Is lying ever good?

The Messiah allowed himself to be persuaded by the earnest faith of others:

The Syrophoenician Woman's Faith

Mark 7:24-30 (The Syrophoenician Woman's Faith)
24And from there he arose and went away to the region of Tyre and Sidon.[g] And he entered a house and did not want anyone to know, yet he could not be hidden. 25But immediately a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an unclean spirit heard of him and came and fell down at his feet. 26Now the woman was a Gentile, a Syrophoenician by birth. And she begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27And he said to her, "Let the children be fed first, for it is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." 28But she answered him, "Yes, Lord; yet even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." 29And he said to her, "For this statement you may go your way; the demon has left your daughter." 30And she went home and found the child lying in bed and the demon gone.​

The Syro-phoenician woman asks for her daughter to be healed. The Messiah at first refuses. But she shows great humility and faith, and the Messiah assented.

This is just like the Messiah is planning to walk on. Then the Apostles beg him to stay, and the Messiah assents.

 

1 Kings 8:39
Solomon's Prayer of Dedication to YHWH-God (Excerpt)
Then hear Thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive, and do, and give to every man according to his ways, whose heart Thou knowest; (for Thou, even Thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men​

HBSMN, you have been overwhelmingly apt with your scripture quotations to this point, but here you have made a grievous error. Just as you quoted Rev 21:27, I humbly quote 1 Kings 8:39: only YHWH-God truly knows the hearts of men.

You cannot say you look at what is on the heart without claiming you can do what YHWH-God alone can do.

What I believe you meant was, you try to look at the heart.

YHWH-God, and YHWH-God alone knows the truth of mens' hearts.

I earnestly pray that you, HBSMN, do not take offense.

 

Okay, it's plain to me that no one is going to address the lapse in foreknowledge of Jesus - He motions to go on, but (surprise, surprise!) they restrain Him. It wasn't His intent to go with them, break bread, open their eyes, etc. That was all the result of Him being smacked down and cuffed and prevented from doing what He really wanted to do.

Since we've settled that matter, how about this:

or if like Young's Literal:

Who restrained their eyes? Did God restrain their eyes? Did they restrain their own eyes? As I asked before, was it plainly Jesus but they refused to notice the resemblence, wounds, etc?

What things? Well, duh, where have YOU been, hiding under a rock? Which would you rather have - Jesus deliberately disguising Himself for some good purpose you may not understand, or Jesus playing a moron who has no idea what they're talking about?

Did they open their own eyes, or did God do it?

In other words, He disappeared. Neat trick for some random guy who didn't even know what they were talking about. If their eyes weren't opened prior to this, I think they might have gotten a little suspicious something wasn't what it seemed to be from the disappearing act.

So Jesus deliberately made sure they wouldn't recognize Him and pretended as if He didn't know what they were chatting about. How can anyone deny that? Why do that? Why pretend to keep going, knowing full well they would compel Him to go with them? Why wait until the last moment to reveal Himself? I honestly don't know. I've asked myself those questions many times (not that I expect an answer from myself).

If I had to GUESS, and this is purely a GUESS, maybe this was the most effective way to open the scriptures to them. I don't know. But what's the point of trying to explain it away in order to vindicate Jesus from doing something we feeble-minded men think would be inconsistent with His character? Who are we to judge God and manipulate the scriptures to fit our image of what He should or should not do?

 

And that is disingenious at best. You know the intent of the question.

Are you deaf?

What if a tender, young unstable young man who has the most atrocious voice you've ever heard asks, "Can I sing well?"

To be totally honest, the answer is, "I've never heard anyone who sounds worse."

What's you're answer?

Apply it to any sort of thing like this that you choose. Don't try to avoid answering the intent of the question by misdirecting.

 

Bismarck shoots and scores!

 

Totally agree: there was no lie.
I felt that some here were ignoring the Scripture provided and would be painted into a corner by thier beliefs when confronted with how our risen Lord acted in this circumstance.
(I was wrong, they danced around it very well).

Rob

 

Another possibility occurred to me as to at least one reason why Jesus would disguise Himself and then pretend He was going to continue on in the same direction. Perhaps His purpose was to elicit the very reaction He knew He would get, which was a blessing those who "convinced" Him to stay with them. Think of how great a blessing it would be to be hospitable to a stranger only to find out that your hospitality was to the Lord Himself.

Just a thought.

 

Bottom line for me is lying shows a lack of faith in God's Providential care.
"I must lie or else something terrible will happen."
As if God cannot protect you inspite of the evil that may fall on you for your truthfulness.

I have often wondered how the pastors in the persecuted countries instruct their congregation.
Do they promote circumstantial lying to save family members or self from torture, imprisonment or death?

 

Do you ever go to the doctor? How about taking an aspirin occasionally?

 

Maybe He could be an exchange student? Wait........ we are hosting a girl and she is Shiite Muslim. Maybe that will not be Him. :laugh:

 

I "doubt" based specifically upon the authority of the Scriptures. In spite of the way that HBSMN tries to twist Scriptures to make it say something it does not, it still has not been shown conclusively that lieing is always a sin. (Based upon a "lie" being any sort of untruth or subterfuge.)

It may be always a sin, and you should just tell that girl, "Young lady, no one's as ugly as you are."

But, since Scriptures don't state that explicitly (it only says not to bear false witness and that those who continue in the abomination and lie are in trouble), then I doubt that you'll be in trouble for it.

Just as you "think" that it says something that's not there in the text explicitly.

 

Considering the last time I interacted with you, you were contemplating my agenda on this board, I feel no obligation to walk thru various hypothetical circumstances that my family might be involved in.

Suffice to say, Christians do not need to fall for the either-or fallacy.
Either tell the truth or tell a lie.
We can always keep silent and pray.

 

I feel like, in light of HBSMN's poignant Scripture quotes, that I have missed the whole point. Rev 21:27 clearly shows that liars don't make the cut, they don't make the grade for God's Crew. And lo! Jehu's line died out. His great great grandson Zechariah was murdered by Shallum ben Jabesh (2 Ki 15:12). A few years later Israel was destroyed by Shalmanezzer V and Sargon II.

It's like, Jehu didn't make Varsity, but he tried hard so the coach let him play on JV for four weeks.

In the end, he was off the team.

Jehu was a sinner who worshipped the Golden Calves at Dan and Bethel (2 Ki 10:29). As a sinner, he was willing to lie (to the Ba'al priests). YHWH-God used the sin (lie) of a sinner (Jehu) to accomplish His Will (the eradication of Ba'alism), yet the sinful instrument was not necessarily saved.

 

Scripture clearly tells you not to lie (Rev 21:27), but I do not know of any Scripture that always forces you to answer every question put to you.

I mean, come on, we could split hairs all day! If he sang a particular song, you could say, "that's the best rendition of _____ I've ever heard".

Or, you could just not answer. You could change the subject. You could just smile and say, "I think you could work on that some".

Isn't this the basis of the 5th Amendment? America was founded as a Christian Nation. If asked a self-incriminating question, good early American Christians would feel compelled to tell the truth... hence the 5th Amendment. I'll wager (friendly bet) that no Scripture compells you to answer every question, otherwise the 5th Amendment would unGodly, and wouldn't have been ratified by the early Christian Americans.

Bottom line: don't lie, do something else, think fast, don't lie.

 

Somewhere along the way, it was pointed out that HBSMN believes that an unrepentant sinner who fails to repent even a single sin won't make it past the pearly gates.

Please consider this:

"Repent" is a Latin rooted word. The Germanic Anglo-Saxon equivalent is "rue". If you "rue your sins", you are "repentant" of your sins. They mean the same thing. Now, "rue" obviously means "regret", show "remorse", etc.

We could get into details, but "Rue" is related to the (mostly lost) word "Ruth" as "True" is to "Truth". And you know "ruth" from the word "ruthless". See how that works out? A "ruthless criminal" is one who doesn't rue his crimes, who doesn't have any regrets or remorse about his crimes, capiche?

So, an "unrepentant sinner" is, to use only Germanic Anglo-Saxon words, a "ruthless sinner". They mean the same thing, except that I'll wager "ruthless sinner" is easier for you to understand -- if you are a native Germanic Anglo-Saxon -- than "repent", a word you only memorize by rote without understand the word roots (re- "again" pent- "be penitant, feel pain").

So, armed with our pure-German synonym, let's re-ask the question:

How many ruthless sinners get to heaven?​

See how obvious the answer is?

St. Peter, opening up your dossier: "It says here you did mostly a good job, but you lied a few times. Are you sorry about that?"

You: "Nah, come on, it ain't no thing, I know you say it's wrong but I don't care, come on!"

Will that endear you to the Heavenly Father?

 

Bottom line is that sometimes we're forced to choose the lesser of two evils.

And as far as the scripture that was quoted on the original question, just remember:

"You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs."

Which, was ironically quoted from The Joker on Batman.

 

Choosing the lesser of two evils is still evil, but in our human wisdom, the lesser of two evils certainly beats the greater of two evils.

 

More either-or fallacies.

Why are there only two options?????
Tell the truth or tell a lie??

Why not say nothing??

Has it not occured to anyone advocating lying in certain circumstances, that those who would bring us harm need to see that we obey God's law even at a great cost.
That God is the source of Truth and is our source of all truthfulness.
Where do lies come from, is it not from the Enemy?
Is it not from lack of faith in God that we must lie to protect ourselves and others?
Why not tell the truth or stay silent and trust in God no matter what?