Why we think it’s OK to cheat and steal (sometimes) | Dan Ariely

I want to talk to you today a little bit about predictable irrationality. And my interest in irrational behavior started many years ago in the hospital. I was burned very badly. And if you spend a lot of time in hospital, you’ll see a lot of types of irrationalities. And the one that particularly bothered me in the burn department was the process by which the nurses took the bandage off me. Now, you must have all taken a Band-Aid off at some point, and you must have wondered what’s the right approach. Do you rip it off quickly — short duration but high intensity — or do you take your Band-Aid off slowly — you take a long time, but each second is not as painful — which one of those is the right approach? The nurses in my department thought that the right approach was the ripping one, so they would grab hold and they would rip, and they would grab hold and they would rip. And because I had 70 percent of my body burned, it would take about an hour. And as you can imagine, I hated that moment of ripping with incredible intensity. And I would try to reason with them and say, “Why don’t we try something else? Why don’t we take it a little longer — maybe two hours instead of an hour — and have less of this intensity?” And the nurses told me two things. They told me that they had the right model of the patient — that they knew what was the right thing to do to minimize my pain — and they also told me that the word patient doesn’t mean to make suggestions or to interfere or … This is not just in Hebrew, by the way. It’s in every language I’ve had experience with so far. And, you know, there’s not much — there wasn’t much I could do, and they kept on doing what they were doing. And about three years later, when I left the hospital, I started studying at the university. And one of the most interesting lessons I learned was that there is an experimental method that if you have a question you can create a replica of this question in some abstract way, and you can try to examine this question, maybe learn something about the world. So that’s what I did. I was still interested in this question of how do you take bandages off burn patients. So originally I didn’t have much money, so I went to a hardware store and I bought a carpenter’s vice. And I would bring people to the lab and I would put their finger in it, and I would crunch it a little bit. (Laughter) And I would crunch it for long periods and short periods, and pain that went up and pain that went down, and with breaks and without breaks — all kinds of versions of pain. And when I finished hurting people a little bit, I would ask them, so, how painful was this? Or, how painful was this? Or, if you had to choose between the last two, which one would you choose? (Laughter) I kept on doing this for a while. (Laughter) And then, like all good academic projects, I got more funding. I moved to sounds, electrical shocks — I even had a pain suit that I could get people to feel much more pain. But at the end of this process, what I learned was that the nurses were wrong. Here were wonderful people with good intentions and plenty of experience, and nevertheless they were getting things wrong predictably all the time. It turns out that because we don’t encode duration in the way that we encode intensity, I would have had less pain if the duration would have been longer and the intensity was lower. It turns out it would have been better to start with my face, which was much more painful, and move toward my legs, giving me a trend of improvement over time — that would have been also less painful. And it also turns out that it would have been good to give me breaks in the middle to kind of recuperate from the pain. All of these would have been great things to do, and my nurses had no idea. And from that point on I started thinking, are the nurses the only people in the world who get things wrong in this particular decision, or is it a more general case? And it turns out it’s a more general case — there’s a lot of mistakes we do. And I want to give you one example of one of these irrationalities, and I want to talk to you about cheating. And the reason I picked cheating is because it’s interesting, but also it tells us something, I think, about the stock market situation we’re in. So, my interest in cheating started when Enron came on the scene, exploded all of a sudden, and I started thinking about what is happening here. Is it the case that there was kind of a few apples who are capable of doing these things, or are we talking a more endemic situation, that many people are actually capable of behaving this way? So, like we usually do, I decided to do a simple experiment. And here’s how it went. If you were in the experiment, I would pass you a sheet of paper with 20 simple math problems that everybody could solve, but I wouldn’t give you enough time. When the five minutes were over, I would say, “Pass me the sheets of paper, and I’ll pay you a dollar per question.” People did this. I would pay people four dollars for their task — on average people would solve four problems. Other people I would tempt to cheat. I would pass their sheet of paper. When the five minutes were over, I would say, “Please shred the piece of paper. Put the little pieces in your pocket or in your backpack, and tell me how many questions you got correctly.” People now solved seven questions on average. Now, it wasn’t as if there was a few bad apples — a few people cheated a lot. Instead, what we saw is a lot of people who cheat a little bit. Now, in economic theory, cheating is a very simple cost-benefit analysis. You say, what’s the probability of being caught? How much do I stand to gain from cheating? And how much punishment would I get if I get caught? And you weigh these options out — you do the simple cost-benefit analysis, and you decide whether it’s worthwhile to commit the crime or not. So, we try to test this. For some people, we varied how much money they could get away with — how much money they could steal. We paid them 10 cents per correct question, 50 cents, a dollar, five dollars, 10 dollars per correct question. You would expect that as the amount of money on the table increases, people would cheat more, but in fact it wasn’t the case. We got a lot of people cheating by stealing by a little bit. What about the probability of being caught? Some people shredded half the sheet of paper, so there was some evidence left. Some people shredded the whole sheet of paper. Some people shredded everything, went out of the room, and paid themselves from the bowl of money that had over 100 dollars. You would expect that as the probability of being caught goes down, people would cheat more, but again, this was not the case. Again, a lot of people cheated by just by a little bit, and they were insensitive to these economic incentives. So we said, “If people are not sensitive to the economic rational theory explanations, to these forces, what could be going on?” And we thought maybe what is happening is that there are two forces. At one hand, we all want to look at ourselves in the mirror and feel good about ourselves, so we don’t want to cheat. On the other hand, we can cheat a little bit, and still feel good about ourselves. So, maybe what is happening is that there’s a level of cheating we can’t go over, but we can still benefit from cheating at a low degree, as long as it doesn’t change our impressions about ourselves. We call this like a personal fudge factor. Now, how would you test a personal fudge factor? Initially we said, what can we do to shrink the fudge factor? So, we got people to the lab, and we said, “We have two tasks for you today.” First, we asked half the people to recall either 10 books they read in high school, or to recall The Ten Commandments, and then we tempted them with cheating. Turns out the people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments — and in our sample nobody could recall all of The Ten Commandments — but those people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments, given the opportunity to cheat, did not cheat at all. It wasn’t that the more religious people — the people who remembered more of the Commandments — cheated less, and the less religious people — the people who couldn’t remember almost any Commandments — cheated more. The moment people thought about trying to recall The Ten Commandments, they stopped cheating. In fact, even when we gave self-declared atheists the task of swearing on the Bible and we give them a chance to cheat, they don’t cheat at all. Now, Ten Commandments is something that is hard to bring into the education system, so we said, “Why don’t we get people to sign the honor code?” So, we got people to sign, “I understand that this short survey falls under the MIT Honor Code.” Then they shredded it. No cheating whatsoever. And this is particularly interesting, because MIT doesn’t have an honor code. (Laughter) So, all this was about decreasing the fudge factor. What about increasing the fudge factor? The first experiment — I walked around MIT and I distributed six-packs of Cokes in the refrigerators — these were common refrigerators for the undergrads. And I came back to measure what we technically call the half-lifetime of Coke — how long does it last in the refrigerators? As you can expect it doesn’t last very long; people take it. In contrast, I took a plate with six one-dollar bills, and I left those plates in the same refrigerators. No bill ever disappeared. Now, this is not a good social science experiment, so to do it better I did the same experiment as I described to you before. A third of the people we passed the sheet, they gave it back to us. A third of the people we passed it to, they shredded it, they came to us and said, “Mr. Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X dollars.” A third of the people, when they finished shredding the piece of paper, they came to us and said, “Mr Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X tokens.” We did not pay them with dollars; we paid them with something else. And then they took the something else, they walked 12 feet to the side, and exchanged it for dollars. Think about the following intuition. How bad would you feel about taking a pencil from work home, compared to how bad would you feel about taking 10 cents from a petty cash box? These things feel very differently. Would being a step removed from cash for a few seconds by being paid by token make a difference? Our subjects doubled their cheating. I’ll tell you what I think about this and the stock market in a minute. But this did not solve the big problem I had with Enron yet, because in Enron, there’s also a social element. People see each other behaving. In fact, every day when we open the news we see examples of people cheating. What does this cause us? So, we did another experiment. We got a big group of students to be in the experiment, and we prepaid them. So everybody got an envelope with all the money for the experiment, and we told them that at the end, we asked them to pay us back the money they didn’t make. OK? The same thing happens. When we give people the opportunity to cheat, they cheat. They cheat just by a little bit, all the same. But in this experiment we also hired an acting student. This acting student stood up after 30 seconds, and said, “I solved everything. What do I do now?” And the experimenter said, “If you’ve finished everything, go home. That’s it. The task is finished.” So, now we had a student — an acting student — that was a part of the group. Nobody knew it was an actor. And they clearly cheated in a very, very serious way. What would happen to the other people in the group? Will they cheat more, or will they cheat less? Here is what happens. It turns out it depends on what kind of sweatshirt they’re wearing. Here is the thing. We ran this at Carnegie Mellon and Pittsburgh. And at Pittsburgh there are two big universities, Carnegie Mellon and University of Pittsburgh. All of the subjects sitting in the experiment were Carnegie Mellon students. When the actor who was getting up was a Carnegie Mellon student — he was actually a Carnegie Mellon student — but he was a part of their group, cheating went up. But when he actually had a University of Pittsburgh sweatshirt, cheating went down. (Laughter) Now, this is important, because remember, when the moment the student stood up, it made it clear to everybody that they could get away with cheating, because the experimenter said, “You’ve finished everything. Go home,” and they went with the money. So it wasn’t so much about the probability of being caught again. It was about the norms for cheating. If somebody from our in-group cheats and we see them cheating, we feel it’s more appropriate, as a group, to behave this way. But if it’s somebody from another group, these terrible people — I mean, not terrible in this — but somebody we don’t want to associate ourselves with, from another university, another group, all of a sudden people’s awareness of honesty goes up — a little bit like The Ten Commandments experiment — and people cheat even less. So, what have we learned from this about cheating? We’ve learned that a lot of people can cheat. They cheat just by a little bit. When we remind people about their morality, they cheat less. When we get bigger distance from cheating, from the object of money, for example, people cheat more. And when we see cheating around us, particularly if it’s a part of our in-group, cheating goes up. Now, if we think about this in terms of the stock market, think about what happens. What happens in a situation when you create something where you pay people a lot of money to see reality in a slightly distorted way? Would they not be able to see it this way? Of course they would. What happens when you do other things, like you remove things from money? You call them stock, or stock options, derivatives, mortgage-backed securities. Could it be that with those more distant things, it’s not a token for one second, it’s something that is many steps removed from money for a much longer time — could it be that people will cheat even more? And what happens to the social environment when people see other people behave around them? I think all of those forces worked in a very bad way in the stock market. More generally, I want to tell you something about behavioral economics. We have many intuitions in our life, and the point is that many of these intuitions are wrong. The question is, are we going to test those intuitions? We can think about how we’re going to test this intuition in our private life, in our business life, and most particularly when it goes to policy, when we think about things like No Child Left Behind, when you create new stock markets, when you create other policies — taxation, health care and so on. And the difficulty of testing our intuition was the big lesson I learned when I went back to the nurses to talk to them. So I went back to talk to them and tell them what I found out about removing bandages. And I learned two interesting things. One was that my favorite nurse, Ettie, told me that I did not take her pain into consideration. She said, “Of course, you know, it was very painful for you. But think about me as a nurse, taking, removing the bandages of somebody I liked, and had to do it repeatedly over a long period of time. Creating so much torture was not something that was good for me, too.” And she said maybe part of the reason was it was difficult for her. But it was actually more interesting than that, because she said, “I did not think that your intuition was right. I felt my intuition was correct.” So, if you think about all of your intuitions, it’s very hard to believe that your intuition is wrong. And she said, “Given the fact that I thought my intuition was right …” — she thought her intuition was right — it was very difficult for her to accept doing a difficult experiment to try and check whether she was wrong. But in fact, this is the situation we’re all in all the time. We have very strong intuitions about all kinds of things — our own ability, how the economy works, how we should pay school teachers. But unless we start testing those intuitions, we’re not going to do better. And just think about how better my life would have been if these nurses would have been willing to check their intuition, and how everything would have been better if we just start doing more systematic experimentation of our intuitions. Thank you very much.

100 thoughts on “Why we think it’s OK to cheat and steal (sometimes) | Dan Ariely”

  1. ENRON makes for an interesting case study. The performance review committee was enacted nobody wanted to loose their jobs. It created an environment that became pervasive, the bonuses were good too.

  2. I wonder Prof. Dan Ariely does not know about psychopathy.
    Cheating is one of main characteristics of buisiness.
    It can be good and bad at the same time in different aspects.

  3. Rolex is expensive because the company created the myth of "explicity". It goes the same with german and french cars. It's not that they are better cared for when they are made, it's the public's idea about you now that you own it and that is something all people in the developed countries unfortunately contribute in. That's how it all intertwines… The economy, politics, wars, it all depends on what we admire and how we think and act.

  4. The skin of his face was mostly burned off in a fire when he was a teenager. I'm sure he uses makeup to try to look as normal as possible, but it's never going to be perfect.

  5. As a nurse, I promise to never forget the lessons I have learned from this talk, and I thank you.

  6. When I was a nurse, removing stuck bandaging was a major dilemma. I used to ask the patients what they thought would work best, and some patients wanted slow removal, others wanted the bandages ripped off…. so from this I never did learn what was best of those two options, but my third option, of removing bandages with heaps of saline-soaked swabs was good for stopping pain, as the wetness would dissolve the adhering matter, but it made folks cold, so that was a slight drama too!

  7. er, um, I must add all long-term patients preferred to be cold, but it still didn't make me feel good about making them cold!

  8. Maggie, I tried to give you a thumbs up… but, sob, it not work… so this is my praise of your caring comment! Thank you for your lack of arrogance and your wonderful ability to listen to others!

  9. my mum is a nurse who works in burns unit. She says they give the patients morphine, use a solution to make the bandages easier to peel, and take their time since ripping the bandage will pull off small amounts of skin, which burns patients need pretty badly.

    I wonder why this guys experience was so different

  10. I work in a burn ICU…I ALWAYS ask the patient if they prefer me ripping the bandages off quickly or working on them slowly. I also ask how they prefer me cleaning their skin: softer/quicker brushes with the washcloth or larger/sweeping movements with the washcloth.

  11. I'm about to watch it, but I'm guessing the answer isn't "because that's what we're taught by our government?"

  12. We have a culture that has high tolerance for a small amount of cheating, lying and breaking the law.
    If you remind someone doing 56 in a 55 MPH zone, that they are breaking the law, odds are good that they knew their speed and did not consider themselves a law breaker.  

  13. Unjust societies promote lawlessness.

    If you are taking from one percent parasites you are commiting a virtuous act. They have completely warped the world and wealth distribution. Anything that you do that more evenly distributes material goods is by definition a good thing to do.

  14. We are not quite developed enough to reason about these things in an automatic way (without a lot of effort) so we don’t. It’s just how we work; time and an increase awareness of these important ideas may one day change how we think and behave.

  15.  It's not "intuition" when a nurse is incapable of listening to her patient's wishes. The nurse isn't experiencing physical pain. The nurse doesn't want to endure the emotional pain of ripping bandages for two hours. I wish his doctor had intervened. I was in an American hospital for months. The things some nurses do is unconscionable.

  16. Very astute observations.  We used to call it Mob Rule, which I believe is based on the same emotional connections, needs and desires.  I believe it is more of an intellectual adaptation of our Animalistic Territorial Imperatives, which amounts to, gain as much as you can, (breeding females) with the smallest expenditure of effort, for the greatest reward for our specific genetic survival.

    We seen the approximate same thing in lion prides, when three fully mature male brothers who grew up together come upon a pride they want, the three take out and depose the single male of that pride.  It is strength in numbers, as well as the ability to put out the least effort while gaining the most advantage.

    Because it is an intellectual adaptation, it can be twisted and lied about, such our true nature is not so evident in our effort to gain the advantage.  We humans are ANIMALS after all !!!

  17. I found this idea very interesting so I chose this speech to do a research paper over, however, I am unable to find where this speech took place or what exact day (besides sometime February 2009). Anyone know where this speech took place?

  18. Dan Ariely laid out the norms for cheating and stealing. In such situations we tend to convince ourselves that what we do is not entirely wrong.

  19. Great point at the end. I find we often have strong intuitions especially concerning morality that seem so obvious that we've never bothered questioning, leaving us with an opinion based on, not facts, but an intuition that hasn't been proven, which is why it's so important to always question them and test them to make sure that whatever your doing or thinking is based on facts.

  20. Righteous people think that people would not steal if they weren`t desperate. Don`t judge those who act by the basic means of survival if you don`t know what it means

  21. It is interesting how we feel that our identity relies on these "intuitions", as if morality were static, and apart from ourselves. Also I think it was a really great point to actually show how these intuitions are illusory and must be tested. I found this speech very liberating.

  22. What's getting me about this regarding the bandage analogy is one very. very important detail. If they did it the slower, better-for-that-patient way, they'd take twice as long. That extra hour will not go to another patient, who needs the care. So the question isn't just 'good care for this one patient' it's 'make sure all patients get care'. We're taught 'take the bandage off fast because it's better', and that's just understood as standard. But part of the reason taking the bandage off fast is good is not because of personal 'less trauma', but also because of 'economy of time'. Isn't it better that everyone gets some, but not perfect, care, than for some to get perfect care, and others to get less than perfect or worse no care?

  23. Can someone answer these questions for me?

    1. What does the presenter mean by “predictable irrationality?”

    2. What causes us to so regularly engage in “predictable irrationality?”

    3. Can you think of a time when either you or someone you know has behaved in ways that could be described as “predictable irrationality?”

    4. What conclusions has Dr. Ariely drawn about cheating based on his experiments?

    5. What do his experiments have to do with his discussion of “predicatable irrationality?”

    6. How can we overcome our tendency to engage in “predictable irrationality?”

  24. My favourite author :), I love when he speaks, it is such a inspiration. It would be pleasure if you could visit Brno, Czech republic 🙂

  25. Hello everyone, you can use the link below for 60% discount on behavioral economics certification;

  26. I totally disagree.

    A real intuition is a rarest thing!
    Our opinion to do in this way or that way is not an intuition.
    It is just opinion based on your own knowledge and experience.
    However, an intuition usually based on your knowledge and your experience plus! something else!
    What is it?
    No one knows, but if you have one, you are from about 3-5 percents of the people on the Earth who really owns this treasure.

    The hardest thing is to do like your intuition claims guys.

  27. I've seen many people steal and cheat when growing up. I find that those who do it have little to no ethics and they justify their actions with their skewed mindset. You cannot stop them completely. You need to keep reminding them it's bad, but once your guard goes down they start again. The only way not to deal with these people is to only deal with good people and from experience that's about 1 in 5.

  28. Oh my god, his overall conclusion from this study is pretty helpful with a particular situation I have experienced recently.

  29. Isn't he amazing and so real! Just pure of heart I think which melts away any scars which he thinks we all perceive. 🙂

  30. Yes, I am a visual person and mostly I like his red shoes. He has a little "monkey" in him and a long time ago that monkey got him into some trouble I am guessing. I think that his cheating test is a good reason why some people should go to church to be remininded of the good things to do in life but hey this is from the mouth of Jesus: Beware of the hypocrites in the synagogues so is this you? I suppose that this is the wrong thing to say on Easter April Fool's Day. However, Jesus plays the ultimate prank by rising from the dead 2018 years ago. I didn't think of that, I read it on "Think Big" to tell you the truth.

  31. how do you get to be on TED? I'm all over-educated well I don't have a 15 page CV like Dan but I think that I have a few things to say.

  32. One thing is for sure. Stealing is a form of childish behaviour. Some humans just love the thrill that they have something, although if they get caught and it's time for them to pay for what they have back, they will pay for it much more painfully than if they just behaved like they have a brain. Criminals like to due themselves for extinction and fail, it's those people who are cutting themselves to relive suffering, or people who think drugs will ultimately solve their hunger for healthy mental stability out of thin air while destroying their physical health and mental health, which in fact it's not doing anything progressive, just anti social and anti personal, being a form of self destruction.
    Yes, and hardcore criminals are people who in my opinion don't need help, they should be sent on some uninhabited island guarded with radar and navy out in the middle of the ocean with other prisoners and left there with nothing (not even clothes) but a basic BIC brand lighter. I don't care about giving taxed money and resources towards prisons where they live and get fed and praised like a cow is for milk. IF they think they know a better world, let's go let them f%^king build it if they're so clever.

  33. I always like Dan Ariely's interviews and talks-this one is fascinating. We have heard from the patient's perspective and from the nurses perspective about the bandage dilemma –should it be ripped off fast or slowly? @Uturuncu points out that there may not be enough time to go slowly which I believe would have been brought up by the nurse if that were the underlying issue, but since the nurse says she would have had emotional pain from enduring longer bandage removal I believe that was her main issue, however we haven't heard from a medical perspective. What would a dermatologist's research say? Does the body heal better, faster, or is it safer to expose the burnt skin for as little time as possible? Does the skin heal smoother with less scarring? Would it be best all-around to take bandages off slowly, in sections, and from head to toe (as Dan points out) with breaks. Within those break period allow the skin to remain unexposed or exposed, as necessary, and allow the nurse to move on to other patients under her charge. Whatever the medical research suggests, obviously, to allow the skin it's best chance. Thanks @DanAriely for your insight and research.

  34. I liked the video but I have to thumbs down because the intro was about 20dB louder than anything else on youtube and I thought my headphones would blow out my ears.

  35. This men should be funded for the rest of his life. I want to know these things and so should you. He has more talks, he's amazing.

    1 Honor your mother and father,
    2 don't kill,
    3 don't steal,
    4 don't covet your neighbour's stuff (house/wife/servant),
    5 no other gods,
    6 don't swear,
    7 no adultery,
    8 don't lie,
    9 observe sabbath..

    Three questions to you are:
    1) did I cheat?
    2) What makes you think this?
    3) What was my motivation?

  36. The man spent THREE YEARS in a hospital and he's not destitute, bankrupt from paying off his medical bills. He's obviously NOT AN AMERICAN. Don't you wish YOU had the same option if something catastrophic happened to you?

  37. I have heard that workers tend to steal from their employer more often if they feel they are being treated unfairly.

  38. Perceived value versus what you think you deserve. Mind blown. Wait, do I deserve to have my mind blown and if so by how much?

  39. The first loophole in the moral code is procreation, since procreation is the mother of all crimes and multiple crimes in itself, starting with the obvious slavery of the procreate, then the insane (infinite) risk taking on the back of another person (your child, the one you plan to love). And since humans have no problem with leaving their own lives, why would they have one on anything else? It's really odd that they were able to invent morals and ethics! But it is not strange that they lie and cheat constantly.

  40. It doesn’t take a genius to know there is evil people who debilitate their children, spouses, friends whatever. We put husbands in jail for beating their wife’s but not mothers who beat their children?
    No one knows anything in the world. We are just a bunch of Egos living in a society that’s created a worthless system full of ridiculous rules, standards and selfish people. I hate this planet and want to go home.
    Mother of Parental Alienation I miss my sons.

  41. Heard his cheating examples and tests from others who say they did the tests also on TedTalks, YouTube, in books…. So nothing new here.

  42. The experiment including having to remember the Ten Commandments is quite revealing: we truly are beings in the image of God, we have a moral sense responding to the reality of universal morality. When conditioned not to bother about it at all (atheism), we slip. When reminded of (at least the possibility of) Universal Morality, our inner voice commands us to behave morally, to rise, to be better than we otherwise would have been. Our world seems to embrace atheism in an unprecedented measure: therefore expect more cheating in the future, more depravity, moral slackness, more innocent victims too. What happens in the (economically) developed world affects billions of human beings who don't get much opportunity in their lives because they don't get to choose much of what happens to them: exactly, those "little ones".

  43. It is ok if you dont get caught. Most thieves and liers do it without remorse they don't apologize for the wrong doing they apologize for getting caught doing wrong.

  44. How about fiat currency vs. gold? When offered a $20 piece of silver or a $1.00 chocolate bar most people choose the chocolate bar. Why?

  45. Almost everyone would take a million dollars that didn't belong to them if they knew they wouldn't get caught. The ones that wouldn't are either afraid of the invisible Man in the sky, or they are already wealthy , healthy, or both.

  46. and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out… and it turns out…

  47. I,m sorry to be the bearer of bad news for some of us, but if we all think in depth about our growing up imparticularly, ! There will have been a experience, where we have been dishonest to some degree. Its natural to want to cheat some sort of system whether be parents or teachers imparticularly, everyone has made a dime without somebody seeing, especially if we see our friends do it ….infact its a trick of evolutionary behaviour, find aTRICK…..???

  48. According to the Bible ,the devil is the father of ALL lies and liars.The devil,or satan,too was the ancient serpent,the accuser of brethren,the thief,the murderer.So when any person would replicate these characteristics of satan ,the deceiver of nations,their father would be satan while GOD our CREATOR is TRUTH,LIGHT,LIFE,SOURCE. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (John 8:44)

  49. # Jehovah is God of truth (Deut 32:4). He hates lies and liars (Pr ‪6:16-19‬). All liars shall spend eternity in the lake of fire (Rev 21:8,27; ‪22:15‬).

  50. TL;DR Check yourself before you wreck yourself

    (yes it's an oversimplification but it gets the general idea down pretty well imo)

  51. Once you let people break the law just a little, then with little time there would be no law whatsoever!!! Morality is not for you to alter!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *