The Whole Truth?

The Whole Truth?

by | Sep 15, 2019 | Knowledge & Wisdom

We are familiar with the legal requirement that a person must promise in court to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” and certainly the Scriptures clearly and repeatedly teach that lying –  saying something that is untrue –   is wrong (Psalm 31:18, 63:11, 101:7, 119:29, Proverbs 6:17, 12:22, 19:5, 9, Zechariah. 8:16, Ephesians 4:25, 1 John 2:21, Revelation 21:27, 22:15 to mention only a few examples!). But, apart from legal contexts where we promise to tell the whole truth, does the Bible teach that we must always tell all the truth – that it is lying if we do not speak everything we know about a situation?

In past articles we have shown the Scriptures make it clear that it is not wrong to word statements and answers in such a way that an impression will be created that protects innocent individuals who might be harmed if we were to tell the whole truth in a given situation.

This is the kind of situation posed by the classic moral question of “Should a person give a full and true answer if asked if they know the whereabouts of innocent individuals being hunted by those who would clearly harm them” (as in World War II Nazi hunts for Jews in hiding)?  Most Christians can see the need for withholding known facts in situations like this, and there are biblical precedents for such behavior.

The story of the midwives protecting the newborn male Israelites in Egypt (Exodus 1:15-21) and the woman Rehab protecting the Israelite spies (Joshua 2:4-6, 6:17, 25) are two such cases.  But the clearest example of this is where God himself is said to have instructed the prophet Samuel to tell King Saul that he was going to Bethlehem to offer sacrifices and to omit the detail that he would anoint the young David as king while he was there (1 Samuel 16:1-5).  Had Samuel told all the truth to Saul in this situation, Samuel’s life may well have been endangered, and at the very least he would probably have been blocked from doing what God had instructed him to do. A similar situation is found in Jeremiah 38:24-27 where the prophet Jeremiah, although asked, does not repeat all the details of a conversation that could endanger him. 

But while it is relatively easy to see the morality of withholding information in such cases, what about situations where lives are not endangered, but telling everything we know may cause unhappiness if not actual harm?  We must be particularly careful in situations such as these, but once again there may be biblical precedent to guide us.

Genesis 18 tells the story of how the patriarch Abraham was visited by three “men” – one of whom was clearly God himself in human form (Genesis 18:13-33).  In this well-known story, the Lord announces to Abraham that despite his advanced age (Abraham was some 90 years old at this time), God would give him a son and heir.  Hearing this, Abraham’s wife, Sarah, who was nearby “… laughed to herself, saying, ‘After I am worn out, and my lord is old, shall I have pleasure?’” (Genesis 18:12 ESV).  

We are then told that the Lord asked Abraham “…Why did Sarah laugh and say, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, now that I am old?’” (vs. 13).  Interestingly, the Lord did not repeat Sarah’s exact words or her complete statement, only what was necessary for his purposes.  He did not repeat Sarah’s specific comments on her own condition or Abraham’s, which would have been embarrassing and perhaps hurtful if repeated.

This would seem to be a clear example that it is sometimes not wrong to withhold the whole truth from someone – without saying anything untrue – when all of the truth might be hurtful or distressing.  In exactly this way, as parents we might not give our young children all the facts of a medical report or what a doctor tells us regarding a child’s illness. 

It is true that in withholding part of the truth we may sometimes be creating a situation in which people may get the wrong idea regarding given circumstances.  So in these cases we must always be sure that we are withholding facts for the sake of others – not to protect ourselves or for our own advantage in some way.

We see this careful withholding of information in the Gospel accounts of the life of Jesus.  John’s Gospel tells us that prior to a religious festival in Jerusalem Jesus told his family members: “You go to the festival. I am not going up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come” (John 7:8).  However, a few verses later we read that “… after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret” (John 7:10).  The secrecy involved in Jesus’ actions indicate that he may well have gone separately in order to protect his family members from the danger he knew he might bring on them, but John makes it clear that in order to protect them in this way it was necessary for Jesus not to tell them all the truth regarding his plans at that point.
​
We do not have the perfect character and wisdom of the Son of God, of course, so scriptures such as these are not invitations to “juggle with the truth” using our own human understanding as we go through life.  But what the biblical examples do show us is that sometimes it is not wrong to withhold specific information that might endanger, hurt, or embarrass others. The Bible shows that, of itself, is not lying.  

Which is Biblical –  Peacemaking or Pacifism?

Which is Biblical –  Peacemaking or Pacifism?

by | Sep 1, 2019 | The Church & the World

Does the Bible teach peacemaking (the avoidance of conflict when it is possible) or pacifism (the complete avoidance of conflict under any circumstances)?  It’s especially confusing for many people because some claim that the Bible teaches the first of these ideas while others claim it teaches the second.
 
Nevertheless, both the Old and New Testament give a consistent picture when it comes to this question, so rather than try to look at all the possible scriptures on the subject we can focus on one or two clear examples.  

In the Old Testament
​
One of the clearest examples of the Bible’s approach to this question can be found in the story of the patriarch Abram/Abraham – the “father of the faithful” as he is called (Romans 4:11) – and his nephew Lot. In Genesis 13 we read:

“… quarreling arose between Abram’s herders and Lot’s….  So Abram said to Lot, “Let’s not have any quarreling between you and me, or between your herders and mine, for we are close relatives. Is not the whole land before you? Let’s part company. If you go to the left, I’ll go to the right; if you go to the right, I’ll go to the left.” (Genesis 13:7-9).

We need to notice that this was not a simple parting of the ways of the two men.  The “quarreling” that erupted between Abram’s servants and Lot’s was apparently intense (the Hebrew is translated “strife” and “adversary” in other passages).  Although Abraham was the senior family member, he calmed things down even to the extent of allowing Lot to choose the best area and taking what appeared to be “second best” himself.  This is a classic example of peacemaking at its best – where someone in a position to act otherwise nevertheless shows humility and great flexibility in order to avoid strife.

But only a chapter later in Genesis we read that Lot and all his family and servants were subsequently taken captive by raiding kings of four nearby cities, and Abram’s response was quite different:

“The four kings …carried off Abram’s nephew Lot and his possessions … When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the 318 trained men born in his household and went in pursuit as far as Dan. During the night Abram divided his men to attack them and he routed them, pursuing them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus. He recovered all the goods and brought back his relative Lot and his possessions, together with the women and the other people” (Genesis 14:11-16).

So, despite Abram’s obvious desire to avoid conflict when this was possible, in circumstances where peacemaking simply would not have worked and people’s lives were at stake, Abram was willing and ready to use force.  The fact that Abram had trained men ready to fight* but only used them in such circumstances shows Abram was a man of peace, not pacifism.

In the New Testament
 
When we turn to the New Testament, we find this same attitude of avoiding conflict whenever possible – yet with the understanding that this is not always an option.  We find Jesus teaching: “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9), but also showing that while there are circumstances where the “sword” is not appropriate, there are perhaps others where it is (Luke 22:36).  But it is in the writings of the apostle Paul that the New Testament teaching on peace is most clearly laid out.

First, we should note Paul stresses that God is a God of peace (2 Thessalonians 3:16) and as a result he tells us “Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace” (Romans 14:19).  But in the same letter to the Romans Paul also writes: “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18).   Here Paul clearly indicates that there are circumstances where it is not always possible to live at peace – as when we or others are attacked and need to defend ourselves. In such circumstances, as Paul’s words must mean, the responsibility of peace depends not on us, but on others.  If others will not walk peacefully, then the use of defensive force may become unavoidable.
​
Pacifism claims that there are no circumstances where it is morally acceptable to resort to force, but the Bible nowhere clearly teaches this view and gives many examples of the defense of self and others. Certainly we should avoid strife as much as possible in every circumstance. The author of the book of Hebrews makes this clear in saying that we should “Make every effort to live in peace with everyone” (Hebrews 12:14).  But making every effort to avoid strife – loving peace and seeking peace wherever possible – is peacemaking, not pacifism. 

* For more information on the story of Abram’s rescue mission, see our blog post “Allies, Preparation and Persistance“. 

When It’s Hard to Pray

When It’s Hard to Pray

by | Aug 11, 2019 | Prayer

Even great writers occasionally experience “writer’s block” – the seeming inability to write a few meaningful sentences – despite the fact that they may regularly write thousands of words in a day.  In a similar way, even the most faithful of prayer warriors can experience times when praying seems to be difficult.  There may be different reasons for this –  prayer may become difficult because of feelings of guilt, exhaustion, discouragement, defeat, sadness, anger, or other reasons.  But whatever the cause, if we are finding it hard to pray, there are several simple strategies we can employ to help us get back to God –  back to wanting to pray.  Next time you feel it is difficult to talk to God, consider trying one or all of these techniques:

Get Some Rest

One of the most frequent causes of difficulty in prayer is simple tiredness. Whether it is because we are trying to pray at the end of the day when we are already tired or because of exhaustion resulting from illness or other factors, tiredness greatly impairs our ability to think clearly and to pray effectively. The answer in these situations is often simply to get some rest and try again.  As Psalm 127 tells us: “In vain you rise early and stay up late, toiling for food to eat— for he grants sleep to those he loves” (Psalm 127:2). The God who planned for sleep in our lives knows that sometimes we need rest before we can proceed. Difficulty in prayer at night can often disappear by morning.

Give Yourself a Spiritual Check Up

If difficulty in prayer continues, we may need to take the time to examine our lives and determine that we are not compromising our beliefs in some area. When we settle into a habit of making allowances for thoughts, words, or deeds that we know are not good, we set up dissonance in our minds and our prayer is usually the first thing to be affected.  The book of Genesis shows that the first sin led immediately to a reluctance to talk with God (Genesis 3:8) and, as is often said, prayer can stop us sinning, but sin can stop us praying. In these situations, as we determine to change we find it easier to pray again – and to get the help that true change requires. 

Pray for Others

Sometimes it is our own feelings or problems that, for whatever reason, are pulling back on our ability to pray.  In situations like these it is often helpful to simply try to concentrate on the problems and needs of others (so often so much worse than our own!).  There is something about doing this that makes our own efforts to pray more effective. The book of Job tells us that “After Job had prayed for his friends, the Lord restored his fortunes …” (Job 42:10) and this story perfectly illustrates the way active concern for others pulls us closer to God despite our own situation.

Use a Prayer from the Bible

On occasion, our difficulty with prayer can be that we simply do not know what to say.  Perhaps we feel ashamed for something we have done, or possibly we admit we feel angry with God for something that has happened in our lives.   In these situations, when we just do not know quite how to put our thoughts into words, it can help to simply pray out loud one of the prayers recorded in the Bible.  The prayer outline we call “The Lord’s Prayer” (Matthew 6:9-13) can work well as can Psalm 23, Psalm 51 or one of the other psalms, depending on the circumstances.  Praying these prayers out loud can often help us feel like adding our own words and thoughts as we go along – and that is getting back to where we should be.

Just Pray it!

We began this article talking about “writer’s block.”  Professional writers know they cannot afford to allow themselves the luxury of continuously not writing, and most know that the best way to overcome such a block is to “Just say it!” – simply to make themselves write something.  Just putting the words down somehow gets the creative juices flowing again and while it may not be great literature, it’s usually better than nothing!

Prayer is like that, too.   When we feel unable to pray we often need to “Just pray it!” Pray something – anything –  just to get the process started again.  Using one of the techniques we have looked at can often help us accomplish this. But we should always remember that no matter how awkward or even artificial our prayers may seem at these times, God is more than happy to accept our efforts and even to help us in ways that we may not even imagine (Romans 8:26-27). That’s one of the great things about prayer itself – when it gets hard we can pray for help in praying. And that’s a prayer that God will always answer.
 
* For more information on prayer, download our free e-book Your Call: Using the Direct Private Line of Prayer.  You can download a copy to read on any computer or e-book reader here.

Three Tests of Our Religion

Three Tests of Our Religion

by | Aug 1, 2019 | Discipleship

The apostle James uses the word “religion” in a specific sense.  Rather than meaning religion in the sense of the body of beliefs we hold (as in “the Christian religion”), James uses religion to mean what we do about our beliefs (as in “he practices his religion”).

The verse most of us remember in this context is found in the first chapter of James’ epistle: “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world” (James 1:27).

But this verse, so often quoted in isolation (or marked in our Bibles that way) is actually only part of James’ teaching on this subject.  When we read James 1:27 in context we see that his thought actually begins in the verse before this one:  “Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless” (James 1:26).

Now, if we read these verses together – as we should – we find something interesting:  that James is giving us not two, but three distinct tests of our religion or personal religious practice.  First (in verse 26), he gives us the test of speech. James does not give us any specific examples here; he just tells us plainly that religion that is not worthless involves control of our speech – whether it be the restraint of negative or impure speech or the use of positive uplifting speech.

Next (in verse 27), James tells us that religious behavior that God accepts includes good deeds. Here, he does give a specific example – to look after orphans and widows in need.  But the principle is obviously a broad one of which this is just an example. The care for orphans and widows clearly represents our actions toward everyone in need – our willingness to act on our religious beliefs on their behalf.

Finally (in the second half of verse 27), James tells us that religion acceptable to God also includes keeping oneself from being “polluted by the world.”   Here again James does not give any specific example of what he has in mind, but we can gain insight into his meaning by comparing this verse with what the apostle says later in this same letter: “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God” (James 4:4).

Here, James is also talking about the problematic ways in which the wrongful aspects of the world around us can influence us negatively.  Although this influence can affect our actions and words, interestingly it is our thoughts that James has in mind here. We see this from what James says directly before verse 4: “What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you?  You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want” (James 4:1-3).

So the setting of James 4:4 has to do with our thoughts and attitudes. That means that the three tests James gives us in James 1:26-27 are, respectively, tests of what we say, do, and think.   Thinking, saying and doing embrace most of what we are as individuals, of course, and James makes the point that our religion, if it is to be true, must involve all three –  the behavior of the mind, the tongue, and the hand: our thoughts, words and deeds. 

But the wording James uses is particularly important because he stresses that no matter how good our religion may be in one of those areas, it is meaningless if it is not matched in the others.  James tells us that it doesn’t matter what good deeds we do if our thoughts or words are not also right; it is of no importance if our thoughts and words are right, but our deeds do not follow through.  All three must be right. 

These combined tests of what constitutes true religion should give us all pause.  It is only as we analyze our own behavior in all three areas and ensure that, with God’s help, we are living out our religion in all of them* that we will pass the tests James gives us.
 
*See our article on the surprising order of importance the Bible gives to words, thoughts, and deeds here. 

A Balanced Prescription for Self-Worth

A Balanced Prescription for Self-Worth

by | Jul 21, 2019 | Character

 
Self-esteem is a “hot item” these days.  For several decades we have been told that a strong concept of self-worth is absolutely vital for mental health and wellbeing.  As a result, most Western educational systems now focus on the early development of self-esteem above many, if not most, other goals. 

Unfortunately, the unmodified stress on self-esteem from early childhood onward all too often leads to a false sense of accomplishment. As psychotherapist Jennifer Coon-Wallman has written, the purpose of many school programs is simply “to dole out huge heapings of praise, regardless of actual accomplishment.”

Worse yet, in recent years it has become clear that an unbalanced sense of self-esteem invariably leads to the development of self-centeredness and to social problems that result from that flawed view of the world.  As a New York Times article pointed out as far back as 2002:  “Last year alone there were three withering studies of self-esteem released in the United States, all of which had the same central message: people with high self-esteem pose a greater threat to those around them than people with low self-esteem, and feeling bad about yourself is not the cause of our country’s biggest, most expensive social problems.”

It is not that a concept of self-worth is somehow bad, but that self-esteem by itself is not good.  We must be able to balance that concept in order to properly see ourselves in perspective, to properly relate with others, and for society to function properly. 

Interestingly, we see this necessary balance in the Biblical story of the first humans.   The first chapter in the Bible’s first book, Genesis, tells us: “ … God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them” (Genesis 1:26), and this should give us all the fuel we may need for the development of a healthy self-concept.  If we believe what this verse plainly says, we can all rest assured that we are of great worth by virtue of our very nature and that we do not need some kind of fake praise to create an artificial and skewed self-esteem.

On the other hand, the very next chapter of Genesis tells us, with equal clarity: “… dust you are and to dust you will return” (Genesis 2:19).  If knowing that we are the work of the very Creator of the universe is ever a temptation to pride and inordinate self-esteem, this verse quickly puts things in perspective. Knowing that at our very best we are still merely dust that comes and goes like a transient vapor (Psalm 39:5) should prevent us from taking too high a view of ourselves.

In that sense, the story of the creation of humans as recorded in Genesis carries with it a built-in and balanced self-worth prescription that both elevates and restrains our concept of ourselves at the same time.  According to the Bible, both statements – that we are as gods (John 10:34) and that we are as nothing (Galatians 6:3) – are equally true.  Both statements are also equally necessary for individual and social well-being. 

Perhaps some of us need to focus more on one aspect of self-image than on the other, or perhaps we all need to focus on both aspects according to our current state of mind.   When we feel pretty pleased with ourselves or our achievements, it does not hurt to remember that we are still dust, but when we are afflicted by self-doubt and feelings of unworthiness it is always good to remember that we are children of God created for his purposes. 

Simplistic as it may sound, it’s a dual prescription that can prevent arrogance and pride on the one hand and discouragement and depression on the other.  It’s a balanced prescription for the attitude we all need if we are to gain and maintain the kind of self-identity God intends us to have.