I have found that we as people tend to listen to testimonies differently than we do sermons. When we’re aware that someone is trying to influence our perspective there is a guardedness that rises up in order to protect our core values. We naturally evaluate the source of this new information, to see if it seems trustworthy or whether it might pose some type of threat.
We generally listen with a degree of skepticism until we establish some sense of connection to the provider of this alternate viewpoint. If internal alarms begin to sound in our head, it becomes very difficult to receive anything, regardless of the content of the message.
On the other hand, when someone tells their story we tend to be less guarded and to look for points of connection with their experience. When they speak of struggling as a child, we often recall our struggles as a child. When they testify to moments of despair, we generally remember our moments of despair. And when they share their moments of triumph, we are often reminded of our own redemption story. Even if their journey is very different than ours, we can relate to points of it in a very personal way.
I would describe these two dynamics as the “Us and Them” paradigms. New information is generally received through the “Them” portal (e.g. that’s your opinion, that’s your experience, that’s your interpretation, that’s fine for you, but…) until that data and its source are vetted through our internal filtering system. Once credibility is established, we can shift to the “Us” portal, where these things can be viewed as trustworthy and pertinent to our own experience.
I would also suggest that we tend to interpret the scriptures through these same information biases. We are naturally drawn to the passages about God’s faithfulness and the promises He’s made. We receive them through the “Us” bias because we view them as pertaining to us, and our lives.
But warnings about unfaithful Israel and the folly of the Pharisees are usually viewed through the “Them” lens, as we struggle to place ourselves in those contexts. There is a natural inclination to push such incrimination away from us. Within this pattern, God’s promises to His covenant people are banked in our account as part of our inheritance, yet somehow His warnings of straying hearts and a love of temporal things are seen as “Them” issues.
We’ve even developed theologies based on the idea that Israel’s unfaithfulness disqualified them from God’s promises, while God’s grace somehow justifies us in spite our own lack of fidelity. Once again, their transgressions are viewed through the “Them” lens (i.e. as pertaining to a certain people at a specific time and place), while God’s enduring patience is received through the “Us” channel (i.e. transcendent to time and space).
This pattern becomes even more troubling when viewed through the context of Jesus’ return. There are so many scriptures that appear to be warnings for individuals who count themselves as believers, or followers, or even disciples. Passages referencing a people who possess a form of godliness but deny the power thereof (2Tim.3:5), or who honor Jesus with their lips, but whose hearts are far from Him (Matt.15:8), and/or those who do things in His name, but don’t really know Him (Matt.7:21-23). Yet, if we process these words through the “Them” paradigm, refusing to entertain the possibility that He’s speaking to “Us”, we’re not likely to heed those cautions.
Similarly, the gospels prominently feature tales of Jesus’ adversarial relationship with the religious leaders of His day (i.e., Pharisees, Sadducees). His strong rebuke of their hubris and haughty attitude is obviously a cautionary tale for anyone who might assume the mantle of leadership within the church.
Yet the sad history of western religion is littered with corrupt, perverse, and even abusive leaders, who claim to represent Christ. It is not as if this topic is subtly addressed or thinly veiled within the scripture, but clearly the warnings have not been heeded. I have little doubt that this type of counsel is generally viewed through the “Them” lens.
Despite the fact that many Christians would say that we are fast approaching, or perhaps even living amid the “end times”, there seems to be little concern with regard to the Lord’s admonishments to the seven churches in the book of Revelation. Who is He speaking to with these warnings? What does it mean to forsake our first love (Rev.2:1-7), who are the false prophets that threaten to lead us astray (Rev.2:18-29), and what causes Him to view us as “lukewarm” (Rev.3:14-22)? If we process these words through the “Them” paradigm, we run the risk of being spewed from His mouth.
Paul asserted that “all scripture” is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training (2Tim.3:16), while the Hebrew writer reminds us that every good father chastens their children (Heb.12:5-8). If we want to claim the promises as our own, we must also be willing to receive the training and correction of the Lord. We cannot afford to have “Us” scriptures and “Them” scriptures, as we need to hear what the Spirit of the Lord is saying to the church in this very hour (Rev.2-3). If the only thing we can receive from Him is promises, blessings, or encouragement we diminish His role from that of a Father to that of a Sugar Daddy.
Read Full Post »
Bjcorbin's Blog 
Us and Them
Posted in Commentaries, tagged admonishment, core values, correction, end times, experience, father, guarded, inclination, inheritance, leader, leadership, paradigm, rebuke, receive, sermon, skepticism, Sugar Daddy, testimony, them, training, trustworthy, us on September 18, 2025| Leave a Comment »
I have found that we as people tend to listen to testimonies differently than we do sermons. When we’re aware that someone is trying to influence our perspective there is a guardedness that rises up in order to protect our core values. We naturally evaluate the source of this new information, to see if it seems trustworthy or whether it might pose some type of threat.
We generally listen with a degree of skepticism until we establish some sense of connection to the provider of this alternate viewpoint. If internal alarms begin to sound in our head, it becomes very difficult to receive anything, regardless of the content of the message.
On the other hand, when someone tells their story we tend to be less guarded and to look for points of connection with their experience. When they speak of struggling as a child, we often recall our struggles as a child. When they testify to moments of despair, we generally remember our moments of despair. And when they share their moments of triumph, we are often reminded of our own redemption story. Even if their journey is very different than ours, we can relate to points of it in a very personal way.
I would describe these two dynamics as the “Us and Them” paradigms. New information is generally received through the “Them” portal (e.g. that’s your opinion, that’s your experience, that’s your interpretation, that’s fine for you, but…) until that data and its source are vetted through our internal filtering system. Once credibility is established, we can shift to the “Us” portal, where these things can be viewed as trustworthy and pertinent to our own experience.
I would also suggest that we tend to interpret the scriptures through these same information biases. We are naturally drawn to the passages about God’s faithfulness and the promises He’s made. We receive them through the “Us” bias because we view them as pertaining to us, and our lives.
But warnings about unfaithful Israel and the folly of the Pharisees are usually viewed through the “Them” lens, as we struggle to place ourselves in those contexts. There is a natural inclination to push such incrimination away from us. Within this pattern, God’s promises to His covenant people are banked in our account as part of our inheritance, yet somehow His warnings of straying hearts and a love of temporal things are seen as “Them” issues.
We’ve even developed theologies based on the idea that Israel’s unfaithfulness disqualified them from God’s promises, while God’s grace somehow justifies us in spite our own lack of fidelity. Once again, their transgressions are viewed through the “Them” lens (i.e. as pertaining to a certain people at a specific time and place), while God’s enduring patience is received through the “Us” channel (i.e. transcendent to time and space).
This pattern becomes even more troubling when viewed through the context of Jesus’ return. There are so many scriptures that appear to be warnings for individuals who count themselves as believers, or followers, or even disciples. Passages referencing a people who possess a form of godliness but deny the power thereof (2Tim.3:5), or who honor Jesus with their lips, but whose hearts are far from Him (Matt.15:8), and/or those who do things in His name, but don’t really know Him (Matt.7:21-23). Yet, if we process these words through the “Them” paradigm, refusing to entertain the possibility that He’s speaking to “Us”, we’re not likely to heed those cautions.
Similarly, the gospels prominently feature tales of Jesus’ adversarial relationship with the religious leaders of His day (i.e., Pharisees, Sadducees). His strong rebuke of their hubris and haughty attitude is obviously a cautionary tale for anyone who might assume the mantle of leadership within the church.
Yet the sad history of western religion is littered with corrupt, perverse, and even abusive leaders, who claim to represent Christ. It is not as if this topic is subtly addressed or thinly veiled within the scripture, but clearly the warnings have not been heeded. I have little doubt that this type of counsel is generally viewed through the “Them” lens.
Despite the fact that many Christians would say that we are fast approaching, or perhaps even living amid the “end times”, there seems to be little concern with regard to the Lord’s admonishments to the seven churches in the book of Revelation. Who is He speaking to with these warnings? What does it mean to forsake our first love (Rev.2:1-7), who are the false prophets that threaten to lead us astray (Rev.2:18-29), and what causes Him to view us as “lukewarm” (Rev.3:14-22)? If we process these words through the “Them” paradigm, we run the risk of being spewed from His mouth.
Paul asserted that “all scripture” is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training (2Tim.3:16), while the Hebrew writer reminds us that every good father chastens their children (Heb.12:5-8). If we want to claim the promises as our own, we must also be willing to receive the training and correction of the Lord. We cannot afford to have “Us” scriptures and “Them” scriptures, as we need to hear what the Spirit of the Lord is saying to the church in this very hour (Rev.2-3). If the only thing we can receive from Him is promises, blessings, or encouragement we diminish His role from that of a Father to that of a Sugar Daddy.
Rate this:
Read Full Post »