Lying in Christian preaching is often portrayed as a destructive practice that undermines trust and damages one's reputation, contrasting sharply with the virtue of truthfulness (Ephesians 4:25). Illustrations typically use images of fragile or unstable structures to symbolize the precariousness and eventual collapse of falsehoods.
A reputation for lying causes others to distrust even truthful statements.
Denades, addressing the Athenians, said, "I call all the gods and goddesses to witness the truth of what I shall say." The Athenians replied, "And we call all the gods and goddesses to witness that we will not believe you."
Falsehoods are unstable and difficult to maintain compared to solid truth.
It is difficult to maintain falsehood. When the materials of a building are solid blocks of stone, very rude architecture will suffice; but a structure of rotten materials needs the most careful adjustment in order to make it stand. Whately.
Many leaders feel the government has a right to lie. One of them has made an interesting argument. His name is Arthur Sylvester and he was the assistant Secretary of Defense. He writes:
"If I had been living in the early 19th century in what was then our country's West, and had been a religious man, ... I am sure I would have taken my stand with the Lying Baptists instead of the Truthful Baptists."
He is referring to an incident in 1804 in Kentucky. Some Baptists were disputing whether they should tell the truth and possibly sacrifice the life of a child as a result. The Lying Baptists thought they should lie to the Indians and possibly save the child.
East Germans are looking into their secret police (Stazi) records. One woman found out her husband had informed on her. She divorced him and warned others, "If you can resist it, don't look in your records."
#1812
*
In the July 15, 1993 'BOARDROOM REPORTS, Peter LeVine writes: "When the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey ran a help-wanted ad for electricians with expertise at using Sontag connectors, it got 170 responses -- even though there is no such thing as a Sontag connector. The Authority ran the ad to find out how many applicants falsify resumes."
Kenneth Kantzer writes that falsehood and lying are popular, but Christians cannot justify them. [full text of article at end]
I. A matter of trust.
A. A defensive half-back expects to be deceived by the other side.
B. We don't expect to be deceived by leaders and politicians.
1) "Time" magazine asked if we are a nation of liars.
2) We have trivialized lying.
II. Slide into acceptable deceit has a long history.
A. Some lies are justified.
1) Thomas Aquinas had three categories of lies - jokes, helpful
lies, and malicious lies - but only last is a mortal sin.
2) Dietrich Bonhoeffer said only cynics claim to speak whole
truth at all times. [Wizard of Id cartoon: "You're good!"]
B. Biggest red herring - lies for a good purpose are morally
acceptable.
1) Oliver North - "Lying isn't nice. But sometimes you must
weigh in the balance the difference between lives and lies."
2) But Immanuel Kant once said, "Lying violates the source of
law and destroys the very foundation of our social and
political relationships."
III. A careful definition of a lie.
A. Every statement that is not so, is not necessarily a lie.
1) Simple mistakes are not lies.
2) Jokes are not lies.
3) In war we should expect deception.
a) No one is morally bound to tell the enemy the truth. (?)
B. The Biblical tradition is absolutely against lying.
1) Ten Commandments.
a) Other verses. Mal 3:5; Eph 4:24
2) Augustine took an absolutist position.
a) "One never errs more safely than when one errs by too
much loving the truth."
b) Some lies are understandable, some are worse than others,
but all lies are wrong.
3) John Wesley said, "I would not tell one lie to save the souls
of all the world."
4) Kenneth Kantzer: "I do not know what I would do if I had to
choose between lying or losing my life. But from the
safe confines of my office, I would rather face my Lord
telling the truth than stand before him and have to
explain why I had lied because the truth cost too much."
#3242
ARTICLE:
In my younger days I played football - as a defensive halfback. Sometimes, misled by the clever ball handling of the opposing quarterback, I pulled in too quickly. I never accused the quarterback of lying - I blamed my bad judgment. During a football game, no one expects to trust the other side.
But when people we believe we are supposed to trust mislead us, what are we to think? In recent years Gary Hart, Jim Bakker, John Poindexter, and Oliver North all told huge lies. And as this column is going off to the typesetter, Bakker is having his day in court. In response to the perfidy of these public figures, Time magazine asked if we are not a nation of liars. I worry: Since two of these four are professed evangelicals, are evangelicals in danger of becoming known as a body of liars?
Our society has trivialized lying. But the slide into acceptable deceit has a long history. Some lies, it is argued, are justified. Thomas Aquinas, for example, divided lies into three categories - jokes, helpful lies, and malicious lies. Although the first two are sins, only the last is a mortal sin.
In our own day, Dietrich Bonhoeffer taught us: “It is only the cynic who claims 'to speak the truth' at all times and in all places to all men in the same way. ... It is very difficult ... to say what actually constitutes a lie.”
This attitude toward lying developed into the biggest “red herring” of all: that lies for a good purpose are morally acceptable. Oliver North undoubtedly convinced himself he was lying for the good of the nation. In his own defense North admitted that “Lying isn't nice,” but he added: “Sometimes you must weigh in the balance the difference between lives and lies.”
I admire Oliver North's patriotism, but I believe that he was seriously mistaken. Immanuel Kant once said, “Lying violates the source of law and destroys the very foundation of our social and political relationships.” What North may well have meant for the good of his country represents a serious blow to the mutual trust and integrity that is essential to the life of a nation.
it is true that we must be careful how we define a lie. We cannot condemn as a lie every statement of what is not so. A lie differs from a simple mistake or even a faked pass on the gridiron. Likewise, jokes are not lies. Jokes are momentary deceptions for mutual enjoyment.
Most of us think that in acknowledged warfare, the rules of warfare - like a game - are sufficient warning. All should expect deception; no one is morally bound to tell the enemy the truth.
A lie is a statement or sign intended to lead another to believe what we ourselves do not really believe, except when it is mutually understood that our words are not to be trusted.
Given this definition, there is a tradition absolutely against lying that is every bit as strong as the Aquinas-Bonhoeffer-North quibbling. The Bible unequivocally denounces lies and liars. The sixth of the ten great commandments declares: “Thou shalt not bear false witness ... “ (Deut. 5:20). The apostle Paul writes: “Put away lying, speak the truth” (Eph. 4:24) [should be Eph. 4:25]. And the Book of Revelation sets forth repeatedly the awful reminder that “no one who practices lying” shall ever have any part in the new heavens and the new earth. God “hates” liars (Mal. 3:5).
The greatest Christian philosopher-theologian of the early church, Augustine, argued for an absolutist position. No Christian should ever tell a lie. Some lies are worse than others - lies intended to hurt. Some lies are understandable, and he was loath to condemn those who would lie to save a life. Yet all lies are wrong. John Wesley agreed with Augustine's absolutist position: “I would not tell one lie to save the souls of all the world.”
I must side with Augustine and Wesley. As the ancient theologian said: “One never errs more safely than when one errs by too much loving the truth.”
I do not know what I would do if I had to choose between lying or losing my life. But from the safe confines of my office, I would rather face my Lord after telling the truth than stand before him and have to explain why I had lied because the truth cost too much.
Claiming to be truthful sets you up to get shot at.
(Illustration of President Carter and "no lie" pledge.)
Claim to be honest, claim to have integrity, and you set yourself up to be shot at. Remember when Jimmy Carter said, "I won't lie to you"? A correspondent on the White House staff said that as soon as the president said that, a whole group of correspondents determined to prove that he lied. They weren't interested in anything else.
The lives of parents do affect the children. Children will follow their parents' sins in a bigger way. Genesis gives an example of sin being visited upon four generations: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph. Each generation lied.
#431
*
Bundy was a pathological liar and could not be trusted when he said pornography made him kill. Too few people end up like him. It was just a ploy to try to stay alive.
When Oprah Winfrey was 13 she decided new, octagon-shaped glasses would make her beautiful and popular. Her mother refused, telling Oprah they couldn't afford such an extravagance. The next day, after her mother had gone to work, Oprah smashed her old glasses on the floor. She pulled down the curtains, knocked over a table and threw things around the room. Then she called the police.
"I decided to be unconscious when they came in and to have amnesia." At the hospital, the doctor brought her mother to her bed, but Oprah pretended not to recognize her. "All we know is that someone broke into the apartment, hit her over the head and broke her glasses," explained the doctor. "Broke her glasses?" asked Vernita Lee. "Do you mind if I'm alone with the child for a few minutes?"
The mother glared at her daughter and counted to three. As Oprah tells it: "She got to two, and I knew she was going to kill me. And so I said, 'It's coming back to me now ... you're my mother!' She dragged me from the bed and we went home. Yes, I got the octagons."
She went to live with her father, Vernon Winfrey, who had married and grown into a respectable member of the community, a barber and pillar of the Baptist church. He taught her honesty. "I never told another lie. I wouldn't dream of making up a story to my Dad. Let me tell you, there is something about people who believe in discipline - they exude a kind of assurance and realism."
At a beauty pageant when asked about her life's ambition, she replied, "I believe in truth, and I want to perpetuate truth. So I want to be a journalist."
Her most valuable lesson: "Just tell the truth. It will save you every time."
Al Neuharth, founder of USA Today newspaper, believes in the old Sicilian saying, “Hold your friends close – but your enemies closer.” His new book describes how he destroyed his enemies by appearing to be their best friends. Some specific episodes are described.
[saying is also used in the movie “The Godfather”]
Disciples would then be liars [if they stole Jesus' body]. Why would they die for it?
Paul Little writes: "Men will die for what they believe to be true, though it may actually be false. They do not, however, die for what they know is a lie. If a man ever tells the truth, it is on his deathbed."
#1156
*
Kim Duk-Soo was found by North Korean soldiers in the family cellar on November 20, 1950. He and his father, a Presbyterian pastor for 42 years, were taken to prison and told they would be executed in the morning. His father told him they could not tell a lie to save their lives.
That evening, a captain approached Kim. "Are you a Christian?" For a fleeting moment, life for a lie seemed the only logical way to go. But the young boy remembered his father's instruction. "I am a Christian," Kim said. The captain drew closer, and whispered, "I am a Christian too. I used to be a Sunday school teacher before the war. You must escape tonight. I will help you." Kim fled that night, having to leave his father under heavy guard awaiting his eventual death. Kim made it to an American base and played the organ for the chapel.
"I should have been killed after the Communists found me, but God sent that Christian guard to help me escape. When I play the organ at church, I am doing it for God."
Researchers James Patterson and Peter Kim investigated the truthfulness of Americans in "The Day America Told the Truth." An extensive questionnaire found that 91% lie occasionally, 14% have been sexually abused as kids, 70% have no heroes, 90% believe in God, New Englanders rank first in adultery.
#1474
*
Solzhenitsyn directly challenged the Soviet Orthodox hierarchs' longstanding reason for capitulating to the authorities:
"By what reasoning is it possible to convince oneself that the planned destruction of the spirit and body of the church under the guidance of atheists is the best way of preserving it? Preserving it for whom? Certainly not for Christ. Preserving it by what means? By falsehood? But after the falsehood by whose hands are the holy sacraments to be celebrated?"
Solzhenitsyn's advise can be summed up by his famous admonition: "Live not by lies!" He believes strongly that the moral corruption in Soviet society caused by widespread lying and deceit will be reversed only when each individual determines to live by the truth.
The people of God have often faced ethical dilemmas. For example, if it is wrong to kill one’s son and it is wrong to disobey God, then what should Abraham have done when God told him to sacrifice Isaac (Gen 22)? God commands obedience to the king, but the king commands the murder of innocent male children. What should the Hebrew midwives do (Exod 1)? The Scriptures enjoin obedience to parents but one’s parents insist that he not serve God. What is the responsibility of love (Matt 10:37)? The Bible forbids lying but the lives of God’s servants can be saved by intentionally falsifying. What should Rahab have done (Josh 2,6)? The queen commands that all God’s prophets be killed. A man defies her and hides one hundred of them. Was Obadiah right (1 Kings 18:13)? The Bible demands obedience to human government (Rom 13:1-2), but the king rules that all should worship an idol. Were the three Hebrew children wrong in disobeying the authorities (Dan 3)?
Besides these biblical examples there are many examples of moral conflicts which are instanced in human experience. Should the doctor take the life of the mother or the unborn baby, if both cannot live? Is it right to push someone out of an overcrowded life boat to save others? Should one first save his father or the man who just invented a cancer cure? Is it morally right to return a man’s gun to him if he demands it in order to kill his wife? There are several responses which one may make to such conflicting ethical situations. The four basic ones will be reviewed here in terms of the Christian biblical ethic of love.
The First Way: There Is Only One Absolute Duty of Love
The Second Way: There Is Always a Third Alternative for Love
The Third Way: Performing the Least Non-Loving Act
The Fourth Way: Subordinating the Lower Laws of Love to the Higher Ones
The Scriptures give ample illustrations of the principle that higher commands take precedence over lower commands. Jesus said that love for God is more important than love for parents, even though both are commands of God (Matt 10:37). Peter made it clear that the command to obey human government was not higher than the one to preach the Gospel (Acts 4). The Hebrew midwives (Exod 1) and the three Hebrew children (Dan 3) were all commended for disobeying human government when it conflicted with a higher ethical command. Abraham’s intent to kill Isaac was morally right only because it was put in irresolvable conflict with his direct obedience to God’s higher command to obey Him (Gen 22).
Three things are clear from these and other biblical examples. First, there are real conflicts among God’s commands which are personally unavoidable by the individual. Second, a man is morally obligated to follow the highest command when he cannot do both. Third, God does not hold men guilty for following the highest command. Rather, God commends them (cf. Abraham, Hebrew midwives).
This raises one final question, namely, in what sense is this view absolute when it allows that one is not obligated to follow some (lower) ethical laws when they conflict with higher ones? There are three ways in which it may be said that all commands based on God’s nature are absolute even though they must sometimes be subordinated to higher ones.10 First, they are absolutely binding as such on the particular relationship toward which they are directed. Lying as such is always wrong. And in relation to another man’s life, it is never right to murder him, and so forth. However, what is absolutely binding as such in a simple relation is not necessarily the right course of action in a complex situation where one must decide between two commands as conflicting. Secondly, when there is a conflict, it is an absolutely binding ethical obligation to follow the higher law revealed by God in His Word.
Finally, implied in the above is the truth that God has established absolutely the very order of commandments based on their proximity to His very nature as holy and loving. In short, some things are more godly and more loving because they are more Godlike. And Scripture is the only true source for knowing precisely the ordering of God’s priorities. If we are wrong in ethic judgment, then, it is because as Jesus said, “You do err not knowing the Scriptures” (Matt 22:29).
A knowledge of the priority of values has two very important implications. First, by knowing which commands are higher and which are lower, one knows which “evil” is the greatest good in the more rare irresolvable conflicts. Secondly, an awareness of divine priorities enables the Christian to distinguish the best from the merely good in the more common everyday choices. For it is not only a good to choose the lesser “evil” in unavoidable conflicts, but it is also an evil to elect the lesser good when there is no unavoidable conflict. In this latter respect ignorance of the biblical priority of values leaves the Christian vulnerable to the perennial temptation to sacrifice the best on the altar of the good.
Ephesians sermon series.
"Living Truthfully" Ephesians 4:25-32
I. Concrete behavior that should result from a Christian's new nature.
A. Five examples.
B. All concern our relationships.
C. A negative prohibition is balanced by a positive command.
D. A theological reason for the command is given or implied.
II. Don't tell lies, but speak the truth. 4:25 (cf. Zech 8:16)
A. Necessary to lie sometimes?
B. Lying is against God's character, and always wrong.
C. We are members of Christ's body.
III. Don't lose your temper, but make sure your anger is righteous.4:26f
A. "Be angry, and sin not" (KJV) echoes Psalm 4:4.
B. Righteous anger.
C. Dangers: the permissive "be angry" is qualified by 3 negatives.
1) Don't sin.
2) Don't let the sun go down on your anger.
3) Don't give the devil a foothold. 4:27
D. Christians need to control anger.
IV. Don't steal, but work and give. 4:28
A. Eighth of Ten Commandments.
B. Positive implication: earn your own living.
V. Don't use your mouth for evil, but rather for good. 4:29-30
A. Don't let rotten talk come out.
B. Instead, build people up.
C. Jesus taught the great significance of speech.
D. Grieving of Holy Spirit.
VI. Don't be unkind or bitter, but rather kind. 4:31-32
A. Six unpleasant attitudes.
B. The qualities of God and Christ.
VII. Are you living in truth?
Original sermon: (November 7, 1982) [1676]
*
“But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit” Acts 5:3a
Satan’s primary strategy is deception. He will introduce his thoughts and ideas into your mind and deceive you into believing that they are yours. It happened to King David. Satan “moved David to number Israel” (1 Chronicles 21:1), an act God had forbidden, and David acted on Satan’s idea. Did Satan walk up to David one day and say, “I want you to number Israel”? I doubt it. David was a godly man and he wouldn’t have obeyed Satan. But what if Satan slipped the idea into David’s mind in first-person singular? What if the thought came to David as “I need to know how large my army is; I think I’ll count the troops”?
If Satan can place a thought in your mind – and he can – it isn’t much more of a trick for him to make you think it’s your idea. If you knew it was Satan, you’d reject the thought, wouldn’t you? But when he disguises his suggestion as your idea, you are more likely to accept it. That is his primary deception. If you knew where the thought came from, you wouldn’t be deceived.
Ananias and Sapphira might have thought that it was their idea to withhold some of their offering while getting the strokes and attention from others who believed they had given everything. If they knew that it was Satan’s idea, they probably wouldn’t have done it (Acts 5:1-3). If Satan can get you to believe a lie, he can control your life. That’s why it is truth that sets you free (John 8:32).
*
[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #9367]
Thielicke said in his native Germany, "The avoidance of one small fib ...
may be a stronger confession of faith than a whole 'Christian philosophy'
championed in lengthy, forceful discussion."
#2767
*
David Casstevens of the Dallas Morning News tells a story about Frank
Szymanski, a Notre Dame center in the 1940s, who had been called as a witness
in a civil suit at South Bend.
"Are you on the Notre Dame football team this year?" the judge asked.
"Yes, Your Honor."
"What position?"
"Center, Your Honor."
"How good a center?"
Szymanski squirmed in his seat, but said firmly: "Sir, I'm the best center
Notre Dame has ever had."
Coach Frank Leahy, who was in the courtroom, was surprised. Szymanski always
had been modest and unassuming. So when the proceedings were over, he took
Szymanski aside and asked why he had made such a statement. Szymanski
blushed.
"I hated to do it, Coach," he said. "But, after all, I was under oath."
----------------
By David Casstevens from Condensed Chicken Soup for the Soul, Copyright 1996
by Jack Canfield, Mark Victor Hansen & Patty Hansen
#2845
*
In the classroom setting of one Peanuts comic strip, on the first day of the new school year, the students were told to write an essay about returning to class. In her essay Lucy wrote, "Vacations are nice, but it's good to get back to school. There is nothing more satisfying or challenging than education, and I look forward to a year of expanding knowledge."
Needless to say, the teacher was pleased with Lucy and complimented her fine essay. In the final frame, Lucy leans over and whispers to Charlie Brown, "After a while, you learn what sells."
The temptation to say "what sells," that is, what others want to hear whether it is true or not, is always with us. When we give in to that temptation, what we really sell is the integrity of our soul. When we resist, Christ can say of us as he did of Nathaniel, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!" (John 1:47)
People find it hard to be honest with themselves.
Dieting documentary on PBS — scientists thought overweight people had different metabolism. They gained weight when eating same amount as rest of us. Conclusion was due to self-reporting tests.
A new technique called “doubly-labeled water” finds exactly how many calories they are consuming. One dieter reported, in good faith, 850 calories of intake. The test showed it was more like 3,300. When told this, her estimates of intake increased. We don’t mean to be dishonest, but we do it to justify ourselves.
________
Doubly-labeled water involves isotopes that can be detected with scientific instruments. It has been very useful for metabolic studies.
The defining issue for faithful Christian discipleship at the end of the twentieth century is the taxing intersection between church and society. Theological differences notwithstanding, Protestants from mainline academics in the South to evangelical parish ministers in the Northeast are placing the issue on the table, challenging the faithful to rethink critical assumptions about the relationship of the Christian faith to American society with all the force that accompanied the modernist-fundamentalist controversy decades ago.
With IN GOOD COMPANY and WHERE RESIDENT ALIENS LIVE, Hauerwas and Willimon extend the argument of their controversial 1989 bestseller, RESIDENT ALIENS, which encouraged mainliners to acknowledge the radically “sectarian” demands of their faith. “The very idea that Christians can be at home, indeed can create a home, in this world is a mistake,” they write.
Hauerwas vigorously defends his efforts to reverse the paradigm by which Christians have traditionally viewed both church and society. To him, the church is less a pillar of society than a “polis” [city] in its own right, reprogramming believers from the destructive patterns and practices (not so much the thinking) of the world. “What we Christians have lost,” he laments, is the sense of “just how radical our practices are, since they are meant to free us from the lies so characteristic of the world.”
The “lies” Hauerwas is talking about include the Western political tradition in general and the American experiment in particular, with its notions of self-determination and religious freedom, idols that have weaned believers from serious discipleship. While his analysis is probing, Hauerwas’s apparent hostility to things American may not reflect a healthy understanding of nature and grace. Surely, America represents many hazardous idols, but is she really the anti-Christ Hauerwas claims? Perhaps Hauerwas’s sourness on the United States helps explain his attraction to Catholicism and the Mennonites, traditions that have historically not felt at ease across the Fruited Plain.
Hauerwas’s disdain for Western society leads to a stinging critique of the Reformation:
The association of the Reformation with presumptions of justification by faith through grace as a center of the Gospel was a profound mistake. That emphasis, perhaps unwittingly, underwrote essentially individualistic accounts of salvation that combined with liberal political theory to produce an outrageously accommodated church.
While his emphasis on a more corporate understanding of salvation is a welcome antidote to American individualism, Hauerwas’s own “picking and choosing parts of traditions I like without having to bear the burdens of parts ... I do not like” suggests that he has not escaped the same conundrum Frank Schaeffer fell into when embracing Eastern Orthodoxy: presuming by sheer willpower to adopt a tradition that by nature adopts its own members, not vice versa.
In WHERE RESIDENT ALIENS LIVE, Hauerwas teams up with his sidekick William Willimon for a lighter, more popular sequel to RESIDENT ALIENS, responding to the key objection the 1989 book generated: “Where is this church of which you speak?” Willimon and Hauerwas say their church is discernible “if we take the trouble to look for it in the right places.” So they offer a few vignettes of a faithful congregation here and a Christian warrior there, but spend most of their time negotiating misperceptions. “We are not asking Christians to withdraw from the world but rather to recognize we are surrounded.”
Hauerwas and Willimon have no patience for the classic Lutheran paradigm of church and state as complementary spheres; the church is by nature a political entity in conflict with the state. The model they emulate is the African-American church in South Carolina before and during the civil-rights movement: “Here was a church that knew that it lived as strangers in a strange land, that had no illusions about the wider culture, that knew that it needed to gather on Sunday and protect its children.”
COPYRIGHT(C) 1997 BY CHRISTIANITY TODAY, INC/CHRISTIANITY TODAY MAGAZINE.
JANUARY 6, 1997 VOL. 41, NO. 1, PAGE 50
A SHEPHERD-BOY, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought
out the villagers three or four times by crying out, "Wolf! Wolf!"
and when his neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their
pains. The Wolf, however, did truly come at last. The Shepherd-boy,
now really alarmed, shouted in an agony of terror: "Pray, do come and
help me; the Wolf is killing the sheep"; but no one paid any heed to
his cries, nor rendered any assistance. The Wolf, having no cause of
fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the whole flock.
There is no believing a liar, even when he speaks the truth.
At the University of Massachusetts last month, a coed told police that a man had grabbed her from behind, slashed her face with a knife, and then ran away. At Duke University, in North Carolina, a black doll was found hanging from a tree near a gathering place for the Black Student Alliance.
At North Carolina's Guilford College, a white student said she'd been assaulted by men who scrawled a message on her chest -- one that suggested, to put it mildly, that she was too friendly with blacks. And at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota, a lesbian coed told police that two men had punched her in the face while shouting anti-gay slurs.
These stories are truly awful. But there's just one problem: They're all a pack of lies. The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that every one of the students made up the supposed incidents, apparently for political reasons.
Sad to say, concocting stories of slaps and slurs have become the latest trend on some campuses -- a way of achieving political aims when other methods have failed. The worst of it is, the tactic is working. Students and even professors applaud outright lying as a good means of promoting a political agenda.
Jon Sanders, a research fellow at the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy, says that students fake hate crimes to "influence their campus's move toward multiculturalism." They're tempted to cook up these hoaxes, not just because they know they'll probably escape punishment, but because "they know they have advocates who will rush to their defense."
That was surely the case at St. Cloud State University. There, $12,000 was raised for information leading to the supposed attacker of Jennifer Prissel. When Prissel admitted she'd lied, gay students rushed to defend her. After all, they explained, Jennifer's little white lie led to "a giant step forward" in community respect for gays.
And Molly Martin, the Guilford student who claimed she'd been attacked by racists? She got what she wanted, too. A student leader, Martin had lobbied for a full-time director of African-American affairs. Even after her lie was exposed, Guilford created the position she had sought.
Why is it that students think it's not enough to reason with their fellow collegians? Why do they think they have to create a drama, to appeal to people's emotions instead of their minds?
These students have become part of the culture of sensationalism -- and sadly, they've taken their drama lessons from their elders. Remember the sensation a few years ago when NBC rigged a GM truck to explode on camera?
And politicians do it all the time, too. The whole point of campaign attack ads is to yank your emotions, not to stretch your mind.
In Isaiah, we're told, "come, let us reason together." It means we should solve problems by appealing to reasoned debate -- not by eliciting emotional outbursts.
And, of course, it's wrong to lie, even if the ultimate purpose is noble.
It's a lesson we need to teach our collegians the next time they stage an epic drama in support of a pet cause. We should warn them that if they continue to assault the truth, people who really are attacked will pay a heavy price.
And if we reward them for fibbing, we're teaching them an ugly new motto: If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie, again.
___________________
Copyright (c) 2000 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.
*
Average person tells 50 lies a day. According to an article in the July 27, 1983, issue of USA Today, a psychologist says we all tell spouses, friends and others 50 lies a day to cover up our social errors. "Even in this age of honesty, we all lie daily to cover our 'social errors,"' says California psychologist Jerald Jellison.
He says we commonly use: "I have a headache." " I had to work late." "I didn't want to hurt your feelings."
"I'll get right on it." "It's in the mail." "I was only kidding." "I don't expect anything in return." "I was trying to help." "Let's have lunch." "Of course I care." "I never lie."
Penny Baxter in THE YEARLING wanted to get rid of a worthless bear dog he had. Custom was to brag on dog. More you bragged more everyone knew you were lying. Penny took dog to Lenn Forrester and went on telling what a lousy dog. Sorriest dog I ever owned ..." Man thot: Never heard a man talk about his OWN dog that way. Next day man came and demanded a trade. Conscience bothered Penny. Son: "You told the truth, Pa." "Yes," said Penny, "my words were straight, but but my intention was as crooked as the Ocklawaha River."
Lexicon of Intentionally Ambiguous Recommendations, or LIAR.
Here are some examples:
*To describe an inept person--"I enthusiastically recommend this
candidate with no qualifications whatsoever."
*To describe an ex-employee who had problems getting along with
fellow worders--"I an pleased to say that this candidate is a
former colleague of mine."
*To describe an unproductive candidate--"I can assure you that no
person would be better for the job."
*To describe an applicant not worth consideration--" I would urge
you to waste no time in making this candidate an offer of
employment." Larry Pryor in Los Angeles Times
According to the book THE DAY AMERICA TOLD THE TRUTH, Americans are making up their own rules and laws. The says that there is absolutely no moral consensus in this as there was in the 1950s and 1960s.
Religion plays almost no role in shaping most lives, the study found. While nine out of every ten people say they believe in God, only one in five had ever talked to a minister, priest, or rabbi about a personal problem. Four in every five said they believe in an afterlife. Almost half believe they're headed to heaven, while only 4 percent expect to spend time in hell.
The results the survey conducted by the book reveal that only 13 percent of the population still believes in all the Ten Commandments. Nine out of ten lie regularly. Nearly one-third of married Americans have had an affair. One-fifth of the nation's children have lost their virginity by age 13. One in seven Americans carries a handgun or has one in a vehicle. One in five women says she has been raped by a date. For $10 million, 7 percent of the American people will kill a stranger, 23 percent would be willing to become a prostitute, and 25 percent would be willing to abandon their family.
A FISH TO PROVE IT
A deacon sent in his apologies for the Sunday morning service,
claiming that he was ill with flu. One of the members, however, said
he had seen the deacon on his way to a ball game.
After the service, the minister went to visit the deacon, "Brother,"
he said, "I have information that you were not sick at all this
morning, but went to watch a ball game."
The deacon protested: "That's a vicious lie! And I'll show you my FISH
to prove it!"
A newspaper man sent a letter home from Red China. At the end he put
the following note, "I hope this letter reaches you because the
censors here are very tough." When the letter arrived another note
had been added, "There are no censors in the People's Republic Of
China."
- Unknown
A little girl came very early one morning to her mother, saying:
"Which is worse, Mamma, to tell a lie or to steal?" The mother replied
that both were so sinful she could not tell which was the worse.
"Well, Mamma," replied the little one, "I've been thinking a good deal
about it, and I think it is ever so much worse to lie than to steal."
"Why, my child?" asked the mother. "Well, you see, Mamma, it's like
this," said the little girl. "If you steal a thing you can take it
back 'less you've eaten it; and if you've eaten it, you can pay for
it. But" -- and there was a look of awe in her face -- "a lie is
forever."
He said likewise That a lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest
of lies, That a lie which is all a lie may be met and fought with
outright, But a lie which is part a truth is a harder matter to fight.
- Lord Alfred Tennyson
The steroid scandal has rocked baseball for several years now. A critical event was when key players were questioned before a congressional committee in March 2005. In a room filled with humbled heroes, Mark McGwire hemmed and hawed the most. His voice choked with emotion, his eyes nearly filled with tears, time after time he refused to answer the question everyone wanted to know: Did he take illegal steroids when he hit a then-record 70 home runs in 1998 — or at any other time?
Asked by Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., whether he was asserting his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, McGwire said: "I'm not here to talk about the past. I'm here to be positive about this subject."
On an HBO sports program in 2007, baseball player Curt Schilling says that Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire's refusals to address accusations of steroids use are tantamount to admissions. "It goes to the Mark McGwire thing in Congress. I mean, I'm a huge Mark McGwire fan. But I just always thought it was very simple: If you did something and someone asks you if you did it and you didn't do it, you say no. Any other answer than no is some form of yes, isn't it?"
*
[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #6706]
In Mark Twain's fascinating book about his travels in the West and
Hawaii, {Roughing It}, there is an account of a man, a
notorious liar, who was known in the community to be a spinner of tall
tales. No one ever believed anything he said. One day they found him
hanging dead, with a suicide note pinned on him, written in his own
hand, saying that he had taken his own life. But the coroner's jury
pronounced it murder. They said that if the man himself said he had
taken his own life, it was proof he hadn't!
People who love golf have a big advantage over people who fish.
When golfers lie, at least they don't have to show anything to prove
it.
- Ron Dentinger, {Reader's Digest, }August 1996, p. 66
My Source: BANNER OF TRUTH
Volume 7, #8, August 1998
… … … … … … .
Author: Walter Pigg
… … … … … … .
Quite some time ago a reader of BANNER OF TRUTH wrote, recounting an exchange he had with another preacher, wherein the preacher had said in writing that he would answer any question anytime relative to a controversy. When a number of questions were asked, eight months later no response had been received. The reader of B.O.T. commented as follows: “In talking with other preachers, there seems to be a great problem in the brotherhood with this sort of thing, not only with preachers, but with elders as well.” The writer asked that I do an article on the above problem.
The problem of lying is certainly not new. The first lie on record is that of the devil telling Eve that she would NOT surely die if she ate of the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3:4). Christ told the Jews that they were of their father the devil, who is the “Father” of the lie (John 8:44). Lying is much more commonplace in today’s society than it was thirty or forty years ago. Politicians are generally considered dishonest. Even our President is known for lying. Lying is often practiced in the business world. Yes, lying is often practiced in the religious world.
The lying under consideration in this discussion is the stating of that which is known to be false, and that which is intended to deceive or mislead. A lie may be acted rather than stated in words. In some situations it may be difficult to know if an individual is lying. For example, a promise may be made with good intentions and then be forgotten by the maker of it. But if it is evident that the promise has not been forgotten, then the unkept promise would constitute lying. Pardon the personal example, but it illustrates the point. When my wife and I became involved in mission work in the Ukraine, at least three congregations promised to support us financially at a certain point in time. It has been almost two years since that point in time was reached, and not one of the congregations has kept its promise. Now, it is highly unlikely that all three simply forgot the promise that they had made. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary.
It is to be expected that people of the world would lie when it would bring no harm from the secular world. Such people do not respect God’s word which time and again speaks clearly and forcefully against the sin of lying. But it is altogether a different matter when those who claim to be Christians engage in lying. Paul, in writing to the Ephesians says the “old man” is to be put off and the “new man” put on. In view of this he says: “wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbor… “ (Ephesians 4:22-25). The seriousness of lying is set forth in no uncertain terms when it is said: “and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).
Many lies are told in the name of religion. In 1 Kings 13, is recorded the account of the “old prophet” who lied unto “the man of God that came from Judah,” telling him that an angel had spoken to him, telling him to bring the man of God back to eat with him. “But he lied unto him.” Believing the lie cost this man his life. False witnesses (liars) were sought among the Jews to testify against our Lord that he might be put to death (Matthew 26:59-60). The apostle Peter lied when he denied Christ (Matthew 26:69-70). Ananias and Sapphira “lied… unto God” (Acts 5:1ff). Paul warns of those who would depart from the faith, “Speaking lies in hypocrisy” (1 Tm 4:2). John warned against believing “every spirit” [teacher] “because many false prophets are gone into the world” (1 John 4:1). There are many warnings against lying and various examples of the sin in the New Testament.
Though lying is a soul-condemning sin, we should not be surprised when people, even those who are religious, engage in the practice. The Catholics have what they call the “doctrine of mental reservation,” which allows them to tell outright lies when it will help their cause. There are various religious cults which are built upon falsehood, lies which mislead and deceive. All of the man-made religions are built, at least in part, upon that which is false.
As sad as it may be, lying is becoming more common among members of the church all the time. One who is acquainted with activities within the church, even to a small degree, is aware that in varying instances someone or someones are obviously lying. I have known of various instances where lying took place. In one case it was learned that an elder was known in the community where he lived as an habitual liar. Such brings great hurt upon the church.
Of great concern and sadness to me is the fact that many of our own brethren are guilty of intellectual dishonesty [lying]. That is, they are giving God’s word the lie when they disregard it and deviate from it. Paul says, “let God be true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). When one leads people to disbelieve what God has clearly said, that one is guilty of lying. The term “liberalism” as it is so commonly used today involves the denial of what God’s word says, and the substiution of what pleases man rather than God. This is being dishonest with God and if a person will be dishonest with God, why wouldn’t that same person be dishonest with his fellow man?
While some erroneous teaching may be done through ignorance, I’m persuaded that much is done with the intent to deceive and mislead people. A case in point is the teaching being done today which denies the distinctiveness of the one true church which was built by Christ and purchased with his blood (Acts 20:28). Rather than the one true church, people are being led into the man-made religion of denominationalism. Max Lucado and Rubel Shelly are living examples of this, but they are by no means alone in this teaching of error.
A number of brethren are turning their backs upon John 4:24 as the standard of acceptable worship. Worship is being turned into an act of entertainment, lacking the proper respect and reverence for God which characterizes the true worship with which God is well pleased.
In an increasing number of instances God’s objective word is being replaced with a subjectivism closely akin to that which is found in Pentecostal religions. Closely related to subjectivism is the direct operation of the Holy Spirit upon the individual, in some way apart from God’s word. If the Holy Spirit does not influence man directly, apart from the word, it is a lie to teach that the Holy Spirit does. If the Holy Spirit does act in the direct manner, as some are teaching, it makes a liar of God’s word and its claim of completeness or all sufficiency.
Error is being taught today on the subject of divorce and remarriage, fellowshipping those who are in error, and a host of other things. When something is taught which is not according to God’s word, a lie has been taught.
Brethren, when we lie we put our own souls in jeopardy, but this is not all the harm that has been done. We also bring reproach upon the blood-bought body of Christ. It is a shame when brethren are not trustworthy. This hurts the cause of Christ. In a time when society thinks lying is a trivial matter, we need to stand tall as examples of those who speak only the truth. We need to be ever mindful of the fact that “there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth… or maketh a lie” (Revelation 21:27).
David Fidler, 49, had been a respected Darwin, Australia, news journalist for fifteen years; Fidler enjoyed the attention he received from those who believed him to be national Olympic champion ... none of which was true! The burden of these stories had accumulated in Fidler's mind and heart, but the weight was lifted when the lie of it all was revealed. Fidler recently admitted in an interview he had not swum for Australia at the 1968 games in Mexico. The former newscaster said, "The Olympic thing was something that was said that should not have been said and I didn't know how to unsay it. I wished I could, but I just didn't know how. For 15 years there wasn't a day go past when I didn't want it to stop. It was like the Sword of Damocles hanging over my head."
---------------------------------
Commentary: Believers have know the relief of confession for millennia. When sinners go before the Royal Throne of Grace and asks the Kings pardon the burden is lifted. At first it's a surprise! Most are aware something is wrong but are not able to put their finger on it. Only when the burden is lifted do they come to see it was their sin that burdened them. God is faithful to forgive us our sins if we would but ask. Psychiatrists have known for some time that most of their patients would experience a significant level of healing if they could simply experience forgiveness preceded by a healthy dose of confession.
Source/Attribution: Adapted from Australian Associated Press, National section, "Exposed Olympic lie a relief, says disgraced newsreader," 28 March 2000; John Gillmartin
*
Thirteen years ago, James Corder was convicted of murdering his stepmother and was sent to prison in Iowa. From the beginning, Corder insisted they had the wrong man -- a claim his family fervently believed.
Then James signed up for the InnerChange Freedom Initiative, one of the prisons Prison Fellowship actually runs as a Christian institution -- the story of which was featured in prime time at the Republican National Convention 2000 in Philadelphia.
Prison Fellowship opened the first InnerChange prison three years ago outside of Houston. The 18-month regimen is far from easy. Inmates, all of whom volunteer for the program, get up at 5 in the morning for devotions. Then they spend their day working at their jobs, or studying for their high school equivalency exams. They also attend classes to develop life skills and to gain spiritual maturity. Evenings are filled with more classes and discipleship seminars that run until 10 p.m. -- no TV, no wasted time.
During Phase 2 of the program, inmates perform community service, and they're encouraged to repent and to make restitution to their victims. Prisoners are then matched with volunteers from area churches who mentor them during their remaining time in prison. Each mentor spends at least six months after the inmate's release, helping him adjust back into the community.
Three months after James Corder signed up for the second program we started, in Newton, Iowa, he found he could no longer live with himself. As Jack Cowley, IFI's national director put it, "James felt the Lord was telling him that if he was going to stay in the program, he would have to stop living a lie. He had to tell his parents he DID stab his stepmother to death."
That was not easy, for after 13 years of lying, James was concerned about how his parents would react. He asked his fellow inmates to pray with him. When he told his parents the truth, they were indeed shocked, as he expected. But they told James they would continue to love and support him.
Well, that confession had a tremendous impact on his fellow inmates. Jack Cowley says, "These were men who wanted to change their lives through Christ, but had no idea what a life in Christ looked like. And here's a lifer who showed a dramatic proof of the reality of Christ. He's a role model."
One of many, I might add. I've been in Iowa and Houston several times. I've met lifers who praised the Lord that they're in prison so that they can witness for Christ. I've met hardened criminals, including some six-time losers, who have been transformed totally. I've met men who turned down parole -- imagine that -- so that they could stay in the prison and complete the program.
Do faith-based solutions work? Well, take a look at Houston for an answer. Recidivism in America's prisons is over 70 percent. But in the three years we've run the prison in Houston, 47 men have completed the full 18 months and are now out, in church, at work, and matched with mentors. And NOT ONE is back in custody.
This is a wonderful testimony to share with those who wonder if faith-based solutions really work. The answer is, "Yes, they do!" And the time has come to replace inefficient government programs with faith-based answers.
Not only do these programs work, they afford Christians a great opportunity to show the world the power of our risen Lord.
___________________
Copyright (c) 2000 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.
*
You see them in motel rooms, most public buildings, and you should see them on the ceilings in your house - smoke detectors. Those little plastic monitoring devices that sound an obnoxious alarm when there's smoke in the room. Just ask me - I proved it the day I left my English muffin in the toaster oven too long. That smoke detector did its job - a job that can actually save lives. You want an alarm to go off when there's smoke in your house, especially if it's warning you about something that could do major damage.
Well, I'm Ron Hutchcraft and I want to have A Word With You today about "The Truth Alarm."
Years ago, I asked God to install a spiritual smoke detector in my heart - one that would go off inside me whenever I was saying something that was less than the truth. I think we all need an inner alarm like that. Because lies do so much damage if you don't put them out right away.
We tend to think of lying as, you know, a "lesser" sin. God doesn't. Listen to what He says in Proverbs 6, beginning with verse 16, our word for today from the Word of God. "There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to Him." What follows is God's hate list. Only one sin is mentioned twice in this list - "a lying tongue" and "a false witness that pours out lies." See, that lie you tell is very serious business. You're messing with something God detests.
When you lie, you violate the Ninth Commandment of God's sacred law. When you lie, you become an ally of the devil - because Jesus told us the devil is "the father of lies." (John 8:44) When you lie, you start a series of events that usually means more lies to cover up the lie and it means damage to relationships, reputations, respect - and, most certainly, your relationship with the God who hates lying.
We even tend to lie to ourselves about the fact that we are lying! We're just "exaggerating" or it's only a "white lie," whatever that is. But in God's book, you're lying whenever you're intending to deceive or mislead someone. That's why we need to ask God for that inner alarm that reminds us that we're saying something - or are about to say something - that is less than what God knows to be true.
Lying is so common that we can do it with little guilt or remorse. We lie to get ahead ... to get our way ... to get even ... to get out of a jam. The reason doesn't matter. God hates it. And He clearly commands: "Each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor." (Ephesians 4:25)
Deceiving ... lying ... distorting the truth - it starts a spiritual fire that can do so much damage and actually end up consuming you. But inside you lives the Holy Spirit of God who Jesus called "the Spirit of truth" (John 15:26) - and He is your inner alarm system to let you know when you've crossed from what's real into what's false. Ask Him to ring it loud whenever you're about to let something less than the truth cross your lips. We've become desensitized to lying. We need God Himself to awaken our calloused conscience and not let us get away with anything less than the truth.
Telling the truth may hurt. But it can never do as much damage as not telling the truth. Because our God hates lying.
________________
Copyright © Ron Hutchcraft Ministries, Inc., PO Box 400, Harrison, AR 72602. Used by permission. Written by Ron Hutchcraft. "Practical Answers to Real Life Issues"
*
Synopsis:
Officer ran a red light, killing a pregnant woman, her son, and her sister who were in a van going the other way. The officer was drunk. The officer is on trial for manslaughter.
A fellow officer is reported as testifying that the drunk officer had had several drinks that day but did not specify the number. “He was unsure how many drinks Mr. Gray had that day.”
When the accident happened, the officers arriving at the scene observed alcohol on the breath of the drunk officer. Here is a report of his condition and his evasions and lies at the time:
“Sgt. Michael Siciliano, the patrol supervisor who arrived at the scene, and Capt. Brian White, the duty commander that night, gave more detailed accounts, saying that a frantic and visibly shaken Mr. Gray smelled of alcohol and said that the victims had caused the accident.
“Sergeant Siciliano said that during questioning, Mr. Gray had told him: ‘Sarge, I never saw them. They walked right out in front of my car.’ The sergeant conceded that Mr. Gray had not immediately been handcuffed because he was a police officer.
“Captain White said that by the time he had arrived at the scene, it was clear that Mr. Gray had been drinking and was trying to freshen his breath by eating Altoids mints.
“Captain White testified that Mr. Gray, a former high school classmate, admitted as much, saying: ‘I was drinking, but it was earlier. I had the greens all the way,’ referring to traffic lights. ‘I didn’t see them coming,’ the captain quoted him as saying.
“For Mrs. Herrera’s family, it was a difficult day of testimony, particularly listening to Officer Conway and claims that Mrs. Herrera and her family had darted into traffic against a green light.
“‘He was drunk and sleep-deprived,’ said Ramona Hernandez, Mrs. Herrera’s aunt, referring to Mr. Gray, in an interview after the proceedings. ‘How could he know the difference between a red light or green light?’”
It was a sad story made so much worse by a lie.
The police believed it. People across North America believed it and were so outraged they donated thousands of dollars in reward money and sent cards of condolences to the family.
The media believed it and covered it as a legitimate news story.
But it was just a 10-year-old boy's fib. The St. Albert boy, whose dog Sheba was killed Saturday at a playground, took back his story that a trio of teens hanged her by her leash.
He admitted Monday it was a terrible accident. He told police Sheba died after her leash caught on the playground equipment. Dr. David Merchant, a St. Albert psychologist who has specialized in treating children for more than 30 years, said the boy was probably dealing with a host of anxieties.
His pet had died, it may have been his fault and he lied to cover it up. He could never have anticipated the story would be picked up around the world.
“First the angst and anxiety, and then the creation of the tale. In some respects, (children) tell the tale so much they believe it really did happen. But it's a terrorizing thing to have to keep lying,” Merchant said.
“It's sad but it starts as a simple, typical story of a child who made a booboo, did a bad thing and then tried to cover it up.”
The elaborate descriptions the boy gave of the three attackers ought to have been the first clue he might have been fibbing, Merchant said.
The boy described each of the three teens down to the brand names on their clothing.
In traumatic events, Merchant said, one either shuts down awareness altogether or remembers one or two specific things in great detail.
“To what extent are the police so overwhelmed with such horror that they are willing to believe it?” Merchant asked.
“Children will certainly lie and it's usually easy to catch them because they come up with such preposterous things.”
Dozens of people from nearly every state and province called The Journal on Sunday and Monday, asking where to send money and gifts.
It doesn't surprise Merchant that people were so shocked they felt the need to help.
“We have such a macabre fascination with horror,” he said.
Asked what lasting impact this might have on the young boy, Merchant said children are adept at forgetting their indiscretions as they grow and change through puberty and adolescence. Children live in the present.
“Much depends on how the family deals with it. They may want to kick his derriere for a while but if they have a loving, embracing reaction, then he'll come through it and maybe even be closer to his family.”
“It's just a relief to know that it didn't happen the way he said,” said St. Albert RCMP Cpl. Kelly Anctil, “because it was so hard for us to believe that somebody would do that.”
The story fell apart Monday afternoon when an artist began working with the boy to produce sketches of the three alleged suspects.
The artist felt uncomfortable with the boy's answers, so she stopped the interview and got an investigating officer to talk to the youngster, who then admitted what happened.
“The little boy's got some soul-searching to do and the family's going to have to deal with the aftermath of it,” Anctil said.
“But as far as the RCMP is concerned, we've concluded the file.”
The boy and his family could not be reached late Monday for comment. “I think Mom and Dad are pretty upset about it,” Anctil said.
“There'll probably be lots of talking going on over the next couple of days to resolve the issue.”
Even though the story wasn't true, it was posted on the Internet and picked up by news agencies around the world. So what happens when the story changes?
“This particular situation will probably turn into an urban myth, where the story will be told and re-told countless times,” said William Koty, director of the division of applied technology for the University of British Columbia's continuing studies.
Koty specializes in Internet studies.
“Once something gets published in so many places, it's nearly impossible to go back and correct things and put in the truth.” *
A minister told his congregation, "Next week I plan to preach about the sin of lying. To help you understand my sermon, I want you all to read Mark 17."
The following Sunday, as he prepared to deliver his sermon, the minister asked for a show of hands. He wanted to know how many had read Mark 17. Almost every hand went up. The minister smiled and said, "Mark has only sixteen chapters. I will now proceed with my sermon on the sin of lying."
A man who told police his 6-year-old daughter and ex-wife were missing in the World Trade Center attacks was charged with filing a false report after his relatives said he was lying.
Alan Braker, 41, was arrested Thursday at his East Orange, N.J., home and could face additional charges, said Lt. Elias Nikas, a police spokesman.
Braker's story was widely reported, but days later his relatives - including his mother, two of his sisters and his estranged wife - told reporters his story was false.
His motives were not immediately known, Nikas said.
In his accounts to reporters, Braker said he identified his ex-wife's body at a morgue in Jersey City, N.J., and said her name was Madileene Sanchez. But authorities said no morgue was set up in Jersey City to handle trade center victims, and that no record of Sanchez existed.
Braker had also posted fliers of a girl shown in a white cap and gown from grade-school graduation. The fliers said the girl was Braker's 6-year-old daughter, Mya, who was with her mother at the World Trade Center on the 107th floor, where Sanchez worked at Morgan Stanley & Co.
The company has no record of Sanchez working there, and has no offices on that floor.
Meanwhile on Wednesday, police arrested Sara Hekriy, 44, of Toronto, Canada, and charged her with perjury, Nikas said.
Hekriy was arrested at a family assistance center set up in New York. Police said she had falsely a signed notarized document stating her husband was missing in the attacks.
AP-ES-09-27-01 2211EDT
A Mexican family faked the death of their mother and buried a coffin containing a dummy made from bags of sand in an apparent insurance scam, authorities said Thursday.
But when the family of 42-year old Perla del Carmen Sanchez Mendez in the southern state of Tabasco tried to claim one million pesos ($122,000) in life insurance, authorities smelled something fishy.
"It seemed suspicious to us that only nine months after taking out the policy the family put forward a death claim and even more so when contradictions arose surrounding the day and cause of death," Marina Dominguez, a life insurance agent with Grupo Nacional Provincia, told reporters.
The insurers alerted police and obtained an order for the grave to be exhumed.
"What we found left us shocked and stunned and confirmed the insurance fraud," said Tabasco state attorney Wilber Damian Moscoso. "Inside the coffin we found two bags of construction material and a false plastic head" he added.
Police said they suspected Tomas Gomez Sanchez, the son of the matriarch, to have mastermind the fraud. They give no information on the whereabouts of the mother.
Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Joseph J. Ellis, who made false claims in classes and interviews that he served in Vietnam, will give up the American culture course he teaches at Mount Holyoke College.
College spokesman Kevin McCaffrey said Tuesday that Ellis, 57, chose to give up the class.
In a brief statement, Mount Holyoke President Joanne V. Creighton expressed regret about Ellis' misrepresentation, but stopped short of criticizing him. She did not say whether Ellis would be disciplined for the deceptions.
"I too deeply regret the effect of his misrepresentation on students, colleagues, and the public," the statement said.
Ellis apologized for the Vietnam misrepresentations after The Boston Globe disclosed Monday that he had falsely claimed to have served in Vietnam with the 101st Airborne Division. He also had claimed in interviews that his experience in Vietnam motivated him to join the anti-war movement.
Creighton and Ellis both refused to be interviewed.
Ellis also taught a course on the literature of the Vietnam War at nearby Amherst College. Three students there told the Globe that Ellis talked about his Vietnam experiences in that class.
The Amherst class is not scheduled for the next academic year. Amherst officials have not commented on Ellis' misrepresentations in that school's classrooms.
Ellis won the Pulitzer Prize in April for his book "Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation.
”The Bread of Life never gets stale.”
I love this story which reportedly came from Sports Illustrated (I do not know which issue):
The game was played in Wellington, Florida. In it, a seven-year-old first baseman, Tanner Munsey, fielded a ground ball and tried to tag a runner going from first to second base.
The umpire, Laura Benson, called the runner out, but young Tanner immediately ran to her side and said, “Ma’am, I didn’t tag the runner.” Umpire Benson reversed herself, sent the runner to second base, and Tanner’s coach gave him the game ball for his honesty.
Two weeks later, Laura Benson was again the umpire and Tanner was playing shortstop when a similar play occurred. This time Benson ruled that Tanner had missed the tag on a runner going to third base, and she called the runner safe. Tanner looked at Benson and without saying a word, tossed the ball to the catcher and returned to his position.
Benson sensed something was wrong. “Did you tag the runner?” She asked Tanner.
His reply: “Yes.”
Benson then called the runner out. The opposing coaches protested until she explained what had happened two weeks earlier. “If a kid is that honest,” she said, “I have to give it to him.”
~~~~~~~~~~
It may be that no Christian characteristic has suffered more in our society than honesty. It’s lacking in the workplace, it’s lacking in many of our marriages, it’s lacking in our government, and sometimes it’s even lacking in our churches. Like Diogenes of ancient Greece, we sometimes feel the urge to take our lantern and begin our search for an honest man.
There is something about Christians that should stand out like a neon sign on a dark night. Jesus wants his people to be known as a people of truth. We should establish a reputation, like Tanner, for speaking the truth even when it would benefit us to do otherwise. Then, and only then, will those around us trust what we say without hesitation, without wondering whether we really mean what we say or not.
“Therefore, putting away lying, each one speak truth with his neighbor, for we are members of one another.” (Ephesians 4:25).
May God help you to be that person of truth that Diogenes was looking for (and God still is, too).
It was the latest example of what's become an epidemic of dishonesty. A few days ago, historian Stephen Ambrose admitted that in his new book, THE WILD BLUE, he'd lifted passages from an earlier book by historian Thomas Childer. Many sentences were similar; others were identical to those in Childer's book, THE WINGS OF MORNING.
To his credit, Ambrose, whom I know and respect, promptly apologized and said Childer would be properly acknowledged in future editions of the book. He also said the word-for-word copying was inadvertent. But as Fred Barnes of the WEEKLY STANDARD asks, "How could such a thing happen inadvertently?"
How, indeed. In recent years, politicians and pundits, professors and even Pulitzer Prize-winners have been caught dealing in deceit. For example, Pulitzer-Prize winning historian Joseph Ellis was caught inventing a Vietnam War record. So was Tim Johnson, manager of the Toronto Blue Jays. And just a few weeks ago, football coach George O'Leary was caught embroidering details on his resume-a deception that cost him his dream job as coach of Notre Dame.
Sadly, these people are not a minority. James Patterson and Peter Kim, authors of THE DAY AMERICA TOLD THE TRUTH, estimate that 91 percent of us regularly trash the truth.
Why has lying become so much more prevalent? Some scholars believe the problem arose out of the gradual adoption of a utilitarian ethic -- one that began eroding the traditional ethic in the West in the mid-to late-nineteenth century. Utilitarianism can be made to say that a good end justifies the means-that if a lie does more help for more people than harm, then we ought to feel free to employ one.
In the late twentieth century, this problem was exacerbated by the rise of postmodern deconstructionism on college campuses. Postmodernists teach that the truth is not merely irrelevant; they believe it simply doesn't exist. As Lynne Cheney observes in her book, TELLING THE TRUTH, academics "leaped beyond the common sense observation that people's descriptions of reality differ to the conclusion that there is no independent reality and thus no basis for making judgments about truth-or falsity." Truth claims are in reality "the constructs of dominant groups-the creations of the powerful," Cheney writes.
This assault on truth has spread beyond academia-and today we're seeing the grim results. Today, even the man on the street sees little wrong with lying. For instance, in the wake of the George O'Leary scandal, a football fan told the NEW YORK POST, "I think Notre Dame is acting holier than thou." O'Leary ought to be judged, not on his integrity, but his coaching record.
It's the perfect postmodern response to lying: Perfectly okay to re-invent ourselves, because what we say and do matter less than whether we can coach a team.
The good news is that while America's tolerance for lying is greater than ever, Americans retain enough of their Judeo-Christian ethic that the news that a public figure lied is still viewed as scandalous. We have to help our neighbors understand what's behind this propensity for lying: A worldview that denies the existence of truth itself.
And then we must point them to the Author of truth: The One who said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
For further reading:
Charles W. Colson, THE LINE BETWEEN RIGHT & WRONG: DEVELOPING A PERSONAL CODE OF ETHICS (Barbour Publishing, 1997).
Stephen E. Ambrose, THE WILD BLUE: THE MEN AND BOYS WHO FLEW THE B-24S OVER GERMANY (Simon & Schuster, 2001).
Thomas Childer, THE WINGS OF MORNING: THE STORY OF THE LAST AMERICAN BOMBER SHOT DOWN OVER GERMANY IN WORLD WAR II (Perseus, 1996).
Lynne Cheney, TELLING THE TRUTH: WHY OUR CULTURE AND OUR COUNTRY HAVE STOPPED MAKING SENSE -- AND WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT (Touchstone Books, 1996).
_________________________
Copyright © 2002 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. 'BreakPoint with Chuck Colson' is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.
*
On some political issues involving religion, America's youth seem to be more conservative than their elders, but cheating, stealing and lying by high school students has increased with alarming vigor, according to two separate studies.
A report by the University of California at Berkeley's Survey Research Center says 59 percent of adults ages 27 to 59 want public schools to allow prayer at official school activities such as commencements while 69 percent of teenagers support school prayer.
Thirty-four percent of adults support government restrictions of abortion, the report said, while about 44 percent of youths age 15 to 22 support such restrictions.
Forty percent of adults registered support federal aid to faith-based charities, meanwhile, while 59 percent of college-aged youth and 67 percent of younger teens support such funding.
The UC Berkeley survey, released in September, was funded by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts.
Survey participants were asked to rank their feelings for religious conservatives on a scale from zero for "cold" to 50-100 for varying degrees of "warmth." While no age group showed a significant amount of warmth for Christian fundamentalists, 33 percent of youth gave them a score over 50 while 26 percent of adults gave them a similar rating, UC Berkeley researchers found.
"We were surprised by the greater support among young Americans for some aspects of the conservative cultural agenda," said Merrill Shanks, political science professor at UC Berkeley and one of the lead researchers for the study. "Young Americans show more conservatism on religious politics and abortion even though youths, as a group, appear to be less likely than their elders to attend religious services regularly or consider religion a guide in their daily life.
"If the youth of today maintain these positions on religious politics and abortion as the years go by," he noted, "then the American public as a whole could become more conservative on these issues."
Meanwhile, a recent report by the Josephson Institute of Ethics reports that students admitting they cheated on an exam at least once in the previous year jumped from 61 percent in 1992 to 74 percent in 2002; the number who stole something from a store within the year rose from 31 percent to 38 percent; and the percentage who admit they lied to their teachers and parents also increased significantly.
The Josephson study, released as part of the Oct. 20-26 National Character Counts Week, also indicates alarming deterioration over the past two years. Cheating rose from 71 percent in 2000 to 74 percent in 2002; theft increased from 35 percent to 38 percent; and those who said they would be willing to lie to get a good job jumped from 28 percent to 39 percent.
The survey also found that students who attend private religious schools were less likely to shoplift but more likely to cheat on exams and lie to teachers. Also, students who participate in varsity sports cheated on exams at a higher rate than students who did not play sports.
"The evidence is that a willingness to cheat has become the norm and that parents, teachers, coaches and even religious educators have not been able to stem the tide," said Michael Josephson, president of the Josephson Institute of Ethics, based in Marina del Rey, Calif. "The scary thing is that so many kids are entering the workforce to become corporate executives, politicians, airplane mechanics and nuclear inspectors with the dispositions and skills of cheaters and thieves."
Gender is the most significant differentiating factor among high school students, the Josephson report said. While girls cheat and lie as much as boys in general, they are substantially less likely to steal or engage in other dishonest practices and they have more positive attitudes toward ethics.
Participation in varsity sports did not make a difference in behavior except for the likelihood of cheating on exams. The study also found that students who attend private religious schools do not act much better than those who attend public schools. Generally, students who claimed their religion is essential or very important to them also performed on the national average.
The Josephson report is based on a survey of 12,000 high school students administered by schools throughout the nation. The Josephson Institute of Ethics is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that conducts a national survey of the ethics of American youth every two years.
The UC Berkeley study is based on telephone interviews completed during the latter half of 2001, and most occurred between late April and Sept. 10, according to a Pew Charitable Trusts news report. About 1,250 people were interviewed, a standard sample for academic research.
*
“For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? And [why] not [say], ‘Let us do evil that good may come’? — as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.” (Romans 3:7-8 NKJV)
Doing evil that good may come
• Truth — veracity
• Abounded [increased] — was enhanced
• Lie — unfaithfulness, sin
• Judged — condemned, punished
• Sinner — case supposed is this, that because good has been brought out of evil, the evil-doer should not be punished
• And…say — since out of evil, good has been extracted
• Do…come ? — Rom 6:1, 15 — if we do good, good will come of it: if we do evil, good is brought out of it: therefore it matters not what we do, since all will come right in the end
• Whose [Their]…just — just must be the condemnation of all who act on such a principle, and talk in such a way
Whose damnation is just — Rev. T. Robinson
I. What is meant by damnation
1. Judgment
2. Condemnation
3. Punishment
II. The damnation of all the impenitent is just, especially where there is
1. A wicked will to choose evil
2. A wicked wit to justify it
Justification.— In a conversation which the Rev. Mr. Innes had with an infidel on his sick bed he told him that when he was taken ill, he thought he would rely on the general mercy of God; that as he never had done anything very bad, he hoped all would be well. “But as my weakness increased,” he added, “I began to think, is not God a just Being as well as merciful? Now, what reason have I to think He will treat me with mercy, and not with justice; and if I am treated with justice,” he said, with much emotion, “where am I?” “I showed him,” says Mr. Innes, “that this was the very difficulty the Gospel was sent to remove, as it showed how mercy could be exercised in perfect consistency with the strictest demands of justice, while it was bestowed through the atonement made by Jesus Christ. After explaining this doctrine, and pressing it on his attention and acceptance, one of the last things he said to me, before leaving him, was, ‘Well I believe it must come to this. I confess I here see a solid footing to rest on, which, on my former principles, I could never find.’”
“I know not which is worse; the bearer of tales, or the receiver; for the one makes the other. We should no less hate to tell, than to hear slanders. If we cannot stop others' mouths, let us stop our own ears. The receiver is as bad as the thief.” — Bishop Henshaw
“God is as true in His threatenings as He is in His promises. Let us fear the threatening, that we may not feel it.”
Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.
Donate