Yeah, But ...
by Thomas Jeffries on 09/26/2008 at 9:39 AM
I may not post as often as some of the other Boundless Line regulars, but I try to check the site whenever possible throughout the day. With that in mind, I've noticed a rather troubling trend in the comments section.
Whether the topic is voting, adoption or texting while driving, there are more and more commenters these days who seem to acknowledge the "rightness" of a position right before proclaiming that they will likely continue to ignore said position. I'll call it the "Yeah, but ..." syndrome.
In other words, "Yeah, I know that God hates abortion, but I'd rather cast my vote this year based on No Child Left Behind ..."
Or, "Yeah, I agree that kids should have both a mother and father, but lots of important professional organizations endorse same-sex parenting ..."
Or even, "Yeah, it's obvious that texting while driving is extremely dangerous, but I don't plan on stopping ..."
Perhaps I'm just one of those old-school kids who watched the crash test dummies go flying through the air and henceforth concluded that seat belts were a pretty good idea. Similarly, I only have to read Jeremiah 32:35 once to comprehend that child sacrifice is detestable in the sight of God.
Of course, I've also managed to repeatedly disregard the biblical admonitions against lying, coveting and lusting in my heart. Simply put, I'd rather admit I'm a hapless sinner than casually justify behavior that flies in the face of Holy Scripture and common sense.
You might think I'm a hypocrite for even bringing this up. And you know what? You're absolutely right.
1. Greg said the following at 10:14 AM on Sep 26:
I totally agree with you, Thomas.
I heard a preacher once said, "Either you believe the Word of God for what it is, or you don't believe in the Word of God for what it is. To do both is to say in the same breath that either God exists and He doesn't exists." or "God is holy and He is a liar."
People, let's stop sitting on the fence on issues which clearly goes against the living and breathing Scripture, which "... is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17). And in that passage, Paul uses the phrase, "All Scripture" meaning everything in the Bible.
No, I'm not saying that I'm perfect and am legalistically following everything in the Bible down to the very letter. I'm a sinner saved on by God's grace after all, but there's a huge difference between purposefully or premeditated sinning after knowing something is a sin, and trying our best to not sin after knowing that thing we do is a sin.
2. Danielle said the following at 10:20 AM on Sep 26:
Ha! You're right. It's called cognitive dissonance. We know what we should do but we don't do it.
To digress, I know your abortion example was to make a point, but I don't think Christians should vote on just that one issue. Personally I'm pro-choice. That's a whole other bag of drama, but as a future teacher I WILL be voting based on No Child Left Behind.
3. Derek Wong said the following at 10:24 AM on Sep 26:
It seems like it's that whole idea of being willing to change. I know that I need to be conscious of it whenever I am faced with some type of truth.
I would hope that people would be willing to change their opinions if they can agree on something. I think it's somewhat related to this boundless article that I enjoyed about setting priorities.
4. Rachael said the following at 10:28 AM on Sep 26:
The comment in this post that "In other words, "Yeah, I know that God hates abortion, but I'd rather cast my vote this year based on No Child Left Behind ..."" was perhaps just a general impression rather than something someone specifically said.
In scanning through the comments on the voting post, I think I was the only one who mentioned "No Child Left Behind". I probably don't know as much about or feel the pressure and consequences as a K-12 teacher of a largely under-achieving school might, but, as I mentioned in my comment, still abortion holds the most weight for me. I'm not going to vote simply based on a politician's stance on educational issues. Still think it would be nice if a new main political party emerged, but abortion definitely holds the most weight in my mind.
Just pointing this out. Again I realize this was must have been a general statement type of example of the spirit Jeffries has been noticing...
5. Beth said the following at 10:31 AM on Sep 26:
Churches are full of hypocrites...and I'm one of them, thank God. I'm so glad He refuses to leave us comfortable in our hypocrisy. He won't settle until we're formed in Christ's image instead.
6. Jorden said the following at 10:36 AM on Sep 26:
Yes, I agree I see a lot of that too. I don't comment a lot, but I read the majority of boundless line posts. Don't always read all the comments, but I've read a fair amount.
Maybe we're a little too friendly with the world than we should be(like I said, myself included)? I know I am not perfect and if I posted more I would have some of the "Yeah, but..." syndrome. We should strive to remove the "Yeah, but..."'s from our vocabulary and try to live as God would have us live, Holy and righteous.
Ephesians 4:22-24
"You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds; and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness."
But if we do not...
Revelation 3:16
"I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth."
7. Texas Craig said the following at 11:00 AM on Sep 26:
Sometimes, people will use the "yes, but" language as a method to try to soften their disagreements with others. It can be a communication tool that intends to first establish common ground "yes, you have a good point" and then tries to add another thought into the mix "but, there is also the issue of ...."
So, I do not always read "yes, but" language or discussions as being hypocritical (although I agree with you that virtually all of us are hypocritical -- or at least have some cognitive dissonance -- in our lives).
Oftentimes, also, the "yes, but" language occurs in the context of trying to balance two competing issues. For example, "yes lying is wrong, but Rahab was essentially commended for it." Or, "yes, murdering women and children is wrong, but God told the Israelites to do it sometimes." Or, "yes, we need to love people, but that does not mean that we tolerate their sin."
So, I guess I do not share your same concern about the "yes, but" language that has been used on recent discussions. I see it as healthy, because rarely are things as black and white as people want them to be. For example, I have raised a question three times on abortion in regard to different posts, and no one has responded to it yet. My guess is because they recognize it presents a very difficult dilemma.
There is absolutely right and wrong. Scripture gives us the standards for that. Sometimes, though, sorting those out and applying them can be difficult. That is hopefully what people are wrestling with as they discuss these issues.Some people may simply try to rationalize their behavior, but many I suspect are trying to balance competing scriptural directives to come up with an understanding of what God desires of them.
8. Brittany said the following at 11:03 AM on Sep 26:
Thank you for addressing this. I read Boundless every day and have yet to comment but this is something I, too, have felt convincted about recently. That "yeah, but..." mentality to SO prominent in the lives of so many. We know what the Lord wants but it doesn't align with our wants and desires, so we make excuses. We write it off because it's "just too hard". But Jesus never promised that our walk with Him would be easy. In fact, he told us every day we would need to pick up our cross and follow Him. That means DENYING OURSELVES (Luke 9:23). That means doing things that make us squirm a bit because they seem so unnatural to our flesh and sinful nature. I'm an expert in the "yeah, but..." department (I'm sure most of us would agree we are). But the Lord is opening my eyes to the pain and heartache that has caused me. His ways are not our ways, that's for sure. And the sooner we abandon the "yeah but..."s in our lives, the sooner we'll see the fulfillment that comes from following Him.
9. Matthew said the following at 11:15 AM on Sep 26:
Good point! Reminds me of the story of a non-believer who told his Christian friend he doesn't want to go to church because of all the hypocrites. The friend replied "there's always room for one more." :)
10. Matthew said the following at 11:38 AM on Sep 26:
As one of the "yeah, but..." people that you singled out (even though my "but" was not the one that you pointed out, I would just like to say that you usually have to make a "yeah, but..." statement any time that there's a difficult moral decision to be made. There is usually another position that seems more right to the person making the statement.
For example, in the adoption debate, many people said, "Yeah, 50% of kids in foster care could go on to be homeless and that's bad, but we have to make sure that kids don't grow up in a house where their parents are sinning in their relationship."
My point? As much as we would like to live in a world where everything was black and white, sometimes it's not that simple. When you go to war, you have to weigh the possible good against the number of civilians that are going to die. When you pass a law, you have to weigh the people who will benefit against those who will be hurt or inconvenienced. When you cast a vote, your candidate is going to do good things and bad things once he or she is in power. You make it sound like saying "yeah, but..." is a bad thing, but sometimes we simply have to say it. I can come up with plenty of examples if people disagree.
The texting thing, though? I'm totally behind you on that.
11. Kevin said the following at 11:46 AM on Sep 26:
Thomas, I'm a hypocrite too. And it's not ok.
12. Dan real*name said the following at 11:48 AM on Sep 26:
Proverbs 20:14:
"It's no good, it's no good!" says the buyer; then he goes off and boasts about his purchase.
Proverbs 22:3"
"A prudent man sees danger and takes refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for it."
Proverbs is full of statements of those who know what is wrong but do wrong anyways. Of course, the bible is only referring to non-believers...JK
We are ALL guilty of going against what is right.
13. Mallie said the following at 11:59 AM on Sep 26:
Well, I'm convicted. As I surf through different messsage boards, how easily the cynical, defiant words flow from my fingertips en route from my sinful heart, defying all opponents, and ultimately, God himself. I judge by what fits into my preconceived notions, or reflects the wordly wisdom, but in the end, God's word is the only guide. I want to repent, and thank you for calling me out.
14. Kerry said the following at 1:08 PM on Sep 26:
Well just to be clear, I know God hates abortion and I hate abortion but I think the "Pro-life" candidates willl do less for abortion than the "Pro-choice" candidates. How so? Well the Pro-choice candidates want to educate young people about contraception, as well as wanting to deal with issues of health insurance. Many woman end up having abortions because they don't have health insurance. The so called "pro-choice" candidates do more to prevent abortion by caring about the women before and after pregnancy than the "pro-life" candidates who only want to criminalize abortion rather than reduce the number of them. Moreover the current "pro-life" candidates for president have chosen to cut funding for teenage moms and dont support insurance programs for young women. So, just because a candidate says they are "pro-life" what are they really doing to support their cause? Do not assume that just because a Christian votes for a so-called "pro-choice" candidate that they are not voting with the issue of stopping abortions in their mind. Trust me, that is one of my top issues and that is why I might be voting for a so called "pro-choice" candidate.
15. DannieA said the following at 2:35 PM on Sep 26:
Rachael in comment #4 does raise a good point. She specifies that she doesn't care too much about educational issues because she doesn't know about the struggles of K-12 impoverished schools.
The way one votes does have a lot to do with the influences and the interactions they have on a day to day basis.
For me, I work in an impoverished title I school...I know the struggles we have...I know that my kids care more about what's going to happen when drunk dad comes home to beat on them, hunger, taking care of siblings because mom is out trying to hustle a buck for necessities...therefore there are a lot of educational issues that are important and more important to me because that is what will ultimately do more harm or help my kids that I love.
I also work in a place and come in contact with people who if are pregnant out of wedlock, keep the baby...there is hardly any abortion-minded associations whether they be the community I work in, my co-workers, or family.
Every person has a different situation and experiences different ideals and horrors. That's why people vote for what is most pressing in their hearts....for what they feel most...
Maybe in politics, that's why there are SOME (not all) yeah...but....
I don't think it's fair to assume that everyone has the same life experiences that 'should' make a person vote a specific way.
16. Thomas Jeffries said the following at 2:41 PM on Sep 26:
Rachael, Matthew, et. al. -- I certainly wasn't trying to single out any particular person or comment. In fact, I wrote the post largely from memory and made sure not to quote anyone word for word, as I didn't want any commenters to feel like I was picking on them.
17. Adam said the following at 2:57 PM on Sep 26:
Very interesting topic. I think we need to be extremely careful when we jump from a principle of God's Word to application. The application is not inspired.
For instance, if one believes that a fetus is a person, then abortion is very clearly Biblically wrong.
Principle: Abortion is wrong, God hates abortion.
Application: If anybody is pro-choice, it is wrong to vote for them because God hates abortion.
or let me bring up one from Boundless and Christianity today a few months ago...
Principle: We need to exercise care and discernment in our entertainment choices.
Application: Either
A: Sex and the City has too much bad content and nobody should see it...ever.
B: Sex and the City has some great themes and can be edifying to some people in spite of some bad content.
It seems like quite often the problem is that bloggers/commenters take a principle, draw some applications, and then try to apply the applications universally as "what is right."
Granted, this is supposed to be a thought-provoking blog. An easy way to get people to think is to say something that people disagree with or that there is controversy over.
I think that oftentimes commenters agree with the Biblical principle being commmunication (yes), BUT disagree with the particular applications that many times go far beyond the principle being presented.
------------
We are told Biblically to not depart either to the right or to the left. I find that often the church is so busy making sure they don't depart to the left that they drift way off to the right.
18. Matthew said the following at 3:03 PM on Sep 26:
Thomas (#15),
I do appreciate you saying that, because I guess I felt a tiny bit misrepresented by the post. I understand why you said it the way you did, though.
19. Eliza said the following at 3:28 PM on Sep 26:
How about:
"For those God foreknew He also predestined."
"Yeah, but you must repent in order to be forgiven."
Or:
"You should love America."
"Yeah, but I don't have to agree with its leadership and half the voters."
20. helengirlie said the following at 3:35 PM on Sep 26:
You're right, Thomas. It's abhorrent to think that some of the most important issues of the day may be so complex, and have so many variables, that a simple decision based on only one of them might not be the optimal choice. It's much better to just assume that every situation can be reduced to a bumper sticker, and thus be dealt with accordingly, either as a great good or a great evil. I'm shocked - shocked - that there are people out there who refuse to take this step.
21. KariE said the following at 3:43 PM on Sep 26:
I would rather cast my vote "for children" by voting against the legalization of their murder than cast it toward changing NCLB.... the carnage of ripping tiny bodies to pieces takes priority over how standards are applied and tested.
[Sidenote: I like freedom in education and am not in love with NCLB by any means, HOWEVER, since it began, children in the USA are scoring higher in their testing than they have in 25 years-- maybe the test is easier or maybe accountability is imperfect but working]
Just a thought-- I'm in an elementary education program with an emphasis in early childhood, and the teachers are VERY active concerning prenatal care/child abuse and neglect, yet they are unashamed to be pro-choice.
I have yet to figure out the system of logic that knits those two points into cohesive agreement.
22. David Rudel said the following at 5:39 PM on Sep 26:
How does one not set on the fence when the Living Word clearly shows the desires of both candidates are detestable?
23. Tara said the following at 11:16 PM on Sep 26:
The fact that any Christian can claim to be pro-choice is morally disgusting. I am sorry if I hurt any feelings but that is the honest truth. It's DISGUSTING. Let's forget politics for a second. I'm not talking about which candidate to support but your own personal stance on the topic. If you believe life begins at conception then you can not be OK with endorsing the murder of millions of innocent lives. We're talking about human life here. I am sorry, but it's not OK to end an life just because it will cut into your budget or make people think mean things about you. Should there be more options/help plans for pregnant women? Of course! Should there be more education in regards to contraception (outside of just "abstinence"...we know we aren't going to get non-Christians to go for this one). I definately support that idea with my whole heart. And I do feel for the women who are in the position where they feel abortion is their only option. But don't take out the consequences of your choices on the innocent child inside you.
Here in Canada it's virtually impossible to vote for a Pro-Life candidate and I know the abortion debate is one we'll never win. But I will never, ever think is OK. I'm not sure what the political solution to the situation is. But in my heart I certainly don't have to accept it.
Please, let's not allow politics to cause us to lose sight of the fact that, whatever the debate (abortion, war in Iraq, the Israel/Palistine conflict) we're taking about real, live PEOPLE. Personally, I don't understand all the politics-talk on this board. It is a fascinating topic from an intellectual perspective but I don't totally understand how it relates to Christianity. It can be a useful tool at times but utlimately my alliegance is to Christ and my fellow man. Not my country. I don't believe it's more Christian to vote for one party over another.
I want to see North America live in accordance to God's Word but no government can enforce that on the people. Even if they did it would be an empty and meaningless religion because it wouldn't be coming from the heart. In the past year I've been seperating myself more and more from politics. I'll still vote but I see the candidate of my choice the lesser of evils and the best choice in regards to preserving the economy and social assistance for families.
Getting back to the main point (sorry for the rambling rant): I am certainly guilty of the "yeah but" and have very recently had to confess to God my justifying of certain rather major sins. Looking back, my justifications were pretty stupid. Can't believe I actually thought they would fly.
"Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like.. But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it--he will be blessed in what he does." James 1:23-25
24. Esther said the following at 6:40 AM on Sep 27:
Kerry,
I was really confused by your post. I don't see how 'pro-choice' movement is more loving and supportive than the pro-life crowd. My observation has been that the pro-choice attitude has been to hand out condoms, talk about "safe" sex, then encourage ever-younger girls to get abortions so they can avoid ruining their lives with an unwanted pregnancy. If the girl does choose to keep the baby, the pro-choice solution is to go on welfare.
On the other hand, while pro-life individuals do everything they can to end the legalization of abortion, they also support a network of independent crisis pregnancy centers across the country that offer pregnancy tests, support, counseling, supplies and love to women considering abortion (as well as those struggling with the emotional baggage of having had one). I just can't see how you can say that pro-lifers don't support the mothers before and after pregnancy. Just because the pro-life candidate isn't offering a government solution doesn't mean that people who want to end abortion aren't trying to find ways to help those struggling with an unexpected pregnancy.
25. Sarah22 said the following at 7:19 PM on Sep 27:
Kerry...
Get real.
Have you actually convinced yourself that the reason women get abortions is because they don't have health care?
I feel so sorry for you.
26. Samantha said the following at 9:57 PM on Sep 27:
If you ever have to justify something you've said or done, it probably wasn't the right thing to say or do. Jesus never had to justify himself, because he always did the right thing, no matter what the world thought.
27. Leah said the following at 5:51 PM on Sep 28:
I think people miss the point of calling someone a hypocrite. So often they take the "remove the plank from your own eye before pointing out the speck in a brother's eye" story too far.
Yes, we are all sinners. If we decided not to confront anyone else over their sin until we'd cleaned up our act, discipline would NEVER happen. As long as we recognise our sin and are working on it, we should be free to (lovingly) confront others over their sin.
It's when we pretend we don't have a plank in our eye that we shouldn't be pointing out a brother's speck.
We should not shrink from admonishing others for their sin out of fear that they'll turn and point the finger at us. Yes, I'm a sinner. But Matthew gives clear outlines on disciplining fellow believers- did he say only non-sinners can carry that out? Of course not, or it would never get done.
Kerry- there are far more women who get abortions out of convenience than simply because they don't have health insurance.
Matthew and Texas Craig- I don't think Thomas was saying that "Yeah, but" is always bad. I think he was saying it's bad when the "but" is excusing you from opposing something God clearly says is wrong.
When I first saw he was criticising "Yeah, but", I had the same thoughts you did. That it's balancing two issues, or accepting someone else's point of view while adding another twist to it. But he specified what about "yeah, but" is the problem. And it seems limited to those which excuse the speaker from opposing something God says is wrong.
28. Holly said the following at 7:03 PM on Sep 28:
Yeah, I think people should stop this trend in commenting, but I'm not sure that I will.
;) Just kidding, good post!
29. Ashley said the following at 2:47 AM on Sep 29:
The "yeah, but" comes in often when an issue just isn't black and white - although so many people try to force it to become black and white. Per abortion - it is NOT a black and white issue. Yes in one sense it is, but in the political sense of it and HOW it should be handled, it isn't. The argument goes to separation (or not) of church and state and other issues, which of course carry with them even more factors. Per the other two examples, the 2nd being again, not quite as clear cut as most people would like it to be. As for texting while driving - this one seems the most "black and white" of anything and someone saying "yeah, but" would be more of a personal denial or some such response. However, one must take into account that the BUT, in certain cases, allows for the gray area to be considered, and SHOULD be considered.
30. Robert said the following at 12:11 PM on Sep 29:
I see what you're saying, but...
I hate it when people do that.
31. Rachael said the following at 9:18 PM on Sep 29:
Comment 15 noted me as saying: " She specifies that she doesn't care too much about educational issues because she doesn't know about the struggles of K-12 impoverished schools."
-->Just noting that this is not at all what I said. Sure if I frequently interacted with kids with horrific family backgrounds their circumstances would frequently come to mind and pierce my heart.
But I'm pretty sure that even if I had more firsthand knowledge and regular interaction with kids in horrific situations, still abortion would hold the most weight with my vote.
32. pass the ammunition said the following at 8:11 AM on Sep 30:
sarah22...
actually, "not feeling financially ready" is the top reason cited by women who have abortions.
So not having healthcare would be a big part of that. Just a correction.
33. To pass the ammunition said the following at 9:24 AM on Sep 30:
"... actually, 'not feeling financially ready' is the top reason cited by women who have abortions."
Hmm ... then maybe they weren't ready to have sex....
Oh wait, now with birth control you can have sex without the "consequence" of a baby. Now I get it....
34. Rachael said the following at 3:20 PM on Sep 30:
(Just wanted to apologize for writing "Just noting that this is not at all what I said." in comment #31. This sounds snotty, prideful, and/or shows irritation. Sorry about that.
It is true that I do not constantly have political educational issues on my mind and that I might think about them more often if I taught in an elementary or (Jr.) high school and if I frequently interacted with kids in harsh situations.
But even then the abortion issue would hold the most weight in a political voting sense. )
35. Leah said the following at 5:28 PM on Sep 30:
Robert (#30) - you must be pretty intolerant then.
If I think someone has a valid point but that there are other possibilities that should be taken into consideration, I think it's perfectly acceptable to say "I see your point, but..."
I could just say "no you're wrong it's X Y Z", but instead it's acknowledging that the other person is not wrong and that what they've said has merit.
I suppose it all depends what comes after the "but".
So, if someone said "I see what you're saying, but I don't think that happens these days and is irrelevant to this situation", then yeah, that's a bit rude. It's pretending to give the other person credit when you're not really.
But if it's more like "I see what you're saying, but you have to keep in mind that only full-time workers can afford that", then that's acknowledging a valid point but adding extra information that should be taken into consideration.