# Speaking ill of the dead..



## BJClark (Dec 16, 2009)

in reading the thread about Oral Roberts death, many have stated it's wrong/disrespectful to speak ill of the dead...so I am wondering where did this train of thought come from??

Why would it be wrong to do so???


----------



## Berean (Dec 16, 2009)

Is it wrong to "speak ill" of Stalin or Hitler?


----------



## Tripel (Dec 16, 2009)

I don't think it is wrong to do so. As others have pointed out, it would be hard to have a conversation about historical figures if you can't speak negatively about the dead ones.

But while it may not be _wrong_, I think it can be _distasteful_ to immediately harp on someone's faults once they have passed. It's an emotionally-charged time immediately following a public figure's death, so I think it's better to err on the side of silence than criticism.


----------



## Theoretical (Dec 16, 2009)

Also, I think it isn't a bad idea to wait to see what if any influence they retain over the long-term, and then to speak ill of their evils, at least as regarding false or really bad teachers.

Ongoing works that are in the wrong - fire away. On the other hand, it should be a more solemn reflection at the present, especially if anyone around us was or is heavily influenced by him (in the case of Roberts). It's good he's not adding to his compendium of teaching and hopefully at the end of the day he was indeed saved, but spitting on his gave isn't necessary to oppose his bad teachings.


----------



## jason d (Dec 16, 2009)

I have always heard "not speaking ill of the dead" was a Jewish custom to show respect, not sure though, I just remember hearing that growing up.


----------



## HeIsMyRighteousness (Dec 16, 2009)

Well, simply reading the bible shows the authors of scripture, through the power of the Holy Spirit, spoke ill of dead people. It isn't out of malicious intent but to speak truth about them. If it is out of hatred for that person then of course it is wrong.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Dec 17, 2009)

HeIsMyRighteousness said:


> Well, simply reading the bible shows the authors of scripture, through the power of the Holy Spirit, spoke ill of dead people. It isn't out of malicious intent but to speak truth about them. If it is out of hatred for that person then of course it is wrong.



I think this is the main idea I had in the other thread. It is one thing to point out the faults of their teaching in order to prevent others from following in their steps, and being distasteful and rude about their death.


----------



## toddpedlar (Dec 17, 2009)

Don't you think this phrase (which I think is very ancient) arises out of pagan beliefs about the spiritual realm? I suspect strongly this to be the case - where to speak ill of the dead would be to invite the spirits of the dead to cause you harm. 

Just a thought... and I should echo what is said above; discussing the grievous harm that one who is dead has done to the body of Christ is not evil, but is perfectly reasonable. Care should be given to the audience to whom one is speaking, and to being appropriate in the criticism and avoid ad hominem attacks, but there is no Biblical principle I am aware of that would preclude criticizing the teachings of a dead teacher.


----------



## BJClark (Dec 17, 2009)

In doing a little digging and researching myself..I came across this link..

Blue Letter Bible - Commentaries

Matthew Henry
Commentary on 2 Samuel 1 



> 1. A man of an excellent spirit, in four things:—
> 
> (1.) He was very generous to Saul, his sworn enemy. Saul was his father-in-law, his sovereign, and the anointed of the Lord; and therefore, though he had done him a great deal of wrong, David does not wreak his revenge upon his memory when he is in his grave; but like a good man, and a man of honour, [1.] He conceals his faults; and, though there was no preventing their appearance in his history, yet they should not appear in this elegy. Charity teaches us to make the best we can of every body and to say nothing of those of whom we can say no good, especially when they are gone. De mortuis nil nisi bonum—Say nothing but good concerning the dead. We ought to deny ourselves the satisfaction of making personal reflections upon those who have been injurious to us, much more drawing their character thence, as if every man must of necessity be a bad man that has done ill by us. Let the corrupt part of the memory be buried with the corrupt part of the man—earth to earth, ashes to ashes; let the blemish be hidden and a veil drawn over the deformity. [2.] He celebrates that which was praiseworthy in him. He does not commend him for that which he was not, says nothing of his piety or fidelity.


----------



## jwithnell (Dec 17, 2009)

Growing up, I always heard this "rule" applied around the time of the death and funeral, and that it was a matter of respect, both for the deceased and for the family. Some of the rational was based on the thought that the dead person can no longer can defend himself, if what is said proves to be false. I see it as a variation on gossip.


----------

