Monsignor will never have to lie when asked "Do I look fat?"
Posted on 06/04/2016 9:41:54 AM PDT by Salvation
“Telling the truth can be as evil as telling a lie.”
Logically impossible. The truth can never be evil. Our Lord is the way and the TRUTH and the life.
In that case, it’s called revealing a secret, yes?
Jesus told the truth and was killed for it. Does that mean we have to flee from the truth?
I don’’t see what you mean about revealing a secret?
I was more speaking of when a person states something that is true, like some of our nations stats on crime and yet people want to be offended by the facts.
Or when a sincere family member or friend tells you it may be good to get help for an addiction or such and the person is offended or just doesn’t agree there is a problem.
I really don’t understand your question of fleeing from truth, I more so am growing into facing everything rather than running, want to be more willing to die for speaking truth or standing up for someone who has.
the bible says if you want to preserve your life you will lose it, and the one willing to lose his life will preserve it.
He that walketh deceitfully, revealeth secrets: but he that is faithful, concealeth the thing committed to him by his friend.That is one instance where speaking a truth is construed as evil.
Whether dishonesty is a vice depends on the context. It is a principle of rationality that it is not a vice to lie to nazis, criminals, and tyrannical governments in order to protect and preserve one’s natural rights.
And if the person being lied to is intent on doing evil things based on your answers to their questions,....?
Monsignor will never have to lie when asked "Do I look fat?"
Moses to Pharoah: Let us go out into the wilderness for three days to worship our God. Just three days and we’ll be right back.
How is that a lie? It’s impossible for God to lie; the words came from God and not Moses. Also, the Bible said nothing about returning; the word translated “go” in Exodus 3:18 specifically means to depart.
Not only that, Pharaoh kept changing his mind after at first acceding to the Israelites’ departure.
“Moses to Pharoah: Let us go out into the wilderness for three days to worship our God. Just three days and we’ll be right back.”
And?
God told Moses: (Exodus 3:18) “...and you shall say to him [Pharaoh], ‘The Lord God of the Hebrews has met with us; and now, please, let us go three days’ journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God.”
God didn’t lie. Neither did Moses.
God knew that Pharaoh would say “no” to this request, and since we know the outcome of the story we can think that God intended for Israel to stay put all along and never intended them to journey into the wilderness. But the simple fact of the matter is we cannot assume that. We can assume that God did intend for the Israelites to go into the wilderness to worship him and there’s nothing in the text that contradicts that.
Exodus 3:17,19 ESV “...I promise that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, ... a land flowing with milk and honey. ... But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go”
Moses said what he was told to say by God. Moses did not lie. God can’t lie. Titus 1:2 (RSVCE) “in hope of eternal life which God, who never lies, promised ages ago”
The Navarre Bible Pentateuch Note on Exod 3:16-22 has in part:
The three days’ journey (v. 18) would not take them to Sinai but was enough to get them away from Egypt. Later, three days will become a number symbolizing divine action. See note on 6:10-13.
The note on Exod 6:10-13 has in part:
According to this “Priestly tradition” account Moses has to win the total freedom of the people, not just get permission for a three-day pilgrimage (cf. 3:18; 5:1).
Therefore understanding that in Jewish tradition the number three (3) signifies completeness and stability1, this appears to have been the meaning of the words, i.e. 3 days meant getting the Israelites definitively away from Egypt so that they may always worship God in total freedom.
And just so no one thinks I’m lying, I freely admit I stole all of that from here: http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/34730/why-is-it-not-a-sin-when-god-asked-moses-to-lie-to-pharaoh
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1325-did-god-ask-moses-to-be-deceitful
http://www.ukapologetics.net/13/threedayjourney.htm
http://www.opc.org/qa.html?question_id=219
Second Kings (or Fourth Kings) Sixth Chapter.
It is not a lie to withhold the truth from someone who has no right to it, like the nazis.
Rahab told a lie.
Thanks for posting this. A most interesting topic and discussion.
Well technically, she didn’t know if they stayed up in their hiding place on the roof of her house. :)
I have to disagree with Msgr.
The Gestapo have no rational basis to expect to be told the truth, and no right to it.
Telling a lie to a gang of murderers is not even a venial sin. And not merely because of “duress,” etc. Telling them the truth would be a mortal sin.
It’s an easy answer fo me: In that situation, I’d rather repent for lying than repent for telling the truth, aka, turning a family over to be murdered.
A soldier in a just war, and acting with the known rules of war, can lie, maim, destroy property and kill enemy combatants. His mental disposition can vary (”I enjoy killing” is not as good as “I want to liberate the invaded country”), but the mental disposition is secondary. The primary criterion is the justification for the war.
So there goes lying to Gestapo about innocent people they might be after. It is an act in the context of a war that seems to be just since the Nazis were the invaders and killed non-combatants as a matter of policy. Likewise the countless examples of lying to assassinate Hitler, and the like.
The article is about lying because lying is something that frequently occurs in peace time. I think Monsignor is right for peacetime conditions. If he wanted to write another article about moral behavior of people at war, he would not have separated lying from acts of violence that accompany lying in a war.
In this case, telling the truth to the Gestapo agents would aid them in doing more evil. One cannot tell the Gestapo the truth about where a hunted person is, and then say, “I have done no wrong, if the Gestapo does something evil with the truth I told them, it is their choice and it is none of my concern.”
The whole emphasis of this thought experiment is wrong and self-centered. The big moral question is not how can I best help an innocent person who is being persecuted but is twisted to be all about how I can maintain a theoretical purity in the world. I think the Jesuits are right - you don’t owe the Gestapo agents the truth because they don’t deserve it and will only misuse it. And did not Jesus warn against casting pearls before swine?
We know killing is a bad thing but in some circumstances it is justified. I have heard people say it would be wrong to tell the Gestapo agents a lie to protect someone but it would not be a sin to kill them to protect an innocent person. I would say, if it isn’t a sin to kill them then it can’t be a sin to lie to them.
If in order to be a good Christian one has to tell the truth to the Gestapo, even if it harms innocent people, if the whole point of Christianity is to tell the truth to any evil doer, wash one’s hands of the consequences and bask in your “purity” - as if you are a pure spirit floating off to heaven and you are too lofty to be bothered with the dirty facts of the injustice all around you - then I would not want to be a good Christian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.