# ***What I've learned on H2O.

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Friend [Friend] on November 05, 1999 at 11:04:22 {6xiCHW3gJ2rRIg7iiOekOgnjR4Br/g}:

In Reply to: **What I've learned on H2O. posted by AF on November 05, 1999 at 09:20:22:

AF

> You've raised some interesting questions that I've thought much about.

I suppose you mean that accepted versus that tolerate? If so, yes, that is a very thought provoking area and one I think can only finally be worked out by each individual.

> What exactly do you mean by "spirituality"? There are many ideas out there on this, but you haven't explained what you mean by it.

I cannot define spirituality in specific terms. It is a need that I have and feel just like I feel hunger for literal food. I believe all humans have it. I will ponder this more to better describe my use of “spirituality.”

> As for "theocratic warfare", I think your ideas leave something to be desired. An intentional untruth is by definition a lie. Lies may be told with a good or bad end in view, but they are still lies. Saying that a lie told with good intention is not a lie manifests precisely the attitude that has resulted in accusations of intellectual dishonesty on the part of Jehovah's Witnesses generally, and Watchtower leaders in particular. If you want to lie towards a good end, then do it honestly by admitting to yourself that you've told a lie. I certainly agree that under some circumstances lying is not a crime. In some situations I would not hesitate for an instant to lie, but I would not try to tell myself that I had not lied. The problem with how JWs apply this principle is that they think that lying for God or for the Society is not a crime, and so they don't view it as lying. This is pure Orwellian doublethink.

Yes, by common definition a lie is any intentional untruth expressed. That is why I restricted my application of the term “lie” to that classified in the Bible as a lie versus the common use of the term. Rahab intentionally told an untruth for which specific act she was attributed righteousness. (Joshua 2:1-7; James 2:25; Hebrews 11:31) The Bible condemns liars. (Revelation 21:8) I do not believe those texts are contradictory. Instead I think the Bible’s application of “lie” is as I have postulated. That is, that sometimes intentional untruth is not classified as a lie. In Rahab’s case her action was that of intentionally uttering an untruth but God did not consider it a lie. It was not considered dishonest. It was not considered a crime. Instead her actions were considered upright and good. She was not classified as a liar.

In my conclusions I have not simply argued that uttering untruth with good intentions is not a lie. It is true that my opinion is that the difference between an intentional untruth that is a lie versus an intentional untruth that is not a lie has to do with intentions (i.e., genuine and unselfish). However, you should note that those intentions are further confined by that which is legitimate or not as determined by the Bible (which, IMO, includes considerations for society).

An example is where you tell an untruth to a violent rapist to protect your family. Have you lied according to Webster? Yes. Have you lied according to the Bible? I do not think you have. Under such circumstance Christians should not consider that God would classify their action as a lie. Also I do not believe society at large will classify that person as a liar or their action a lie.

In this I am not being dishonest with myself because I know perfectly well that under those circumstances I am telling something untrue and would not deny doing so apart from the moment. I just do not consider that that makes me a liar any biblical sense. I also do not consider that you would find those actions of mine as dishonesty. Quite to the contrary I think you would find my actions as legitimate, unselfish and honestly protective of my family in the face of something undeserving of anything good.

As I have already mentioned, I do not agree with every application of the so-called “Theocratic Warfare”.

Friend

Follow Ups:

- ****What I've learned on H2O. AF 13:33:19 11/05/99 (8)
  - *****What I've learned on H2O. Friend 13:54:04 11/05/99 (7)
    - ******What I've learned on H2O. AF 01:19:11 11/06/99 (4)
      - *******What I've learned on H2O. Friend 06:48:43 11/06/99 (3)
        - ********What I've learned on H2O. AF 08:40:28 11/06/99 (2)
          - *********What I've learned on H2O. Friend 10:09:52 11/06/99 (1)
            - **********What I've learned on H2O. AF 17:16:54 11/06/99 (0)
    - ******What I've learned on H2O. Friend addendum 20:54:42 11/05/99 (1)
      - *******What I've learned on H2O. WW 22:14:14 11/05/99 (0)
- ****What I've learned on H2O. J 11:27:13 11/05/99 (1)
  - *****What I've learned on H2O. Friend 11:41:23 11/05/99 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: ****What I've learned on H2O.

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ FAQ ]