The exact same act done for an evil intent is sin, thus why couldn't that act be done with a pure motive (protecting innocent life, as you admit in the follow post) and not be sin?