Monday, August 07, 2006

The truth will set you free

This has potential for being another LONG post. But I don't want it to be. I think the bulk of it is in the title.
This phrase has two meanings, both true.

The first one, the original one, means that Jesus, the Way, the Truth and the Life, will set you free :)

The second one, which I will explore more in this particular post, means that lies will ensnare you, entrap you, and sometimes it may seem easier to keep some things under wraps, but no matter how painful it is to have the truth out, at least you have nothing to hide, and you are free. You're not trying to keep secrets, people may judge, point a finger, stare, be hurt, but you are free.

The question here, is: is this freedom worth the cost, which may be a personal cost, or one that affects another person deeply?

I was thinking of this in relation to the series of books I was reading, especially Fair is the Rose. Leana was much happier when nobody knew how her marriage to Jamie came about. When the truth was out, she lost her husband, her child, and had to sit on the repentance stool- all of which was utterly unfair. But at the same time, she was free.
Telling the truth isn't the easiest way, and sometimes it's better to not tell some things to the whole wide world- in Leana's case I think it would have been perfectly OK if she never told everyone, morally- but I was admirative that she told the truth to the kirk session even though it cost her everything.

I think that sometimes it's best to confess things that have remained hidden- but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone has to know everything. Sometimes they can remain hidden, but I'm not convinced that's the best way.

Feel free to comment on this post. Here are a few questions to reflect on, which would be worth commenting:

*for those who have read the book I'm referring to, what would you have done in Leana's situation?

*what should David have done instead of murdering Bath-Sheba's husband? What do you think would have happened if he had done that instead? I've been told this isn't the best example, if you can think of a better one feel free to comment on that

*do you think that if you've lied to a person in the past, and there is no way the person could possibly be affected by it presently, or ever find out, unless YOU tell, should you confess anyway?
And if you do decide to tell, who should you tell? Just the people immediately affected, or a wider audience?
And what about the case where it's a past affair? Is it the same thing as a lie, or should it receive a different treatment?

1 comment:

Alessia said...

my own, personal opinion... I think question 3 is more interesting, especially as I've already pretty much answered the 2 first ones personnally.
I'd say that if you've lied to someone and there's no way it could possibly affect the person unless you tell, it's pretty selfish to confess now. It'll only hurt more than anything. The only exception I would see to that 'rule' would be cheating- I think that's different, and in the vast majority of cases it should be confessed to the husband or wife even if it's over and has been for a long time.
But I'm still interested in knowing what y'all think :)