Yesterday I asked for your input on two theology quotes. Earlier today I provided my own input on the first of these two quotes. Here is the second:
It has been in vogue to say that today the important thing is not Christianity’s truth but its relevance. That is like saying to the sick that the important thing is not the accuracy of the prescription, but taking the medicine. In determining which of the innumerable kinds of medicine to take, how much, and how often, nothing is more important than the accuracy of the doctor’s prescription.
This quote is from Integrative Theology
Though they speak of accuracy vs. relevance, the options are often presented as “truth vs. love” (Eph 4:15), or “grace vs. truth” (John 1:14, 17). Ideally, of course, both would be nice, but if we have to err on one side or the other, it is often argued (as in the quote above) that we must lean toward truth and accuracy.
I have often taught this way as well.
In the first church I pastored, I preached that the Bible teaches us to speak the truth in love, but if you were going to overemphasize one side or the other, it was better to emphasize truth. Why? Because untruth, I argued, was unloving. Therefore, emphasizing love at the expense of truth is actually hateful.
That, it seems to me, is kind of what Lewis and Demarest are saying above with the image of the medicine. Who cares how loving the doctor is if he gives you the wrong medicine? What is most important is a truthful diagnosis and an accurate prescription.
What is wrong with this? Nothing really…except that it allows people to do and say the most horrendous things in the name of “truth.” And as I have already argued, truth which does not lead you to love, is not truth at all.
Without Love, Truth is Suspect
I understand that a false diagnosis and an inaccurate prescription may do more harm to the patient, but a doctor who does not love the patient or care about the patient and genuinely desire that they get well, will likely not accurately diagnose the sickness or prescribe a medicine.
My wife recently went to a doctor about some health problems she was experiencing, and it quickly became obvious to her that he did not care to hear about her symptoms, take the time to answer her question, or explain to her what was happening. All he did was offer her a small packet of prescription slips which he was certain would take care of a problem he had seen a thousand times before.
My wife was a little hesitant to take prescriptions offered so callously, but trusting his professional, expert opinion, did so anyway. While some of her conditions improved, several others grew worse, and she also began exhibiting several new conditions. We did a little research online, and the doctor had given her the exactly wrong prescription to help her problem.
Why did this happen? Because the doctor didn’t care about Wendy enough to listen to her and spend a few extra minutes finding out about her and her symptoms. He wrote out a few prescriptions, and walked away, thinking he had solved another case, when in fact he had failed miserably, because he lacked the prerequisite love.
Not Truth or Love…
How often do we quote the truth at people, giving them a verse, or a pamphlet, or a book, thinking we have solved another problem, saved another soul, when in fact, we have only made the problem worse? Truth, if it does not come from love and lead to love, is not truth, but a lie.
…But Truth in Love
Here’s the point: I don’t think we can choose between “truth and love” or “accuracy and relevancy.” One without the other perverts the one that is emphasized. Truth without love is harsh judgmentalism and dogmatism. Love without truth is blind sentimentality. But truth in love is compassionate concern.
If you cannot speak truth in a loving way, then it is not true. It is only from a position of love that you can speak the truth and seek the good of the person to whom you speak it.
True truth is loving, and real love is truthful. You cannot divorce the two. If you find yourself justifying what you are going to say or do “in the name of truth” or “in the name of love” you are probably being neither truthful nor loving.
When it comes to truth and love, don’t be content to err on one side or the other. The way of God, the way of Jesus, and the proper way of theology is to speak the truth in love. If one or the other is missing from your theology or your teaching, it would be best to keep your mouth shut.
The irony of the timing of this post and a comment that appeared on another post is too good to miss:
Check out this comment.
He was baiting you, trying to get more fodder for his rant. Somehow you must have really po’d this guy.
I remember talking to him on the phone some, but don’t remember hanging up on him as he accuses me of doing.
I don’t think I’ve ever met him, but he certainly seems to have placed me in his little “heretic” box. Oh well.
RAHAB, Case by Case. R Reagon forgot to feed a pet goldfish of small child at the home he was staying in during arms reduction with Gorbachev. The goldfish died. He sent the secret service out for another goldfish. Theological conundrum solved. Love trumps. I submit self deception in our heart must be overcome so that our love is sanctified and discriminating.
Rahab? Case by case? I don’t understand.
I sent the goldfish story twice, 2nd ,comment completes thought.
“Because untruth, I argued, was unloving. Therefore, emphasizing love at the expense of truth is actually hateful.”
Best sentence in the post right there. So wise.
No one has ever given a satisfactory answer to the the problem of Rahab’s lie in Joshua to me, especially in the light of her being exalted in Hebrews . i confess it is puzzling. i have seen hope dashed over a termnial illness diagnosis that until then was being fought heroically. That and the case of Rahab were life and death issues. Is that significant. Taquiya is the Islamic premise that to lie to an infidel for self protection is a virtue and clearly self serving sin. No argument there. If I may draw a parallel. If If am poor and steal food to feed a starving child, is it theft? Of course. I am left depending on G-d’s perfect justice to ajudicate perfectly. In any case I am either covered by the blood or not and will recieve the just sentence. That does not address the temporal issue? Sin is sin only one way out.
Elias,
One of the beauties fo the Bible is that its characters are real, warts and all.
Abraham was a liar(told the king Sarah was his sister).
David was a adulterer and murderer.
Rahab lied, but we are never even told she repented of her harlotry.
The beauty of these lives, and the point of Hebrews 11 is that all of them and all of us are saved by faith in the then promised, now delivered Messiah. That once they believed in Gods promised deliverence, their sin was no longer what defined them, but rather the righteousness of the Messiah credited to their account before God. Just some thoughts.
FedEx,
President,
Men of Praise Motorcycle Ministry
I would agree with the direction you are going here. Thanks!
During the war people hid jews at the risk of there lives the owners of the houses lied to the authoritys by protecting the jews at the end of the day we are responsible for our actions to not do the right thing is far worse than doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.God looks on our hearts and judges wisely our choices should be motivated out of love for God and for our fellow man.Rahab chose to do the right thing by protecting Gods children had she not stepped out in faith not only would she have died but also her family it took courage to do what she did she turned away from her own people thats repentence in action if she had been found out her own people would have killed her and her family.Because her heart and her actions were right before the Lord that is why she is a great woman of faith. brentnz
David stole bread but God didnt punish him.It was bread that was for the priests it was because they were hungry and he was concerned for them.So he gave it to them though by the law it was not lawful unless you were a priest to eat of the bread therefore you could argue that he sinned as he broke the law.But God saw his heart intent and it was not self motivated so there was no issue in regard to sin.If you judge by the law he would have been guilty God looks on the heart and ruled him righteous interesting.In rehabs case what took more faith on her part to lie or to tell the truth and for what motivation did she lie its that intent that God is interested in was she motivated by fear or faith surely without faith it is impossible to please God.If she had done the right thing and told the truth she would not have been saved nor her family so she did the right thing as far as God is concerned but the wrong thing as far as man is concerned just like David.Which is the better choice to please man or please God.brentnz
Jeremy,
I think this is a very inportant reminder. We are called to both, not one or the other. Just like you I was raised that being hurtfully truthful was better than being lovingly deceptive. It has taken me a long time to see that we really can have both truth, and love.
I have also learned that when my truth does not result in me becoming more loving, I should go back and re-evaluate that truth. So often we cling to our understanding of what is true(knowing that all of us understand truth imperfectly), even as we see it destroying relationships all around us.
FedEx,
President,
Men of Praise Motorcycle Ministry
Good thoughts,…blessings
Every time I hear someone say “speak the truth in love”, they think that gives them the right to say whatever they please, and it is n-e-v-e-r loving. Apparently their “truth” is something they invented.
I am intrigued that the people I know who use that statement all also frequently quote “hate the sin, love the sinner”(this is NOT from the Bible), except they don’t possess any love for the people who fit their definition of “sinner”.
I hear that “hate the sin, love the sinner” thing all the time too. And you are right, there is rarely any love for the person, but instead, and constant reminder of what a “sinner” they are, and how they can only be “accepted into the community” once they get rid of the hated sin.
This is not real love.
Speaking the truth in love is not something man thought up, but a command from scripture. Rather than dismiss this command maybe we should concentrate on what does it mean to speak the truth in love. Truth without love will lead you into legalism and love without truth will lead you into apostasy. We have to have both.
Craig that is great explanation brentnz
Jeremy,
This is an interesting topic…
Read what Albert Mohler wrote in the Wall Street Journal.
I posted it on my new blog. Check it out, I would love your comments.
Is Albert speaking the truth in love?
http://www.abnormalreaction.wordpress.com
Swanny
I read your post and Al Mohler’s.
I did not sense anger or hate in Mohler’s post. I think his opening statement is blatantly false, that homosexuality is shaking the foundations of the church. Pastors said the same thing during the Civil Rights movement (not that the two are identical).
I definitely agree with him that Christians have been afraid to take on the issue where it is most difficult – face to face.
I think that nobody should condemn anyone else unless they personally know and have a relationship with several people who are in the “category” of those they want to condemn. If you can condemn your friends, then fine, condemn the whole group. But otherwise….
In the end, I agree with what you wrote. Mohler seems to see only one way out: all gays must become straight in obedience to the Gospel. Ironically, this statement comes right after he criticizes many Christian solutions as being crude and simplistic!
I read a great book about this subject… “Love is an Orientation” I do not agree 100% with Marin, but I will tell you what.. it completely opened my eyes on the subject.
I HIGHLY recommend it!
I’ve read it too. I agree: It was great!
Andrew is a friend. Check out his blog. LGBTs are some of his favorite people. Mine as well. If I had to choose between spending the rest of my life on a very remote desert island populated with Christians or one populated with LGBTs, guess which one I’d pick?
When we act in love people will be prepared for,sense, and desire the truth. Truth is always truth doesn’t need words to introduce itself or make it’s present known. Love opens people up so they will be receptive to the truth when it’s time to speak. God places the words of truth that need to be spoken when the time is right.
wrong argument about doctor needing love to do his work. he didnt lack love in his work to solve your “wife’s” case correctly. he lacked truth about his profession. he should have known that diagnosing patient is science of its own and needs such aproach. you gather all information first, even information that contradicts your theory. you dont dismiss some symptoms to fit your theory but you include all the symptoms to find better theory. he failed at basic logic. nothing to do with love at all
I seriously love this topic because people fail to realize that both word works together. Even our scripture has a backing on this “walk before me in truth” and “above all love is the greatest”.He didn’t say among, please note he didn’t say before, he said above all “LOVE” is the greatest. I believe both are key but love is the greatest.
Truth is truth no matter who says it or how its said. Granted it may more acceptable to a person if it is said in love but love does not make or break truth.
Love True?
Love is True Belief!
Love Truth
Love God
Love Love
God is Love and Love has the Son of Faith and the Hope of Glory in it.
Faith in Love is Son in Father
Faith in Love is Faithful ONE Word of God.
Faith in Love is Hope — The Trinity of God.
Love is True, Believe!