Mark D. Roberts

Mark D. Roberts


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

posted by Mark D. Roberts

Jesus says that if someone sins against you, you’re to go to the person when you can be alone and point out that person’s fault. This seems clear enough, even if we’re not all that happy about it. But how might we apply the teaching of Jesus in a digital age?

Jesus’ instructions about what to do if someone sins against you were issued in a time when a net was something you used to catch fish, a web was something spun by a spider, and digital media meant communicating with one’s fingers. The teaching of Jesus was intended for a small community of people who shared life together in the flesh. Thus, when Jesus said that the victim of sin should go to the perpetrator, he was envisioning a short walk at most, so that the two could meet face-to-face.

Today’s world is substantially different from the world of Jesus, though the core issues are much the same. People still sin against each other, and are still in need of reconciliation. Yet, these days, the person who sins against you just might live on the other side of the world. You might never have met that person and never have any reason to meet that person. Moreover, these days we don’t tend to walk over to someone’s house for a conversation, let alone a confrontation. We are much more comfortable communicating through some sort of electronic means, be it the Internet or a cellular network.

man-angry-cell-phone-5.jpg

Given the extent to which our relationships today are mediated by electronics, we might wonder how this impacts our application of Matthew 18:15-18. When Jesus says that if someone sins against us, we should go and point out the fault when we can be alone, can this mean that we might use electronic means of communication? Would it be okay to “go” by calling someone up on the phone, or by sending an email, or by Skyping, or by texting, or by tweeting, or by sending a message on Facebook, or . . . .

Certain kinds of digital communication are clearly inconsistent with the sense of Jesus’ instruction. We are to confront one who has sinned against us “when the two of [us] are alone.” Tweeting and posting public messages on Facebook would not in any way reflect the intentions of Jesus. The same would be true for communicating through blog posts or blog comments. So we can safely rule out many popular kinds of electronic communication as incompatible with the teaching of Jesus.

But what about confronting through phone calls, emails, or text messages? These can be private, including in the conversation only yourself and the person who sinned against you. Would calling someone on the phone count as going to that person, in faithfulness to Jesus’ directive?

For many of us, there is an inherent attractiveness in such electronic communication. It feels much safer. After all, if I sin against you and you call me on the phone to “point out the fault,” you’re protected from seeing my anger or even being struck by my fists. If I don’t accept responsibility for what I did to you, and if I begin to speak meanly to you, you can simply hang up. Email would be even safer than a phone call, of course, because you wouldn’t have to hear my voice or respond to my defenses.

Tomorrow, I’ll offer some thoughts on the appropriateness of using private electronic communication for the purpose of confrontation and reconciliation. For now, I’d be interested in your thoughts. 



  • Your Name

    through experience I know that writing does not convey the tone or feeling behind the words – depending on how the receiver reads the words in his head or aloud, he can misunderstand the meaning – he may think the writer is angry when the writer may be asking an innocent question or making a gentle statement – I think writing/texting/e-mail, at least, is not an option because sadly, human nature can tend to lean to the negative when reading something that may have confrontational content

  • Wild Willie

    Is displaying a raised middle finger to someone a digital sin?

  • Pat

    As tempting as it would be to confront electronically, I think the only acceptable use of technology would be for setting up a time to meet, IF you’ve been unsuccessful in contacting them via phone or in person. So much can be lost in translation electronically. I could say something with the purest of intentions and someone could misunderstand, thinking that I was being caustic or mean when maybe I wasn’t (I’ve had this happen on a blog). Or someone might not realize how heartfelt your apology is; your heart can’t always be discerned via e-mail. Of course, the same could be said for handwritten correspondence. So I would say only as a last resort should we use technology. One exception would be if the person is violent. Then of course, distance is bet until you know you aren’t in danger.

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 blog post Happy Reading!  

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 the necessity of Jesus’ death without taking them all

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 is what God is like. He is our God forever and ever,

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 jewelry to associate the cross with love. But, in the first

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 the scriptures” (15:3). Yet this text doesn’t expl

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.