Truth or consequences?

[seebs]

Which is more important to you in a belief: Its truth, or the consequences of holding a given opinion about it?

Imagine, for instance, that you knew with *absolute certainty* the following things:
1. A given behavior someone is engaging in is sinful.
2. The sin will be forgiven, as it is a sin out of ignorance.
3. If the person knew this behavior to be sinful, it would cause them to lose their faith.

Would you tell them the truth, knowing that it would do harm, or would you rather leave them mistaken but happy, and eventually saved?

More generally, if you were wrong about something, and knowing the truth would make you sad, would you want to know the truth?

 

[Jutsuka]

The buddhist view on this is that all "sins" are commited out of ignorance of our true nature. A "sin" can only be forgiven by ourselves but that requires that we know the truth.

I would tell the person in question the truth because that is the only way anyone can begin their journey to enlightenment.

I always want to know the truth even if it hurts, suffering is part of life but suffering can be overcome with the correct mindset, ignorance cannot.

 

[Marcel]

My choice would be it's truth, because of the consequences of disregarding the importance of truthfullness.

Besides that I'd say this is one of those case-sensitive thingies.

I think that our most persistent problems are usually caused by that which we don't care to acknowledge. Solutions are often not so much overlooked, but rather subconciously avoided.

That seccond point was a funny one to mention, if you put it up against Socrate's "ignorance is the root of all evil" by the way.

 

[Freodin]

As with all "What if" questions, this can go totally of course, if you just add your own "What if". Hey, if you can do it, I can do it, too.

So, what if the consequences of knowing the truth would make the person sad for some time, but lead to greater happiness later?

What if the consequences of knowing the truth would lead to horrible things?

You would have to ponder these "what if"s, and many more, if you were to make a decision - and what if you pondered wrongly?

You cannot know. The only way to go is hope for the best, and expect the worst.

 

[dnich163]

For me the crux of the matter is the ultimate good; will it be good ultimately for that person to know the truth even if they are unhappy and lose their faith.
As you state anyway, they will be saved eventually.

David

 

[Blackhawk]

Today at 06:53 AM seebs said this in Post #1

Which is more important to you in a belief: Its truth, or the consequences of holding a given opinion about it?

Imagine, for instance, that you knew with *absolute certainty* the following things:
1. A given behavior someone is engaging in is sinful.
2. The sin will be forgiven, as it is a sin out of ignorance.
3. If the person knew this behavior to be sinful, it would cause them to lose their faith.

Would you tell them the truth, knowing that it would do harm, or would you rather leave them mistaken but happy, and eventually saved?

More generally, if you were wrong about something, and knowing the truth would make you sad, would you want to know the truth?

Well first I have to say that they probably do not have much faith if #3 is true.  At least tehy have not taken the point of making Christ their Lord very seriously.  Because if so then #3 would not occur. 

But I take truth because I believe that Freodin hit it on the head with this statement "So, <I>what if</I> the consequences of knowing the truth would make the person sad for some time, but lead to greater happiness later?"&nbsp; I believe that knwoing and believing the truth would lead to greater joy and peace than believing a lie ever would even if the belief is out of ignorance.&nbsp;




&nbsp;

 

[Freodin]

Today at 07:50 PM Blackhawk said this in Post #6 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=694925#post694925)

Well first I have to say that they probably do not have much faith if #3 is true.&nbsp; At least tehy have not taken the point of making Christ their Lord very seriously.&nbsp; Because if so then #3 would not occur.&nbsp;

But I take truth because I believe that Freodin hit it on the head with this statement "So, <I>what if</I> the consequences of knowing the truth would make the person sad for some time, but lead to greater happiness later?"&nbsp; I believe that knwoing and believing the truth would lead to greater joy and peace than believing a lie ever would even if the belief is out of ignorance.&nbsp;




&nbsp;

Ah, but you ignored my presentation of the opposite possibility: that the truth might lead to something horrible.

Do you think that this can never, never, ever happen?

That is the ultimate problem with the "what if"s - you assume some consequences for something, but for some reason always good ones. No one ever bothers with bad "what if"s. Or, if they do, they are instantly refuted.

So "what if"...

... you know this girl, well, and she is ugly and cold-hearted, mean, not a Christian/Muslim/Atheist (whatever you prefer), is completly untalented for anything except causing trouble, and enjoys getting on your nerves - but she thinks she is the greatest invention since the wheel.

This is the truth.

Now you tell her that - she becomes depressed and kills herself.

No, even better - she kills herself by driving a TNT-filled car into the Empire State Building.

Would you still tell her the truth?

But of course, things like this would never happen, will they?

What if...

 

[FaithtoFaith]

Isn't it our Christian duty to tell our brothers and sisters that they are in sin so that they may get on the right path?

Galations 6:1 Dear brothers and sisters, if another Christian is overcome by some sin, you who are godly should gently and humbly help that person back onto the right path. And be careful not to fall into the same temptation yourself.

So then you would have to have faith in God to bring that person back to Him, according to His word...

Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

The truth will set you free...

 

[Blackhawk]

Yesterday at 10:28 PM Freodin said this in Post #8

Ah, but you ignored my presentation of the opposite possibility: that the truth might lead to something horrible.

Do you think that this can never, never, ever happen?

I did not really ignore it I just believe that knowing the truth about a subject such as this is better than believing a lie.&nbsp; That the consequences of the lie are worse than knowing the truth.&nbsp;

That is the ultimate problem with the "what if"s - you assume some consequences for something, but for some reason always good ones. No one ever bothers with bad "what if"s. Or, if they do, they are instantly refuted.

So "what if"...

... you know this girl, well, and she is ugly and cold-hearted, mean, not a Christian/Muslim/Atheist (whatever you prefer), is completly untalented for anything except causing trouble, and enjoys getting on your nerves - but she thinks she is the greatest invention since the wheel.

This is the truth.

Now you tell her that - she becomes depressed and kills herself.

No, even better - she kills herself by driving a TNT-filled car into the Empire State Building.

Would you still tell her the truth?

&nbsp;


i would get her committed to a psychriatric ward.&nbsp; She would not be mentally stable to begin with&nbsp;if knowing the truth&nbsp;would do that to someone.&nbsp; i was answering based on&nbsp;the fact that we are discussing people with just the normal problems.&nbsp; Not Psycho girl from some teen movie.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

But of course, things like this would never happen, will they?

What if...

What if the girl was a demon and ...

Oh and just know that as Christians we are told to speak the truth in love.&nbsp; So I would be very wise in how I told anyone the truth.&nbsp;

 

[Stormy]

Ignorant bliss? or truth?

I choose truth.

But are you so incredibly sure that what you know to be truth is in fact truth? I wish you would be more specific seebs. There seems to be a problem on your mind.

 

[David Gould]

I do not always believe the truth to be a good thing.

An example that I can think of is a couple who, having struggled through some tough times, are now blossoming in their marriage as their love for one another grows.

One of them, however, has a secret. During the tough times they had a brief affair.

Will revealing such truth actually help their marriage at this point or will it destroy it?

What harm will hiding it do?

To risk the ending of a great love simply for some devotion to truth seems to me to be height of foolishness.

&nbsp;

As to the answers that suggest that if the faith is so weak that it would be destroyed by the truth then it is not worth preserving, I am amazed.

Weak faith should be nurtured into strength, not smashed into pieces out of contempt for its weakness.

 

[David Gould]

Today at 11:45 AM Pray4Isrel said this in Post #13

Then I guess it wasn't such a great love after all, if one had an affair.

Um, it has become a great love since that affair. Would you advise the person to tell the truth and risk losing that great love? For what purpose?

 

[seebs]

Good question! I would argue for truth; without it, there will always be a crack in the stone, so to speak. You can't fix what you haven't acknowledged.

Just MHO, and frankly, I'm in no position to advise; I have no idea what I'd do.

 

[seebs]

Today at 06:29 PM Stormy said this in Post #11 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=695775#post695775)

Ignorant bliss? or truth?

I choose truth.

But are you so incredibly sure that what you know to be truth is in fact truth? I wish you would be more specific seebs. There seems to be a problem on your mind.

Nah, just a hypothetical. I asked this in the IIDB philosophy forum once, a while back; I just wanted to see what I'd get if I asked it here.

The problem is, as you note, it's much harder when you *don't* know for sure what the truth is, and I wanted to pursue this in the special case where it's simpler.

 

[David Gould]

Today at 11:56 AM seebs said this in Post #15

Good question! I would argue for truth; without it, there will always be a crack in the stone, so to speak. You can't fix what you haven't acknowledged.

Just MHO, and frankly, I'm in no position to advise; I have no idea what I'd do.

I would argue that there is nothing to fix. The affair cannot be corrected, after all - it happened and cannot be undone. All that can be sought is forgiveness for it, and if that is what is being sought then it is a selfish wish to feel better about it that is driving the wish to confess.

I would not risk losing love. It is too precious to risk for feeling forgiven - forgive yourself, would what I would tell the person.

 

[seebs]

I don't think you can be forgiven without repenting, and I think that implies disclosure and admission. I dunno.

And it may seem selfish at first, but if you haven't been forgiven, and you know it, it will color your relationship, and your spouse probably doesn't want that either.

There's no "undo" button, but I think the effort is still obligatory.

 

[David Gould]

Fair enough. Personally, I would not bring it up and nor would I want my partner to tell me.

 

[Job_38]

Yesterday at 06:53 AM seebs said this in Post #1

Which is more important to you in a belief: Its truth, or the consequences of holding a given opinion about it?

Imagine, for instance, that you knew with *absolute certainty* the following things:
1. A given behavior someone is engaging in is sinful.
2. The sin will be forgiven, as it is a sin out of ignorance.
3. If the person knew this behavior to be sinful, it would cause them to lose their faith.

Would you tell them the truth, knowing that it would do harm, or would you rather leave them mistaken but happy, and eventually saved?

More generally, if you were wrong about something, and knowing the truth would make you sad, would you want to know the truth?

By that type of thinking,&nbsp;I would do my best that they never hear of the gospel or anything. Because to do so is to **** them.


&nbsp;

 

[Marcel]

What matters more? What you deem important, or from which angle you look at it? Wouldn't bickering about the latter, make you lose sight of the former?

(I think I just pinpointed why so many debates go nowhere )

 

[jon1101]

6th March 2003 at 12:53 AM seebs said this in Post #1

Which is more important to you in a belief: Its truth, or the consequences of holding a given opinion about it?

Imagine, for instance, that you knew with *absolute certainty* the following things:
1. A given behavior someone is engaging in is sinful.
2. The sin will be forgiven, as it is a sin out of ignorance.
3. If the person knew this behavior to be sinful, it would cause them to lose their faith.

Would you tell them the truth, knowing that it would do harm, or would you rather leave them mistaken but happy, and eventually saved?

More generally, if you were wrong about something, and knowing the truth would make you sad, would you want to know the truth?

I tend to believe that unethical behavior is necessarily harmful, and that people commit unethical behavior because at that time they thought it would benefit them. Thus, any unethical act is done&nbsp;out of ignorance. If this is true, then causing my friend to no longer be ignorant would also cause him or her to stop. Therefore, there's not really any dilemma.

-jon