Who Stands For Truth?

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.
-Thomas Paine
“Do you still hold fast to your integrity?”
-Job’s wife

Leadership and Truth

A plethora of ethical breaches across the American community leaves the world questioning the legitimacy of truth. A United States President lies on television about his affair just because he can. Molestations have arisen in the Roman Catholic Church at an alarming rate. The divorce rate is no different in the church than it is in American society. Financial fraud within businesses and churches has brought down many leaders. Many in leadership question truth regardless of its basis or source. Deception and fraud overwhelm the church universal within the United States so that it seems no different from any other group or organization.

David Alan Black asks, “Who stands for truth? Does anybody care?” His questions allude to what he previously wrote concerning divine guidance in our lives and nation. [1] In this article, Black points a finger at political governance and the lack of wisdom and scruples in denouncing the public display of the Ten Commandments but permitting a display of a cross immersed in urine. Truth, according to Black is the foundation for reasonable ethical leadership – truth and not acumen, administrative or pastoral skill, governance, or the ability to get a bill or measure passed through legislation whether in government or on a business or church Board. Whether among secular or spiritual leaders, truth must be the foundation for reasonable leadership. Leadership stands or falls on it. Other character traits have their source in truth.

In answer to the question, “What is a reasonable expectation of leadership in society, business, or the organizations?” the answer must always begin with truth. If we consider the myriad of ethical breaches in society, at their foundation is a lie: abuse, infidelity, perversion, breach of relationships, and compromise.

Israel’s King David puts it aptly when in the depths of bemoaning his own transgressions he writes, “Behold, you desire truth in the inward parts” (Psalm 51:6). He then connects wisdom with desire for truth. The issue for David was not so much that he was the model of perfection, but that integrity grip his heart and pump truth through his veins. He begs in transparency for cleanness before his God (51:10). To him, this meant the discipline of freedom (51:10), wholeness (51:12), confidence to stand for and speak truth to others (51:15), and humility (51:17). Slavery, brokenness, cowardice, shame, and deceit are all traits associated with a lie. They cannot stand alongside true leadership, because they will always trip up the leader and cause him or her to stumble. Therefore, David’s prayer sets up reasonable expectations for spiritual leadership, because all he asked he based on truth.

Chuck Colson identifies the bases for ethical behavior in society’s social structures. He writes, “How can you have ethical behavior? The crisis of character is totally understandable when there are no absolute values.” [2] He cites that ethics are normative. They do not change. They require a reference point beyond ourselves. If they have their source in human limitations and rationalization, chaos and anarchy would rule the day with relativism becoming the path down which these twins travel to destruction of society.

Guidelines for Leadership

The Bible provides ample guidelines for leadership in society. Three are most noteworthy. First, leadership must abide by the most essential principle: God is truth, its very source, and fundamental to ethical leadership. One step removed from this truth is one step closer to personal and community moral anarchy. Colson reviews the tragic circumstances of Jimmy Swaggart and Jimmy Baker. He asserts that Baker’s downfall was “violating what should be the most sacred trust of all: to speak for God and to minister to people in their spiritual needs.” [3] He suggests that Baker and Swaggart crossed the line in their departure from truth. They took several steps away from God and in doing so headed down the path toward moral collapse.

Second, be grounded in the truth. The Apostle Paul mentored Timothy and appointed him elder. He reminded him to be grounded in what he learned (2 Timothy 2:15). In this passage, Paul identifies two men who walked away from them. Their names stand as a legacy in the hall of shame as men who walked away from truth. History will always remember them in this manner. Is this the legacy we wish to leave to future generations? Colson calls for the need of moral consensus. He writes that a consensus must have its roots in Judeo-Christian values for society to exist. These values find their source in the Bible. Taking steps away from them is taking steps toward personal and societal destruction.

Third, avoid the peril of self-love. A phrase sometimes heard in counseling is that we must love ourselves before we can love others. I contend that Scripture teaches no such doctrine. I counter this with the greatest truth found in Great Commandment in the Shema of Deuteronomy:

“Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5).

A person loves others rightly when he first loves God (1 John 5:2). Much of what is written about self-love today arises out of the yearning for self-esteem and self-realization. One issue associated with these self words is they all begin with self. Beginning with self tends toward an inward focus. This does not deny personal reflection. Self-examination is always healthy. The Reformer John Calvin encouraged it and asserted that it drives us to contemplate God and our subsistence in Him. [4]

Self-examination and self-love are exercises in contrast. The Bible warns about self-love and places it in the categories of love for materialism, pride, rebellion, and “lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God” (2 Timothy 3:2-4). It results from taking steps away from loving God toward loving the things of the world. Each step removes us farther from the Great Commandment (loving God). We should take care that human philosophy focused inward does not usurp divine mandate that turns our focus upward to God and outward to people.

We may say that these guidelines do not advance anything new. Quite right, they do not. They have all been said before and so why repeat them? We all need reminders concerning truth. Reminders make an imprint on our minds and guide our actions and behavior. Reminders play a continual record of what is right and wrong. Reminders give motivation for doing right. One who forgets is like one who loses a defense. He or she lets down a guard and leaves the battlefield scarred because of lack of practice when the battle was not near. Make 2007 a fresh start for truth.

[1] Black, David Alan, It’s Time to Abolish Art Welfare, http://www.daveblackonline.com/ it's_time_to_abolish.htm

[2] Colson, Charles W., The Problem of Ethics in Christian Ethics Today: Journal of Christian Ethics, Spring 2004, Online Edition.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Calvin, John, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), 35.