The moment you lie to defend an ideology, you expose your ideology as false. The Iranian religious authorities suffered a devastating credibility blow following the recent Iranian elections when they proclaimed that their preferred candidate had received the most votes, a proclamation which was obviously untrue having regard to the evidence. If the religious authorities are prepared to lie in order to maintain their power base, are they also lying on matters relating to religion?
Chapter 4 of the Acts of the Apostles describes a group of officials, priests and religious lawyers facing an analogous dilemma. The message being proclaimed by the followers of Jesus was creating a threat to their power base. Peter and John had apparently healed in the name of Jesus a paraplegic man who was more than 40 years old, and no-one doubted the reality of the miracle. Is that something they should have just let go, or should they have tried to hush it up?
In an attempt to stop the message spreading, the religious authorities tried to hush it up, not realising that by trying to suppress the truth they were forfeiting any claim they had to be representing the truth. If a belief system or philosophy really is true, it should be able to stand up for itself, without any need for the use of falsehoods or force or suppression.