Is it ever right to lie?

It so happened that the spies found lodging in the home of a woman who proved to be a harlot. Sinful as she was, the Lord had begun a work of repentance and faith in her heart, as her words to the spies proved. It was not lust that led them to her home, but it was God's grace that did so. When the king of Jericho heard that Israelites had come to Jericho as spies, he demanded that Rahab should deliver them to him (v. 3). But she was the one person in that whole city who had been awakened to realize that Israel was serving the true God and that His rights were paramount, so that she decided she must take sides with God against her own nation. When the messengers came to Rahab, she lied to them, telling them that though the men had come to her house, she did not know where they were from and they had left again as darkness was falling (v. 5). The messengers accepted her word for it, and her suggestion that they pursue them quickly.

Was it right for Rahab to lie? No, it is never right to lie. Yet Rahab lied because she had faith in God. Not that faith made her lie, but she could see no other way of protecting the spies. Possibly a more mature faith would have acted differently, for God could work a miracle to protect the spies, if he so chose. The fact that she lied showed her faith, but also showed the weakness of her faith.

The wisdom of faith invariably outwits Satan. Rahab "hid the men" (Joshua 2:4) as soon as they were enquired after. If a believer takes to planning, let him remember that Satan is a craftier planner than he. If the believer trusts his Father like a little child, then Satan is beaten before the battle begins.

Because of the lie Rahab told, cavillers would cast a slur on the veracity of the whole story. But God tells the truth about her character and her ways, as about everything; it is man who hides what is not to his credit. "By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace" (Heb. 11:31). Her faith, not her falsehood, is commended. Easterns are proverbially addicted to lying; not that it is intended by this remark to imply that a national characteristic is an excuse for sin; on the contrary, so much the worse for the nation thus characterised. The testimony of the old poet of Crete was, the Cretans are liars, sluggish gluttons, savage beasts to which testimony the apostle Paul added his own evidence, thus giving the necessary twofold witness to a fact; and so the record stands of a people being liars. Whether of west or east, lying and deceit are hateful to God; "rebuke them sharply" was the word to Titus, because of their national characteristics. No one need suggest that the word of God makes light of a lie, because it tells the truth about everybody, Rahab included. But why should the infidels of Christendom expect morality from believers in God? Their objection, founded on Rahab's lie, to the truth of this part of the word of God, is a testimony that they believe God is true and cannot countenance falsehood, and that He will do what He says He will. He will surely execute judgment on this world, and on its infidelity and its liars, as He has said. Rahab had no right to tell her king a lie any more than a man has liberty to tell a lie to the father of lies. Had her faith in Jehovah gone further, she would have trusted in Him, instead of in her deception, for deliverance. A soldier of Christ telling a falsehood in Christ's name is simply a traitor to his Lord.

There were many faults in the deceitful and timid way in which Jacob returned to Canaan, but he did proceed thither when God told him; and here we see that a right act may be done in a wrong way, which is certainly better than not at all. It was right of him to go to Canaan, but wrong to tell falsehoods, copious and fluent, on the way. The same principle applies to many other of the notable actions of scripture: it was right of Rahab to hide the spies, and of Shiphrah and Puah to save the male children of Israel; but if they had had the faith and courage to do so without telling deliberate untruths, God would have upheld them. We find that the deed is often approved though the manner of its doing is not; and here is an important lesson: a good deed may be done in a faulty way, and we certainly should — as God has done — approve the action and not let the manner of it blind us to its virtue. There is it great deal too much adverse criticism from people who never do anything on those who are in active service, because these latter do not shape all their methods to meet the approval of the former. The old school of German strategists found perpetual fault with Bonaparte, because he did not fight according to their conventional rules; but he kept on winning the battles somehow, and that was the great thing after all. But now Christ is revealed, and all evil is judged in His cross; and He reigns in our life. Let us, therefore, strive to eschew all wrong and to do right things in the right way, for feeble minds are unable to distinguish these things, being stumbled and hindered by our inconsistencies.

We find plenty of that sort of thing in the Old Testament. Not that I defend the falsehood, I do not, though many do. Truth had not then come out. Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. So in Colossians, we have the injunction, "Lie not one to another," and the ground for this is, "Seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds." No such thing was true or known in the Old Testament. Again, in the same way in Ephesians, we have, "Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour," and the ground given for this is, "For we are members one of another"; that too was not true in the Old Testament. Lying is one of the three characters of sin; but the full light had not shone forth in Rahab's time. And in the law it is not truth that is enjoined, but "false witness against" which is forbidden. Still, it is wrong enough now, though you will find many a Christian thinking it right to do so.

It ought not to be needful to insist also on the absolute necessity of truth, both in word and deed, in the dealings of God's children, both with one another and with the world. They who have been made manifest to God should scorn the vain shelter, under any circumstances, of a refuge of lies. But men (and especially women) lie from kindness not less frequently, perhaps, than from fear or interest or malice; but white lies turn black as night beneath the searching eye of the Father of lights. And truth, which to the believer is Christ, will not only shame its adversaries, but exact also penalties, that must be felt, from its unfaithful friends. We are safe from lying and all other species of baseness only so long as we keep in memory the soul-ennobling reality of our relationship as new creatures in Christ, both to God and to each other in His sight.9

For the Christian it is the sure proof of a low and earthly state of soul to palliate a lie by toning it down to "incorrect speech." One thus panders to the world's code of honour, where the truth is unknown, and an impeachment of veracity, however certain, demands wiping out with blood. Still more deplorable is the delusion which plays into the enemy's hand, as if no saint can be guilty of lying. Even the New Testament warns of the danger in Epistles such as those to the saints in Ephesus and Colosse, which treat of the highest privileges of the church. "Wherefore putting away falsehood, speak ye truth each with his neighbour; for we are members one of another." "Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds." The repeated warning proves how readily it might be even among the best taught. Only ignorance or worldliness could think otherwise. In fact it is recorded for our admonition that such was the first sin after the great Pentecost.

But it is intolerable to compare or class with lying any mistakes of inadvertency or hearsay, particularly when there is care to correct them after the facts are better known. The essence of lying is the wish to deceive, whatever the motive; which may be to exalt self or to injure another, to evade through fear or to gain a desired end. There is no difficulty in discerning where the eye is single. Even the least esteemed or those of no account in the church are quite capable of judging matters of wrong or falsehood, though it would be absurd to expect from such a sound judgment on deeper questions. But as the Old Testament does not hide or extenuate the fathers, so the New Testament lets us know how far in this very way might fall an honoured apostle, who trusted himself and let drop the warning words of the Lord.

68 Then what the woman said was true, "The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." When the woman of Samaria said, "I have no husband," it was true; but the object of it was to conceal the truth for all that. It was legally true, but ethically false; true in fact, but truth told to conceal the truth all the while.

The prophet knew the murderous heart of Saul, and reposed no confidence in him, especially in anything that touched his tenure of the kingdom. Smarting from the rebuke passed upon him in the matter of the Amalekites, he probably would neither forget nor forgive the pronouncement of the prophet concerning God's rejection of him as king and captain of His people. Yet such was Samuel that he could mourn, even to excess, for the man whom he knew would not hesitate to kill him if the occasion offered. God instructs His servant therefore how to go about the business without exciting the suspicion either of Saul or his officers. This is not deception, as some have imagined, for Jehovah is a God of truth, and would never resort to deceit in any form or for any purpose whatsoever; and though for man, who would so quickly sit in judgment on God's acts, it is easy and natural enough to lie, with God this is "impossible." "God orders him to protect himself with a sacrifice; Say, 'I am come to sacrifice,' which was true, and proper that he should when he came to anoint a king (1 Sam. 11:15). As a prophet, he might sacrifice when and where God appointed. In truth he came to sacrifice, though having also a further end, which he saw fit to conceal."*

Besides this, it implies that the truth of God is dependent, for example, on my lie to abound to the glory of God; but this means that it is my right to sin — that it is a justifiable thing to say, "Let us do evil that good may come." But, the apostle says, The judgment of such is just.

Some may set up the plea that, their object being the glory of God in the salvation of souls, the manner or the means becomes an indifferent thing. Is not this too like the petulant excuse of the sinner in Romans 3? "If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto His glory, why am I also judged a sinner?" Is this ground for mortal man to take? It is indeed the old fallacy of Satan, "Let us do evil that good may come."