Christians, is it always immoral to disobey the ten commandments? (warning: contains hypothetical situations)?

Question

(if you cannot process hypotheticals, please do not answer).

Is lying always immoral?

Two specific scenarios:

1. You live in a country where the police often "disappear" dissidents. You see a known human rights activist running; a minute later armed police officers arrive, and ask you if you have seen this person, and which direction he went.

Do you follow the ten commandments, or do you lie?

2. You have a friend who doesn't have long to live, and is not a christian. This friend is logical, so you cannot convert him to christianity using logical fallacies. He is scientifically illiterate, so you could use the standard creationist lies to convert him, knowing full well they're lies, but knowing that using them will mean he will die a christian.

Do you follow the ten commandments, or do you lie?

Answer 1

1. The ten commandments are the core of the old covenant; a legally binding agreement between the two parties, God and Israel. Christians are not a party to the ten, so the ten are not relevant to the Christian covenant of faith and the spirit of the law.



2. The ten, in regards to lying, has to do with "bearing false witness" in a legal sense, like at a trial. Lying is covered elsewhere. However, even in the old covenant, the midwives of Israel lied to Pharaoh in order to spare the lives of the male children, and God commended them for this. To lie for the sake of protecting another from harm such as the scenario you put forth would be allowed and encouraged.



3. Your second hypothetical works from a logical fallacy itself, as though there were no other alternatives (black and white thinking) and that a creationist argument is already established to be untrue. There are however other ways, more convincing than even the creation argument.



In regards then to the creationist argument, Occam's razor states that the simplest explanation is invariably the truth. Given that, was the creation of matter (big bang) related to a causality of a being of immense power and intellect, or did it all happen without cause? In other words, is it logical to state and believe the creation just happened without something causing it? The same argument stands for the existence of life. Was the flame of life self-lit, or was there a causative factor, seeing as science has gotten to the point that it is conceded life could not have started up on its own?



But again, there is a more convincing argument. I'll let you dwell on that one.



.

Answer 2

I guess the simple answer is yes, but there would need be much more too it. He would have had to explain it more than just that the world was (when it is) overpopulated, like he would have to explain that he has done away with all the other commandments about procreation, marriage, not engaging in homosexual sex acts, etc. Also, based on your hypothetical it leaves it up to the follower to determine when the world is overpopulated and therefore the individual would pray to ask God when that would be. Because the world will never be overpopulated (99.9% likely to be the case), then it would be a frivilous or unnecessary commandment, which I would then ask God why He would give such a frivilous commandment. I'm sure His answer would be that He was really just testing people and seeing if they would use God and His teachings as an excuse for engaging in certain behavior (or not), which he had specifically forbidden. I guess there are just too many holes in thy hypothetical. But, to be clear, if God did ask that people in no unclear way that they should take someone of the same sex to be their partner, then I don't believe I could disobey, no matter how contrary it was to everthing He has ever taught and commanded.

Answer 3

Not to rain on your hypothetical parade, but the commandment against bearing "false witness" deals with wtiness in the sense of false accusations, knowingly false swearing in the sense of testifying to that you saw, heard, experienced something you know you did not see, hear, experience. It has nothing to do with making a claim that you believe without sufficient cause. So your first case applies, the second does not because it lack malicious intent.



Most Creationists fervently believe the nonsense they repeat and in fact lack the scientific literacy to know what's true from what's false. I find Creationists simply cut and paste from Creationist websites and have absolutely no idea what any of it means. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics springs to mind. I have yet to encounter a Creationist that actually knows what thermodynamics is, what the laws state, or how they do and don't apply. Invariably they leave out "in a closed system" because the Creationist websites leave this out since it then has no application to their cause.



Certainly the Creationist website folks are bearing false witness as they know damn good and well they are intentionally misquoting the 2nd Law and misrepresenting the facts and the evidence at every turn, and they know it isn't science since they begin with the a priori assumption that Creationism is God-breathed Biblical truth and cannot be incorrect. They seem to have no problem whatever outright lying in order to sell their illiterate audience, but their illiterate audience, having studiously avoided the study of Physics (or anything else requiring mental effort), are not about to look up the 2nd Law, despite they have no idea what it means. They simply have no curiosity about the real world since they happily reside in La-La Land, and cutting and pasting from Creationist websites let's them pretend they have cause for their position with an answer that sounds scientific to other illiterates and impresses them greatly.



The purpose of Creationist Apologetics is, after all, not to convince, but to reinforce what the ignorant already believe and soothe any doubt they might not have cause to believe as they do. This obviously doesn't take much since they believed without cause in the first place.

Answer 4

The commandment is giving false witness. Lying about what a neighbor did or didn't do. You would break that commandment by saying a neighbor you don't like is a dissident.

I am not a creationist, I really don't like your use of "standard creationist lies". All people are entitled to their beliefs. Just because someone doesn't believe as I do doesn't mean they are lying. I also don't think that only Christians go to heaven.

Answer 5

Apparently some people don't think lying to the police counts as bearing false witness. Watching them twist a command about not lying into who knows what, even when the situation is clearly about legal witnessing.



It's because people know that ethics are situation dependent, but can't bring themselves to say that inflexible commandments are not good moral guidelines.

Answer 6

If you love the Lord then you wouldn't lie under any circumstances and yes it would be immoral.

However God forgives and understand ones heart, and the motivation as to why you do it.

He will hold you accountable for all that you do. And judge you accordingly to how he see's fit.



I follow the ten commandments best I can. I slip up frequently. Sometimes willing, something

under impulse. I lie not for the sake of lieing. But i lie nevertheless.

May God have mercy on me.

Answer 7

I do both, since lying in and of itself isn't explicitly forbidden in the ten commandments. Certain some things are of higher priority than others. Bearing false witness, if that is what you refer to, is about slander and libel. While it may not be the best thing to do, not being completely honest would be preferable to other things.

In the scenarios you gave



1) I would probably say " I saw him, but he went around the corner, and I don't know where he went.

2) I woud pray for his soul, give him the evidence, and then trust God.

Answer 8

Steve T. is mostly correct: To bear false witness against someone also includes libel and gossip. Alluding to the hypothetical as Socrates pointed out to Thracymachos sometimes to tell the truth is to actively engage in injustice.

Answer 9

Didn't you ask this a few days ago? No lying is never okay. 1. I wouldn't tell them where they went but I don't have to lie, either.



2. I would never lie about the 'Truth' that is God's word. If that person chooses not to believe there is simply nothing I can do.

Answer 10

there is no commandment in the ten commandments that tells one not to lie. maybe in the christian bible there is, but it doubt it.

the closest commandment is don't be a false witness against another which doesn't apply in the cases stated here.

Answer 11

Just because someone believes in God, doesn't mean they're illogical. Sorry, if you want your hypothetical question answered properly, I suggest you not contain insults in them; that should be common sense.



I guarantee that if you were to go about in public calling people you don't know stupid,illogical,and hell bound, then you'd look like the dumb ***.

Answer 12

Not one of the ten commandments is about lying as such.



There is one about bearing false witness, but that means in a court situation and doesn't apply to your examples.



As an atheist:



1) I would say that I hadn't seen him

2) I would not try to make a dying man believe things that were not true, though I would comfort him and reassure him

Answer 13

Jesus said to judge righteouss judgement. It means that sometimes the strictest interpretation of the law might not apply to every single situation that will happen on the earth

Answer 14

This question contains hypothetical situations!

Answer 15

I stopped after "hypothetical"...