How lenient should we be to lies?

[Bootstrap]

A side question from another thread that is no longer worth continuing.

But as long as people keep twisting things, I probably will respond.

So we disagree. I don't believe it is vindictive to tell the truth but rather the manner in telling the truth can be vindictive. And imo, the continued pursuit of pointing out perceived lies is vindictive. The 'dog with a bone' phrase comes to mind. So, I will not pursue this point any further.

Here's how I see it.

1. If lies are repeated often enough, they become "the truth", what everyone thinks they know.
2. People who lie often attack those who identify lies personally, saying that the only reason they would correct the lie is some personal flaw. We have all seen that at work in cults and some secular settings, including political ones. Words like "vindictive" should be defined so they actually mean something. Nobody feels as persecuted as a liar whose lie has been exposed, that's a vulnerable place to be. But nobody has a God-given right to lie without discovery.
3. We do need to prefer truth to falsehood. In general, lies should be corrected when they are repeated, and if the same lies are told over and over, they need to be corrected over and over. The same standards should be applied to both sides.
4. The language and the spirit of the posts matters, not just the content. For both sides, this should not be applied selectively to the person who is telling the truth.

I really don't know another way to embrace truth on a forum like this.

[JohnH]

An obvious problem is when two different people have a different set of presuppositions, so they can't agree on what "true" is. In such cases both people need to accept they have a difference of opinion.

Outright deception is a different thing. It is a persistent problem on Internet forums, especially when a deceitful person can deceive enough people who end up unwittingly taking their side.

[Jeff Altweg]

As a small town Landlord, maybe 90% of the sad stories I hear from my tenants are simply made up , call it what you want ...If their mouths are moving ,it's probably a lie..... that's why in my line of business, everything and anything of note must be in writing , or it's not revelent .to me, or in a court of law..(Evictons)..... Most Anabaptists That I deal with ,from time to time, won't outright lie about problem things, so much as Omit part of the truth , or slant what's supposed to be facts, to personal ideas and opinions, which is about as bad, because I always have to dig ,or look for facts , to get the real picture .....Anymore I expect that , and make my own decisions from what I can discern , besides words, that's just the way it is .....

[JohnH]

As a small town Landlord, maybe 90% of the sad stories I hear from my tenants are simply made up , call it what you want ...If their mouths are moving ,it's probably a lie..... that's why in my line of business, everything and anything of note must be in writing , or it's not revelent .to me, or in a court of law..(Evictons)..... Most Anabaptists That I deal with ,from time to time, won't outright lie about problem things, so much as Omit part of the truth , or slant what's supposed to be facts, to personal ideas and opinions, which is about as bad, because I always have to dig ,or look for facts , to get the real picture .....Anymore I expect that , and make my own decisions from what I can discern , besides words, that's just the way it is .....

Interesting. I have observed the same behaviour from landlords, including a few choice ones like:

- "Oh, don't worry about that not being in the lease. It won't be a problem."
- "Just wait until after your move out day and then you'll get your whole deposit back."
- "There won't be any charges other than the rent, no."

Are you 100% honest with your tenants?

[ken_sylvania]

A side question from another thread that is no longer worth continuing.

But as long as people keep twisting things, I probably will respond.

So we disagree. I don't believe it is vindictive to tell the truth but rather the manner in telling the truth can be vindictive. And imo, the continued pursuit of pointing out perceived lies is vindictive. The 'dog with a bone' phrase comes to mind. So, I will not pursue this point any further.

Here's how I see it.

1. If lies are repeated often enough, they become "the truth", what everyone thinks they know.
2. People who lie often attack those who identify lies personally, saying that the only reason they would correct the lie is some personal flaw. We have all seen that at work in cults and some secular settings, including political ones. Words like "vindictive" should be defined so they actually mean something. Nobody feels as persecuted as a liar whose lie has been exposed, that's a vulnerable place to be. But nobody has a God-given right to lie without discovery.
3. We do need to prefer truth to falsehood. In general, lies should be corrected when they are repeated, and if the same lies are told over and over, they need to be corrected over and over. The same standards should be applied to both sides.
4. The language and the spirit of the posts matters, not just the content. For both sides, this should not be applied selectively to the person who is telling the truth.

I really don't know another way to embrace truth on a forum like this.

Are you suggesting that anyone who cares about truth has an obligation to respond and call out untruth whenever it is presented on this forum?
If not, how should one decide which lies to call out and which to let pass unchallenged?

[temporal1]

Wasn’t it Sunbeam who quoted,
"The truth is like a lion; you don’t have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself" .. ?

separately ..

Mark Twain:

Mark Twain — ‘It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.’

i don’t see a reference to the subject line question: “How lenient?” .. Not in OP or responses.

My response:
There is broad variation in response to lies, even in formal human courts of law, as i think there must be IRL.
The range of lies seems unlimited, some seem insignificant, some seem merciful, others can cause material damage if not death.

Scriptures tell us Jesus places tremendous weight on motivation and heart. Also, that He is the flawless judge.

[ohio jones]

Wasn’t it Sunbeam who quoted,
"The truth is like a lion; you don’t have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself" .. ?

The signature quote was "Truth does not need a bodyguard."

[Bootstrap]

Here's how I see it.

1. If lies are repeated often enough, they become "the truth", what everyone thinks they know.
2. People who lie often attack those who identify lies personally, saying that the only reason they would correct the lie is some personal flaw. We have all seen that at work in cults and some secular settings, including political ones. Words like "vindictive" should be defined so they actually mean something. Nobody feels as persecuted as a liar whose lie has been exposed, that's a vulnerable place to be. But nobody has a God-given right to lie without discovery.
3. We do need to prefer truth to falsehood. In general, lies should be corrected when they are repeated, and if the same lies are told over and over, they need to be corrected over and over. The same standards should be applied to both sides.
4. The language and the spirit of the posts matters, not just the content. For both sides, this should not be applied selectively to the person who is telling the truth.

I really don't know another way to embrace truth on a forum like this.

Are you suggesting that anyone who cares about truth has an obligation to respond and call out untruth whenever it is presented on this forum?

Certainly not. That would be a full time job some days, and not a fun one.

[ken_sylvania]

Here's how I see it.

1. If lies are repeated often enough, they become "the truth", what everyone thinks they know.
2. People who lie often attack those who identify lies personally, saying that the only reason they would correct the lie is some personal flaw. We have all seen that at work in cults and some secular settings, including political ones. Words like "vindictive" should be defined so they actually mean something. Nobody feels as persecuted as a liar whose lie has been exposed, that's a vulnerable place to be. But nobody has a God-given right to lie without discovery.
3. We do need to prefer truth to falsehood. In general, lies should be corrected when they are repeated, and if the same lies are told over and over, they need to be corrected over and over. The same standards should be applied to both sides.
4. The language and the spirit of the posts matters, not just the content. For both sides, this should not be applied selectively to the person who is telling the truth.

I really don't know another way to embrace truth on a forum like this.

Are you suggesting that anyone who cares about truth has an obligation to respond and call out untruth whenever it is presented on this forum?

Certainly not. That would be a full time job some days, and not a fun one.

I agree. I wasn't sure how to read point number 3.
If not all lies need to be responded to, how do we decide which to respond to?

[Bootstrap]

If not all lies need to be responded to, how do we decide which to respond to?

I think people can choose what they care to respond to.

But when they do, I think it's best to let the discussion focus on (1) what the claims are and (2) what evidence is given for those claims. If someone won't discuss at the evidence level, and attacks the other person personally instead, that's what abusive liars do.

Let's prefer pursuing truth together. Let's not treat character assassination as a legitimate way to seek truth.