TaN: The Philippines is the only Christian country in the East – this is an oxymoron phrase if I ever heard one. Filipinos have always maintained (and, I suppose, would fiercely defend) that they are Christians – i.e., Catholics. If this were true (or even just factual), the Philiipines would be paradise on earth, where there will be no crimes and no injustice (involving Christian Filipinos as perpetrator) and no sufferings and no misery (induced or caused by Christian Filipinos). [The two “qualifying” phrases is based on the fact that there are non-Christian Filipinos and non-Filipinos residing or staying within its territory, so the crimes, the injustice may be caused by them and that man has very little control over the forces of nature so misery and suffering resulting from natural calamities such as typhoons and as quakes cannot justifiably or rightfully be attributed to Filipinos, whether Christian or non-Christian.]
However, their daily and “unintentional” actions betray or contradict their claim because otherwise (true) Christians would obey the commandments and teachings (and admonitions) of Jesus. Yet, Filipinos has several reputations that belie such a claim – such as having so much corruption in government (e.g., the latest as of this writing of which is the Janet Lim “pork barrel” or PDAF scam – “Napoles” is the husband’s surname so it would be an injustice to the Napoles family to attribute the scandal to their good name), as perpetrating heineous crimes (e.g., murder and abuse, be they child, women, or whoever), and even as petty matters like simple cheating in tests and spreading gossip.
It is not only embarrassing to continue with our claims but even a disservice (to say the least) and an abomination to Jesus, unless and until Filipinos do a complete 180-degree turnaround and be the epitome of Christianism. In truth and in fact, there is no such thing as a Christian country in this world – not only today but for always – because it would otherwise mean that Jesus has returned, that those of Jesus – raised from the dead and joined by those who have not yet died – would be sitting and ruling over the rest of humanity for the prophecied one thousand years – before the final judgment, the “migration” of all those worthy to Paradise, and the annihilation of all creation.
Come on, let us stop and refrain from branding falsehoods and be true to ourselves and others. Let us stop fooling ourselves by changing definitions so that we will not feel guilty of going against our conscience. Let us stop being fools for Satan. Let us be “fools” for God.
TaN: Anatomy of a lie: Is a lie simply the (unbiased) telling of untruths and devoid of any responsibility to confirm or the intentional (but not necessarily malicious) telling of untruths. [“Intentional” here would mean there is no effort in verifying or determining the veracity before imparting the “untruth” but with knowledge that untruths are being relayed or imparted, whereas the former “unbiased” type would refer to a simple clerical or mechanical act of telling untruths – somewhat like a robot or a machine would be doing when it relays or passes along untruths nd serving merely as a medium or vehicle of transmission.]
Further, if it should have the quality of being deliberate, can it merely be intentional but devoid of any malicious intent (like when one pays or gives an undeserved compliment), or should it be with the purpose of causing injury, harm, or deprivation of what is due. And, what about in the case of advertising where there is foreknowledge of fraud or deception but for the purpose of gaining profit instead of causing harm or inury to the consumer? What does God really mean when He said “Thou shalt not bear false witness against another“?
Does “bearing false witness” refer only to perjury or when we are testifying against another during the pursuit of truth, justice and righteousness or does it encompass the aforementioned situations or scenarios?
Telling untruths is such a complex act that God saw it fit to be included in the Ten Commandments. One probable reason could be that it is the only act one can make that has no obvious or physical evidence of injury or harm yet its impact is even worse than the outright taking of another’s life.
In addition, unlike the taking of another’s life, where it is commanded that “Thou shalt not kill“, it is likewise written in Ecclesiastes that “…there is a time to kill and a time to heal“. So, obviously, killing is not always bad but telling untruths is always evil. There is never a time or purpose where or when telling of untruths is justifiable or permissible.
It must be understood, however, that this does not mean that taking of another’s life is of a lesser evil or degree than the telling of untruths. As in my earlier blog (one of my posts the previous year), I have argued that there is no such thing as lesser of two evils because evil has no degree and by arguing that one evil is less than another is merely our devious and malicious way of skirting guilt from our conscience and purposefully finding a justification to do evil.
Telling of untruths are repeatedly mentioned and warned in the Holy Scriptures. A case in point would be Lucifer or Satan, who is the supreme deceiver. Or, when the Holy Scriptures warned that we should not be wary of what goes into our body but what comes out of it that may be vile. Aside from the familiar body excreta resulting from our digestion and perspiration processes, there is also the matter of words that are spoken. These words may be untruths and these are the “unclean” that is being referred to and that we are being forewarned about. These untruths are more destructive than physical violence or death because they can “kill” what the former cannot – reputations, relationships, and all the immaterial but more important and vital aspects of a man’s being.