Is It Ever Right to Deceive My Wife?

Some time back, a Mr. Johnson wrote a post asserting that it is always sinful for individuals to affirm in speech or action something they believe to be false (I’m using Grudem’s definition here, who believes all lying is sinful but not all deceit). Johnson took his mower to the whole field of lying and in one swath condemned any kind of untruth. My good friend Seth generally agreed with him and took his place in the passenger seat, along with John Murray and Augustine in the back. Interestingly, Johnson first quotes the genre of general principles for his dogmatism (Prov. 6:16). His final conclusion he calls “simple”.

But hold your combine just a minute. Peter encourages us in 1 Peter 3:10: “Let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking deceit”, a direct quote from Ps. 34:13. The heading of this psalm says: “Of David, when he changed his behavior before Abimelech, so that he drove him out, and he went away.”

So David could not have thought of his deceiving act of madness before the king of Gath in the same category as sinful deceit in v. 13. Thus, it’s not that simple. An ESV note for this chapter says David does not “deny the importance of the faithful using of wits in desperate situations.” Perhaps “does this make me look fat” questions from our wives count as desperate situations.

Which leads to Seth’s astute observation: should we be able to lie to our wives so we don’t hurt their feelings? Okay.

Suppose I’m counseling a couple who also happen to be friends with my wife. In our conversation the wife is Jezbellian in her rudeness to me. I know my shoulders are broad enough to carry this offense and that my wife, as the weaker vessel in this regard, will be tempted to retaliate Ahab-style when we meet together as couples later that month. So when the missus asks me how our time went, I say: “It went fine”.

Isn’t this wisdom, an effort to live with my wife “in an understanding way”, as the apostle says in 1 Peter 3:7 just a few verses before the deceit passage? Doesn’t this kind of withholding of truth belong in the same milieu where deceit is legitimate, such as parables, war, and the flea-flicker? Of course husbands should model truthfulness, should not consistently keep their wives in the dark, and should make grand efforts to inform them of their highs and lows.

But is this the case every time? Is this situation to be viewed as sinfully deceitful? I don’t think so.

Was Judas Converted?

Here’s an incredible quote from John Nolland in his NIGTC commentary on Matthew regarding Judas’ suicide in 27:5.

The Christian tradition has been fiercely against suicide, and not without good reason. The present text has been a major impetus to the negative moral evaluation of suicide, and it may be responsible for some of the more regrettable features of the historic Christian abhorrence of suicide. But is Judas’s suicide presented in a totally negative light here? As responsible for Jesus’ death, Judas recognizes that he too should face death. But he cannot get the Jewish leaders to take his confession seriously. So as a desperate man he takes the law into his own hands and sees to the execution of the sentence on himself. There is a fitting correspondence between Jesus’ words in 26:24, ‘it would be better for him if that person had not been born’, and Judas’s termination of his own life: he had no hand in his birth, but he can take measures to ensure that the life that has caused such wrong continues no longer. Not strictly in the sense intended, but nonetheless in a profound sense, Judas is the first disciple to ‘lose his life for [Jesus’] sake’ (16:25).

When it is all put together, I think it is extremely difficult to deny the Matthean Judas genuine repentance. His change of heart cannot be judged as less authentic than that of Peter in 26:75; it is certainly much more dramatic in its practical effects, and it is spelt out in much greater detail by Matthew. Judas is not restored in life as are Peter and the other disciples, but, more than likely, Matthew fully expected him to be restored beyond life.

So Nolland concludes that Judas was more than likely converted. I agree that Judas appears to have had a change of heart after his betrayal of Christ. He acknowledged that he had “sinned” (v. 4). Further, nowhere in the Bible does it say that suicide is the unpardonable sin. All sin is forgivable for those who humbly repent and confess their sin before Christ. But… Continue reading