Henry Krabbendam - James - World Evangelical Alliance

concept of truth (‘emeth). The former indicates “exposure of what is hidden.”
The latter denotes “constructive dependability,” which detests destructive behavior,
always shies away from it, and always seeks to prevent it. The Bible
clearly opposes truth in the sense of “mere exposure” (think of the prohibition
to gossip, etc.), but promotes truth as a constructive entity (Prov. 23:23). In
the light of these definitions, the midwives and Rahab may not have passed
the Greek standard. After all, they refused to “expose,” and wanted nothing to
do with death by exposure. But they certainly lived up to the standard of Biblical
truth. They prevented murder! Pharaoh’s soldiers and the men of the
Jericho’s king were the culprits. They were a murderous bunch. The midwives
and Rahab simply lived out Peter’s truth: “We must obey God rather
than man” (Acts 4:19). From this perspective they surrendered to his unambiguous
instruction, “You shall not murder.” This forbids not only committing
the act, but also “aiding and abetting” others in the act!
The Ninth Commandment comes into the picture as well. “You shall not
bear false witness.” That is, you shall not jeopardize one’s standing or position
in life either by word or deed, in the courtroom or outside the courtroom.
Conversely you must be dependable, supportive and constructive. In this light
one must conclude that Rahab and the midwives were called upon to obey the
Ninth Commandment in the face of attempted murder. This means that they
had no other choice.
Incidentally, this implies that their behavior was not a matter of “civil
disobedience.” The latter is always an unbiblical tactic. Peter did not engage
in such conduct either. Let me paraphrase his statement to the Sanhedrin,
“We are called upon to obey, and we will obey. But you require us to act so
as to disobey a clear-cut instruction of our God. Well, we have no option. We
will continue to preach! Of course, we don’t couch our conduct in terms of
disobedience, civil, ecclesiastical, or otherwise, but define it as obedience to
God. He ‘regrettably’ (irony!) pulls rank on you. If you want to call this disobedience
toward you, that is your business, and not our responsibility! We
call it obedience to God.” From this perspective Rahab obeyed God in preventing
murder and took the side of God in the warfare that had its beginning
in Genesis 3:15!
Finally, how does all this translate for today? Well, it seems that we can
claim that an analogous situation exists, when and only when we, just as the
midwives and Rahab, take action or speak out in defense of life at the risk of
our own lives. If this condition is not met, the situation is not analogous, and
will not allow us to hide our “conduct of deceptive and destructive lies,” socalled
white lies or otherwise, behind the “conduct of strategic and constructive
truth” on the part of the midwives and Rahab.
564