Yes. Lying is Always a Sin - Kiffin's Keep Ep. 57
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- In this episode Jordan delves into the topic of lying, exploring its moral implications from a Christian perspective. He discusses the nature of lying, biblical teachings, historical theological views, and the importance of truth in contemporary society. He argues for a resolute commitment to honesty, emphasizing that lying is universally condemned as a sin and that Christians must uphold the truth, regardless of the circumstances. He also briefly responds to the defense offered by Matt Walsh to his tactics.
Resources:
1) Honesty, Christian Miller: amzn.to/3XxKQVk
2) Plundering the Mercenaries: On Knowing What Time It Is: thelondonlyceu...
3) Sermon Plagiarism as Vice: thelondonlyceu...
Amen and amen! Thank you for publicly taking this clear and bold stance.
Thanks for this, brother. It was helpful.
Glad to hear it! ~ Jordan
Thank you brother. Genuine question here. You made a good case historically for an absolutist view in the first several minutes, saying that all 3 categories of lies are condemned by the majority of the reformed. But then you mentioned an exception, I think Vermigli, and then you mentioned a Luther quote in which he basically said (paraphrase) "If you're in a radically tough place because of sin, sometimes you need to do the lesser of two evils, but then immediately repent and pray you are never put in that situation again." And I think you said "that's appropriate." Essentially you come across at first as drawing a pretty hard and fast conclusion, and later you talk about the slippery slope not doing so could lead to, but then in the comments you seem to still be admittedly conflicted about and even potentially supportive of some circumstances where lying would be the "right" thing to do. So my question has to do with what you think someone should actually do in extreme situations. I'm not trying to justify extreme examples as license to lie in lesser situations. But are you saying that we need to acknowledge that all 3 forms of lying are always sinful, and always needing to be repented of, and yet in some situations they are "right" thing that Christians ought to do? Or maybe you're saying that MIGHT be the case, but that you still need better arguments to come down more firmly on that point?
Hi Brother! Good question. I am definitely conflicted by some of the extreme moral dilemmas (of course, this isn't only the case for lying scenarios but other trolly cart styled dilemmas that are intentionally going to pit extremes against one another). I think the tradition is pretty clear that all forms of lying are sin, so I am partial to that understanding without significant counterevidence which I've not yet been able to see. It seems to me there is always a solution to the problem cases that wouldn't require lying but sometimes it requires different actions prior to the dilemma itself. I think the current controversy over lying is rather straightforward--there are other ways to handle these things with integrity. I don't know if that fully answers your question! But I do want to be clear that if you were in the dilemma of lying or letting someone be murdered I think prudence requires you to save the person and to choose the "less sinful" action in that scenario. ~ Jordan
@@thelondonlyceum Thanks!
7:16, baby monitor? I know that sound anywhere!
You got it lol. Happens way too often. 🤣 ~ Jordan
Hey man, great episode! One thought I had while listening was to consider the biblical distinction between killing and murder. As I currently understand the Bible, all murder is a form of killing, but not all killing. (eg. Think self defense or capital punishment).
It seems that there is an internal principal embedded in God‘s law that can distinguish between two actions that are formally the same on the surface. I wonder if this could apply to lying.
Anyhow, very thought provoking!
*not all killing is murder. (it wouldn’t let me edit the comment so I just left it in the reply.)
The motive to lie is always to deceive. Deception is contrary to God's character. This cannot be avoided. In fact, Biblically speaking, proving life matters more than truth in God's Economy is quite difficult.
Killing in self-defense is not murder b/c you did not initiate violence. The opponent did. Or your Commander did. Either way, not the same.
Hey brother--thanks for comment! I feel the same internal struggle on this with some of the problem cases. I do think the muder/killing distinction is relevant for the discussion. I just haven't yet resolved an appropriate way to move away from the absolutist position given the historical precedent for it--I feel like I need a really good argument to feel comfortable moving that way! ~ Jordan
@@thelondonlyceum I certainly agree that the case would need to be overwhelming to go against the vast majority in one's own tradition.
I remember my ethics professor saying that he held to non-conflicting absolutism, the idea that moral absolutes never truly conflict; the conflict is only apparent. Hence, one will never find themselves in a position where they "must" choose to commit the lesser sin and then repent later. He said Augustine held this view as well. So in your view, if the Nazi's were at the door you said you'd lie and repent later. Do you see that as a situation of conflicting absolutes (protecting life vs telling the truth, or something along those lines.)? Or do you see the absolute as "truth-telling", but deep down you would rather preserve life?
If the latter, It would be interesting to explore why the so-called absolute feels so wrong in the moment that you would rather sin. Does that make sense?
In some ways, the absolutist position on lying is so similar to the pacifist position. I've heard so many pacifist's say, "If someone was trying to kill my wife, I would kill the person to save my wife, even though it's a sin." In these case I just wonder to myself what our moral intuitions might be trying to tell us.
@@andrewphilipbarlow To be a convincing liar without some kind of natural talent for it, most of us would require a lot of practice. How would we get that practice?
Love your work, and I have no interest in defending Walsh, but I do struggle with this. It's one thing to say we shouldn't celebrate lying. (Though IMHO I do think James commends Rahab's deception.) But let's consider this from a pastoral perspective. If you were a pastor in 30s/40s Europe, what would you say to you congregant to desires to hide Jews in his home. Would tell them that it's ok to hide them, but not ok to lie to the Nazis when they come knocking? Would you tell someone not to lie, even if that means the likely murder of innocent life?
Also, how does deception fit into just war? Was the use of spies by Joshua a sin in itself considering they probably lied to hide their identity at some point? Why is killing and theft permitted in just war, but not lying?
Hey brother--thanks for comment! Agree on this. I definitely feel this internal struggle on these sort of problem cases (Nazi's at the door, etc.). I just haven't yet resolved an appropriate way to move away from the absolutist position given the historical precedent for it--I feel like I need a really good argument to feel comfortable moving that way. But to be clear, in the case of the Nazi's at the door I would choose to lie despite it being a sin. I think Calvin, et. al. would suggest that as well. I do think the context of war is one of the most compelling arguments against an absolutist position. I'd love to spend more time thinking about this and reading more on it! ~ Jordan
Murder and theft are not permissible in war. I think Christians have really abandoned Biblical principles on war. We are supposed to be radically dependent on God in war, we are not supposed to trust in technology, weaponry, in superior numbers, or our own strength... so why should we trust in the use of deception? Maybe I take some mindsets about war too far, but it disturbs me that Christians basically think and act exactly like the world about it. I think that The Bible records but does not explicitly call out some pretty scandalous stuff. We have to be careful about assuming that something is permissible just because a Bible "hero" does it without the Bible's explicit disapproval.
Been thinking about this topic. I see you in a comment say that "if the Nazis are at the door" you would lie even though it is a sin. I really struggle with that idea. If something is what God prefers, God does not give us the authority to go with our own preference. I might be missing something here, but it seems clear from scripture that lying is not always a sin. Just like disobeying the government is not always a sin, breaking the Sabbath was/is not always a sin, divorce is not always a sin, etc. There are clear exceptions to all these commands. Why would lying be any different? Sure, we can say Rehab shouldn't be followed, but what about Jesus? Is it lawful to go in the fields and pluck grain on the Sabbath? Or to circumcise on the Sabbath? No (there was a guy stoned in the OT for picking up sticks on the Sabbath), but there are clear exceptions to the command. Btw, you can't really say that we should retrieve the reformed understanding of the 9th commandment though "hard to swallow" and though the cost is great", and then turn around and say that there are some extreme circumstances where one should lie. Doesn't work
Is undercover police work a sin?
This is obviously stupid.
A man breaks into your house with a gun. He's there to murder Bob. You know Bob is hiding in the closet, so you lie and tell the assassin Bob left 5 minutes ago. No, you are not wrong.
Do you really think lying to the assassin in this scenario would stop the assassin from looking in the closet? ~ Jordan
@@thelondonlyceum You are missing the point.