Mark D. Roberts

Mark D. Roberts

What Do To If Someone Sins Against You . . . in the Digital Age, Part 2

Yesterday I set up the question: How do we apply the teaching of Jesus about confronting someone who sins against us . . . in the digital age? Since it can be much easier and safer to communicate with someone by means of cell phone, email, and other digital technologies, does this give us a new way to follow Jesus’ instruction to “go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone” (Matt 18:15).

I’m sure there are times when the use of digital technologies does, in fact, allow us to be guided by the intent of Jesus’ teaching, though not it’s literal sense. For example, in our Internet-flattened, highly mobile age, there are times when it just isn’t practical to meet with someone face-to face. Suppose, for example, that a colleague wrongs you just before heading off on a long, overseas business trip. The cost in time and money of flying to wherever your colleague may be to have a direct conversation is prohibitive. So, at that point you have two choices. First, you could delay the conversation until your colleague returns. Second, you could use some from of technology (phone call, email, text) to communicate your concern. Which of these should you choose?


I don’t think there’s one answer to this question. It depends on all sorts of factors, like: the kind of offense, your emotional state, your colleague’s physical and emotional situation, the nature of your relationship with your colleague, etc. So, if the offense is relatively minor, and if your relationship with the colleague is relatively insignificant, you might decide to wait until you can be face-to-face. On the contrary, if the offense was a potent one, and if the colleague is a close friend, you might choose rather to call in order to confront and reconcile.

Notice that I said “call” and not “email.” I must confess that I’m not a fan of email confrontations, not at all. When I was Senior Pastor of Irvine Presbyterian Church, and email was new, I did use email to communicate with people who had wronged me. It was almost always a disaster. The personal receiving the email couldn’t sense my hurt and usually became defensive. I would often receive in response a quickly composed, rushed response that wasn’t helpful in the least. Relatively small disagreements escalated.


I witnessed this sort of thing time and again in my church. People who tried to confront others through email almost inevitably were not satisfied. Almost always their electronic efforts made matters worse. In time, I urged my staff and my elders never to use email to communicate anything negative, unless it was relatively inconsequential. “No, I can’t make the meeting” was okay. “I’m upset by what you said in the meeting” was not okay.


The cultural ethos surrounding email makes it a very bad way for dealing with disagreements or confrontations. Email communication tends to be quick, spontaneous, and unpolished. It is a poor conductor of emotion or personhood. Because email can be composed, mailed, and received while both parties are burning with anger, as opposed to letters that require delays, it often throws gasoline on the emotional fire. Moreover, it is so easy for people to forward email messages to others, or to include them among the recipients, that email tempts people to break the “when the two of you are alone” rule of Jesus. I can’t tell you how many times I, as a pastor, have been copied (sometimes blind) on confrontational emails that never should have been written, let alone shown to me. So, I would strongly encourage you not to use email to confront someone who has sinned against you, no matter how much you might be tempted to do it.


A phone call would be much better than email because it enhances the personal dimensions of the interaction. When I talk with someone on the phone, I can hear that person’s voice. I can sense emotions like hurt, sorrow, anger, and so forth. A phone conversation facilities interaction that is much more human than anything email could accomplish. (A Skype conversation, with visual images, could be even better than a phone call.)

If you are not able to meet with someone who has wronged you, and if you believe that confrontation should not be delayed until a face-to-face meeting is possible, then I would recommend a phone call. Make sure both you and the other party are in a place of privacy and have enough time to work through the issues. Don’t call someone who is rushing through an airport, and don’t call someone in earshot of your other colleagues at work.


In most cases, I do not think the use of technology concords with the teaching of Jesus about going to the other person. There is something that happens when two people are face-to-face that is essential in the process of confrontation and reconciliation. Yes, to be sure, sometimes a personal meeting does not work out as it should. But the effort to meet with someone is itself an indication of a desire for reconciliation. Therefore, I’d urge you – and me – to take Jesus at his word whenever possible, and “go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone.”

As I come to the end of this series, I want to respond to questions that were posed both in comments and in emails. They have to do with forgiveness. Basically, the questions are these: Should I forgive someone who doesn’t admit to having done anything wrong? And if so, how can I forgive such a person? I’ll address these questions in my next post in this series. 

  • Your Name

    Again, Mark,
    Thank you for this series. The timing is perfect – as God’s timing always is. I am so glad you are willing to be used by God and sensitive to His leading on what topics you address. My husband and I are praying for you as you continue to minister to us and many others through the written word and we are thankful for that “instruction in righteousness”.

  • Eunice

    Thank you, Mark. This message is a reminder for me the significant of reconciliation. A means of humility to work in and through me.
    God bless you always.

Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Mark D. Roberts. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration ...

posted 2:09:11pm Aug. 27, 2012 | read full post »

Why Did Jesus Have to Die? Conclusions
In this series on the death of Jesus, I have presented four different perspectives on why Jesus had to die: Roman, Jewish, Jesus’, and Early Christian. I believe that each of these points of view has merit, and that we cannot fully understand ...

posted 2:47:39am Apr. 11, 2011 | read full post »

Sunday Inspiration from the High Calling
Can We Find God in the City? Psalm 48:1-14 Go, inspect the city of Jerusalem. Walk around and count the many towers. Take note of the fortified walls, and tour all the citadels, that you may describe them to future generations. For that ...

posted 2:05:51am Apr. 10, 2011 | read full post »

Why Did Jesus Have to Die? The Perspective of the First Christians, Part 3
An Act and Symbol of Love Perhaps one of the most startling of the early Christian interpretations of the cross was that it was all about love. It’s easy in our day, when crosses are religious symbols, attractive ornaments, and trendy ...

posted 2:41:47am Apr. 08, 2011 | read full post »

Why Did Jesus Have to Die? The Perspective of the First Christians, Part 2
The Means of Reconciliation In my last post, I examined one of the very earliest Christian statements of the purpose of Jesus’ death. According to the tradition encapsulated in 1 Corinthians 15, Jesus died “for our sins in accordance with ...

posted 2:30:03am Apr. 07, 2011 | read full post »


Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.