By MG Henry

Why do you think that a Christian would tell another Christian what she/he THOUGHT the other WANTED to hear?

Other= person asking the question  (looking for an honest answer)
Speaker= the one giving an answer (that favors himself/herself)

Approaching this question from several angles, I created some scenarios.
It could be that the Speaker wants to gain favor with the Other and give a response that will sound favorable to the other.
Speaking of favorable, there is the possibility that the Speaker FEARS that he/she will give an incorrect or off the mark and be rebuked so  answers and tries to give a positive response whether completely accurate or not.

The Speaker might not want to displease the Other by giving an answer that might cause challenge, dispute or extensive discussion on the issue.
Another thought is that perhaps the Speaker does not possess much confidence in his own observations and perceptions and so gives a pallid response to the Other person, a timid answer lacking conviction and probably of little, if any, value.
Trying to gain favor in the Other’s eyes is another possible reason that one gives an answer that he THINKS the other wants to hear whether the Speaker agrees with it or not.

How do some people arrive at these false approaches to communication with one’s family, loved ones, bosses, friends, ministers?

Some of it, I believe, is learned.  We observe certain people with whom we have to do. Or we remember our family’s habits and issues.  We learn their reactions and responses to stimuli in their lives; what pleases them; what upsets them; how they react when situations arise in their lives and what brings a favorable reaction from them.  Children do this sometimes in school. As an example, a Kindergarten or first-grade student notes that the teacher gives praise to another student concerning a correct answer.  That little student then tries to repeat that answer to every question the teacher asks because it brought praise when it answered a previous question whether correct or not.
Some people have learned by association what attitudes and responses please certain persons so they might give an answer that will elicit a positive response from the Other .

Another consideration might be that the Speaker cares more about self than the Other person with whom he is supposed to be communicating.  It is a total disregard for truth and integrity and saving one’s own ‘neck’ by giving a response that the Speaker thinks the Other wants to hear.   This, to my way of thinking, is anti-social communication.  It really is lying to the other if in our hearts we are thinking one thing, but fear, pride, intellectual fraud and self absorption come into play, here.

Then there is the proverbial “yes” man. No matter what the situation or circumstance or question the “yes-man” amens everything the ‘Other’ person asks or says whether they agree or not.   Sometimes this backfires and the Speaker is caught by his own devices of deceit.

In one way it is an easy way out but on the other hand it is very dangerous to assume or presume to know what the other person WANTS to hear.  Just basing it on previous experiences is taking a big chance in clear and true communication and a terrible and dangerous habit to develop.

I know this is just the tip of the iceberg and I hope this will illicit more responses to this question.

 

By MG Henry
I read by mistake, or so it had seemed at the time, a Scripture this morning which touched , actually shook up my heart, exceedingly. Actually I was looking up another Scripture and mistakenly read the wrong Psalm, right verse. Although this Scripture did not seem to jive with the reference I was seeking….it spoke volumes to me and stopped me in my tracks..
You can imagine my great interest during the teaching part of our service when our Bible teacher, Gary, started leading us through 1 John and describing what “walking in the Light as Jesus is in the Light” might look like. He spoke of our ‘walk’ consisting of how we conduct ourselves, the way we regulate and discipline our lives and the way we progress and use the opportunities the Lord presents to us to see and become more and more like Christ. The Light shines on our darkness and exposes it. Then we have the opportunity to change that behavior or…..continue in it until it becomes very dark in our lives.
He made another surprising comment. If we have stumbled into the darkness and are regretful, asking God to forgive our sin, we really haven’t repented until we CHANGE OUR BEHAVIOR….not do that again and BEHAVE DIFFERENTLY.
But I still haven’t told you my Scripture because after Gary’s dissertation on walking in the Light of the Lord Jesus Christ and conducting our lives accordingly, Sara brought to the LIGHT a clarity that one must either accept or reject. There is NO middle ground. If we reject it, we are in denial and we lie. John wrote that in 1 John 1. If we accept what she said we will have to do something about it.
Sara taught that we, each of us, have an AGENDA. Everyone of us living on the face of the earth has a deep seated, deeply motivating force in our hearts (souls). Whatever that AGENDA is we will conduct our lives in such a way to bring forth the ‘fruit’ of that , against all odds. Some of the fruit may be nourishing or some may be rotten depending on what our agenda truly is. And so when we discover by walking in the Light that Gary taught about, that our AGENDA is ungodly because the Light of Christ’s countenance and as His Word reveal it to us, then we have the godly and moral responsibility to change our agendas or we can never change the fruit that will result in insisting that every action, every word, every thought and desire/design will cater to that Agenda to prove it right, even when it is not righteous. 

What is the solution to this enigma? How did we get these particular agendas? Perhaps they are generational; or from a scarred youth; or as a way of manipulating other people from an early age; or how certain cultures mold habits and thoughts. But whatever the source it is a forceful power to be reckoned with. First needed is a sincere desire to change one’s way of thinking and being, really. Not wanting to “hang on and pet” that nasty creature that inhibits our relationship with Jesus. Jesus Christ did the faultless work on the cross to deliver us from these conditions of our hearts. And Gary said we must NOT live our lives being ‘alluded to’ as being a Christian….that is, broadly being regarded as such but without genuine proof because our Agendas are not Christ’s perfect plan for our lives not indicative of a transformed life.
So, my take on this is that I will employ the WORD OF LIGHT AND INSTRUCTION, the WORD of GOD to determine the true motives of my heart and cease and desist in this operation of making my Agenda’s rotten-fruit dreams come true…like a self-fulfilling prophecy. For our ungodly agendas, though hidden deeply in our hearts identify themselves by their (rotten) fruit.
So what is my Scripture that has the liberating task of helping me through this transformation of renewing my mind and my heart? It is Psalm 16:7 …” I will bless the LORD, who has given me counsel: my heart also instructs me in the night seasons.” Or more explanatory, “  I will praise the LORD, who advises me. My conscience warns me at night. 
I will listen to the counsels of the Lord and my earthly counselors and allow my heart whereof the Holy Spirit indwells to convict me of my sins and allow my conscience instructed by the HIM to work through the changes that need to come to be able to walk in the Light as He is in the Light so that blood of Jesus cleanses me from all unrighteousness.
BECAUSE I AM WILLING, and desire greatly, TO LET IT CHANGE MY AGENDA.

by Gary:
Herman Bavinck, a Dutch Reformed theologian and churchman. wrote; “Sin is not a distinct being but an impairment of being, a deformation.”

The New Oxford Dictionary defines “Sin an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law : a sin in the eyes of God • an act regarded as a serious or regrettable fault, offense, or omission…”

We read in the Bible; “Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.”
I John 3:4 NIV

We can talk about sin abstractly, but what is sin concretely? John Edwards said he did many bad things and hurt a lot of people, but didn’t break the law. But, did he sin? I’m sure his wife said he sinned by committing adultery. President Clinton said he did a very bad thing. I never heard him say he sinned.

The actions of these men and their women partners were immoral. According to the Oxford Dictionary they sinned. Dr. Bavinck would say they have a deformation in their being, meaning they are not living up to the clearly known divine law and were lawless in their actions and character.

Sara says, “Sin is out of style in word for many. Yet sin seems to be in fashion in lifestyle for a wide range of living.”

Would they describe the actions of parents who buy their sexually active teenage children contraceptives as sin? Isn’t it sin to encourage others to sin?

What about other parents who condone their actions by not asking questions about this so called loving behavior of these “Christian” parents? I think the parents are sinning by encouraging their children to sin, and those who stand by and say nothing are sinning as well.

Paul says, “Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them”
God says, “the wages of sin is death.” Romans 6:23 He also says, “all people are mine to judge-both parent and child alike. And this is my rule: the person who sins is the one who will die.” Ezekiel 18:4 NLT

Scriptures like these are sprinkles of warnings to the sinner. The same Bible that gives us the results of sin gives us the major temporal and eternal benefits of sinlessness. We have choices. We make them and we share the benefits and liabilities.

I don’t think sin has gone away. I think we, like the proverbial Ostrich with our heads in the sand think it doesn’t exist or apply to us.