Which would you choose?

[Hitch]

A confirmation is needed, a visual confirmation. And let's say the abused is not 100% trusted. But this mas has seen all, perhaps he has the video.

There are three things to consider: Christ, truth and lie. It is either Christ and truth (for a christian)or 'lie' alone. We could have different opinions.

You're tripping on your own shoe laces.


But I invite you to explain why a witness is required to allow someone to be murdered.

You are a 'CHRISTIAN' and you are the witness. Would you say YES (guilty) and allow this man to be murdered... and bring sorrow to the family OR would you say NO (not guilty) and let him walk away and bring happiness to the family?

I gather your thinking is so convoluted you cant see the problem here .

 

[for_his_glory]

In the end does any one of us get away with lies, fraud, murder, etc. etc. whether we be in Christ or not! Jesus was found guilty, had a trial and condemned to death, his crime was coming against the teachings in the Temple as it was the Priest and scribes that witnessed his teachings and condemned him to death. Even though it was Gods grand design for Jesus to be that final sacrifice for all did he really deserve death!

A lie is a lie like sin is sin as when you are a witness to something you had better have all your facts in order before you speak. I'm 57 years young and I know if I do something wrong then I will pay the consequences for what I did. If I was a witness to a murder or any crime worthy of jail time then as I stand accusing this person who is the breadwinner for their family I as a child of God should also be willing to help out their family.

 

[Classik]

The bad guys crime convected him. Not the words of a witness. The lies will trap you just as the bad guys sins trapped him.

So you would say YES and surrender the video?

 

[Classik]

Are you suggesting Jesus/God would lie? Or bare false witness?

NO: a person who chooses Christ would always say the truth. It is either 'I fear Christ - and I say the truth' or 'I lie'.

 

[Classik]

If I was a witness to a murder or any crime worthy of jail time then as I stand accusing this person who is the breadwinner for their family I as a child of God should also be willing to help out their family.

It is not 'Jail time' in this case - the person must be killed.

As christians, we ought to always reflect the image of Christ. Let our yes be yes.

But do you think the family will take it kindly with you?

 

[jasoncran]

It is not 'Jail time' in this case - the person must be killed.

As christians, we ought to always reflect the image of Christ. Let our yes be yes.

But do you think the family will take it kindly with you?

its not our place to say(this case is immoral to god) to decide the punishment is wrong.

let me say that this what if that persons detainment could save a life?

 

[Classik]

In the end does any one of us get away with lies, fraud, murder, etc. etc. whether we be in Christ or not! Jesus was found guilty, had a trial and condemned to death, his crime was coming against the teachings in the Temple as it was the Priest and scribes that witnessed his teachings and condemned him to death.

I like your spirit here. This is typical of a christian or a true christian (if there is anything like that). And what if the offender is my own son or daughter or wife or husband? Whatever: say the truth and give the devil a heartattack.

I know the 'world' (unbelievers) would never forgive me. They would call me a villain for witnessing against my own son or daughter etc. They won't call it righteousness - they call it madness.


Christ rewards such madness.

 

[Classik]

In the end does any one of us get away with lies, fraud, murder, etc. etc. whether we be in Christ or not! Jesus was found guilty, had a trial and condemned to death, his crime was coming against the teachings in the Temple as it was the Priest and scribes that witnessed his teachings and condemned him to death.

I had a neighbor who was (and probably is) a deacon in the church. Some armed robbers attacked him and took many thing from him. They finally asked him, 'Do you have more money in this house?'

He was lucky enough to have hidden some money under his bed before the robbers entered.

He said: 'I don't have. Believe me, you have taken all'.

In such a situation you don't keep silent. They will suspect you and kill you.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

My friend left me a message on her Status Update. It says: which would you choose, 'A lie that brings so much happiness and freedom' or 'A truth that brings so much tears and sorrow'?

---
I laughed and kept silent. I didn't reply.
What would you answer?

I've been a Christian long enough to know that it is only by the grace of God that I would answer the way I would want to answer as a Christian in any given situation.

Reminds me of Peter who lied to preserve his own skin when he was so sure he would die with Christ if necessary. Christ had just told the twelve at the Last Supper that they would all sit on thrones judging the nation of Israel at the renewal of all things, but then fails miserably when accused of being one of Jesus' disciples.

And for you MASH fans, remember when a visiting General accused Major Hoolihan of impropriety because she had turned down his sexual advances and threatened to report him? The General asked Winchester to lie for him and promised he'd be reassigned to Tokyo if he did so. But in a memorable moment of TV history he told the truth saying he could not destroy a colleague's career for the sake of getting reassigned to Tokyo. A rare moment of greatness in television history.

 

[jasoncran]

I've been a Christian long enough to know that it is only by the grace of God that I would answer the way I would want to answer as a Christian in any given situation.

Reminds me of Peter who lied to preserve his own skin when he was so sure he would die with Christ if necessary. Christ had just told the twelve at the Last Supper that they would all sit on thrones judging the nation of Israel at the renewal of all things, but then fails miserably when accused of being one of Jesus' disciples.

And for you MASH fans, remember when a visiting General accused Major Hoolihan of impropriety because she had turned down his sexual advances and threatened to report him? The General asked Winchester to lie for him and promised he'd be reassigned to Tokyo if he did so. But in a memorable moment of TV history he told the truth saying he could not destroy a colleague's career for the sake of getting reassigned to Tokyo. A rare moment of greatness in television history.

oh the mash quotes we did in country.

 

[Classik]

Reminds me of Peter who lied to preserve his own skin when he was so sure he would die with Christ if necessary. Christ had just told the twelve at the Last Supper that they would all sit on thrones judging the nation of Israel at the renewal of all things, but then fails miserably when accused of being one of Jesus' disciples.

At times I feel like justifying Peter's act (and I wouldn't). It was hard a hard decision for him to defend and support his Master. Imagine what it is like for a servant to lose his Master. The Master couldn't (wouldn't)save Himself (although He had the power to do that), the servant couldn't save his Master. The servant was powerless and was scared to death. Do I blame him? The Master was captured.
I wouldn't justify what Peter did. But he was very repentant and regretful afterwards...I hear his sob. I hear him say, NEVER NEVER NEVER again would I deny my Maste.

Good point, Jethro.

 

[Nathan Alterton]

Are you suggesting Jesus/God would lie? Or bare false witness?

NO: a person who chooses Christ would always say the truth. It is either 'I fear Christ - and I say the truth' or 'I lie'.

I'm not necessarly saying that Jesus/God would ever lie, however, I am saying that there may be situations where God would not condemn a lie, and He might even honor the person who tells it. Provocative? Yes. Please let me explain...

The issue of lying can be far more complicated than we often want to make it.

First of all, the Bible upholds truth telling and specifically condemns "bearing false witness," which, as any Hebrew scholar will tell you, specifically references truthfulness in court, not necessarily lies in general. Is that to say that we should not be concerned with the truth? Of course not! In my opinion, the truth should be held in the highest regard.

However, there are occasionally extremes when it may be the ethical and moral responsibility of a person, even a follower of Jesus, to lie (Please note the words "occasionally" and "extremes"). As Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote in his great, interesting, and controversial book, Ethics, the attitude that one must ALWAYS tell the truth regardless of the circumstances, regardless of the consequences, is a legalistic response of a conscience only partially bound by principles:

Ethics, by Dietrich Bonhoeffer:

Treating truthfulness as a principle leads [Immanuel] Kant to the grotesque conclusion that if asked by a murderer whether my friend, whom he was pursuing, had sought refuge in my house, I would have to answer honestly in the affirmative. Here the self-righteousness of conscience has escalated into blasphemous recklessness and become an impediment to responsible action. Since responsibility is the entire response, in accord with reality, to the claim of God and my neighbor, then this scenario glaringly illuminates the merely partial response of a conscience bound by principles. I come into conflict with my responsibility that is grounded in reality when I refuse to become guilty of violating the principle of truthfulness for the sake of my friend -- and any attempt to deny that we are indeed dealing with lying here is once again the work of a legalistic and self-righteous conscience -- refusing, in other words, to take on and bear guilt out of love for my neighbor. Here, as well, a conscience bound to Christ alone will most clearly exhibit its innocence precisely in responsibly accepting culpability."

In other words, there are rare times when our various ethical and moral standards will come into conflict with each other. In the situation from Kant, and referred to by Bonhoeffer, do I uphold the value of truthfulness or do I recognize a greater moral and ethical responsibility to the values of loving my neighbor and defending life?

There does appear to be a case of this in the Bible:

Exodus 1:15-21, ESV:

Then the king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, one of whom was named Shiphrah and the other Puah, “When you serve as midwife to the Hebrew women and see them on the birthstool, if it is a son, you shall kill him, but if it is a daughter, she shall live.” But the midwives <SUP class=xref value='(O)'></SUP>feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live. So the king of Egypt called the midwives and said to them, “Why have you done this, and let the male children live?” The midwives said to Pharaoh, “Because the Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women, for they are vigorous and give birth before the midwife comes to them.” So God dealt well with the midwives. And the people multiplied and grew very strong. And because the midwives feared God, <SUP class=xref value='(Q)'></SUP>he gave them families.

This appears to be a clear case of the Hebrew mid-wives disobeying authority and directly lying to that same authority because they believed that they had a greater responsibility to God to uphold life. Now, you could argue that they should have taken the same action but then told the truth to Pharaoh and accepted the responsibility; maybe that would have been a better choice. But the fact remains that God honored their decision to value life over truthfulness, and explicitly named them in the Biblical text, honored them, and then blessed them with their own families, because of their actions.

Anyway, think about it some more. I don't think the subject is entirely as black and white as it may first appear.