Surviving Unhealthy Relationships
Series: Cultivating Healthy Relationships #3
1 Samuel 25:14-25[1]
2-13-05
Intro
The subject of our message this morning is How to deal with difficult people (while taking roll of duct tape and baseball bat out of bag)[2].
For the last couple of weeks we have talked about how to nurture healthy relationships.
We have talked about the importance of mutual respect and humility in our relationships. We have talked about how to be a true friend. We have talked about how to not be a difficult person ourselves. Those two sermons lay an essential foundation for what I will be sharing this morning. Without those sermons it would be easy to misunderstand today’s message. Today we will not talk about relationships in general. Today we want to talk about how to handle unhealthy relationships. What do you do about people whose issues run so deep that it is virtually impossible to carry on healthy relationships with them?
I. When I say difficult people I mean people who are difficult most of the time. We all have bad days. We are all a bit difficult from time to time. That’s why love must cover a multitude of faults for our relationships to work. But some people are just plain toxic. They are bad news for everybody that interacts with them. And their interaction with other people is very dysfunctional. Clinical psychologist, Kenneth Haugk offers some very sound advice on this subject in his book, Antagonists in the Church. He defines antagonists as “individuals who on the basis of nonsubstantive evidence, go out of their way to make insatiable demands, usually attacking the person or performance of others.”[3] Some people have so many psychological problems (not to mention the spiritual dynamics involved) that it requires special skills in dealing with them.
In the text that was read at the beginning of the service (1 Samuel 25) we find such a person. His name is Nabal. You have probably at some time heard a sermon about his wife ,Abigail, but I doubt you have ever heard a sermon about Nabal. He’s not the kind of person we like to preach about. But unfortunately the world still has its Nabals and we have to know how to deal with them.
David tried to be a friend to Nabal. He took the initiative and provided a great service to the man. At the risk of his own life and the investment of his own resources David protected Nabal’s shepherds and flocks from the bandits in that area (1 Samuel 25:16,21).
But when David had a need this man not only refused to help but added insult to insult. Listen to his reply to David’s request in 1 Sam 25:10-11, “Nabal answered David’s servants, ‘Who is this David? Who is this son of Jesse? Many servants are breaking away from their masters these days. 11 Why should I take my bread and water, and the meat I have slaughtered for my shearers, and give it to men coming from who knows where?’” Bottom line, he called David a no-good rebel and refused to lift a finger to help him.
The first lesson we learn from this is what not to do. Don’t do what David almost did. Don’t use the ball bat! David became so angry at the man that he decided to attack him. Fortunately Abigail intervened and David didn’t follow through with the attack. Romans 12:19 “Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord.” Of course, it was not long until that happened to Nabal[4]. Nobody gets away with anything. Never forget that. “...God is not mocked. Whatever a man sows that will he also reap.”(Gal. 6:7).
What kind of man was Nabal? It’s obvious from the way he responded to David’s kindness that he was a man with no sense of justice. Most people would feel appreciation for what David had done and be looking for a way to respond in like kind. But Nabal was not most people. Nabal was a selfish, inconsiderate—I’ve got to choose my words carefully—son of Belial (KJV-vs 17). He had no appreciation for what David had done for him. Everybody that interacted with Nabal came to the same conclusion. He is a worthless, vile, stubborn man. This is one way you can tell you’re dealing with an antagonistic, difficult person: everybody that interacts with him comes to that conclusion. If you’re the only one who is in conflict with a person, you are probably not dealing with a Nabal type personality. Nabal had become infamous for being difficult. In verse 17 his servants added the fact that “nobody can (even) talk to him.”[5] It was impossible to reason with the man. That’s what I would call a difficult person.
Now before I move on please note that God didn’t tell David to go try to get along with Nabal. The best thing David could do with Nabal is simply leave the fool alone. Poor Abigail, she didn’t have that option. But God eventually took care of the situation.
Let me just mention two or three kinds of difficult people so you can get a better idea of what I am talking about.
1. One is the Aggressive Controllers[6]. These people do not know the meaning of give and take. They never admit being wrong. And the only kind of relationship they are willing to have is with a person who will surrender to their demands. The Controller develops many skills at dominating the relationship and punishing those who resist. Jezebel is a prime example of a controller. In 1 Kings 21 she had no toleration for Naboth’s refusal to give her and Ahab his land. Controllers respond (maybe not to the extent) but in the same way Jezebel responded to Naboth. Healthy attempts at compromise and reason never work with controllers.
2. Then there are the Indirect Manipulators. On the surface these people may seem harmless enough, even nice—maybe almost a victim. But below the surface there is a calculating ability to always get their way. King Ahab was that kind of person. He didn’t have the guts to kill Naboth himself. But he knew if he whined enough around Jezebel, she would get the job done. Indirect Manipulators are masters at saying one thing and meaning something else. They are very good at making people feel guilty when they don’t meet their expectations. Addressing issues with manipulators is like nailing jello to the wall. They are masters at side stepping the issues and putting the monkey back on your back.
3. Emotional Leaches are another type of difficult person. The difficulty is not as obvious as with an Aggressive Controller. But the relationship they always tend to find is one way. Like Nabal, when you need them they are nowhere to be found. But for their part, they always seem to have some kind of crisis going. They always so pitifully need others to help them.
I’m just identifying these three types of difficult people to give a sense of what we’re talking about. Understand that we’re not talking about people who occasionally behave this way. There’s a little of this in all of us. But it requires special skills when you’re dealing with people who are dominated by these characteristics.
II. So, how do we deal with these type people? Every situation is unique but let me give you a few general suggestions.
1. Evaluate the Situation carefully.
How receptive to truth is this individual? People who knew Nabal said nobody could tell him anything. Prov 26:12 “Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.” That seems to be a pretty accurate description of Nabal. Prov 29:20 “Do you see a man who speaks in haste? There is more hope for a fool than for him.” Considering the reputation of David and his men as warriors, I would say that Nabal was pretty quick to run his mouth. Most nice Christians would have advised David to go down there and talk to the man—reason with him—work it out. In most situations that is exactly what should be done. Matthew 18 tells us to do that. But my strong suspicion is that if David had taken that kind of advice somebody would have wound up dead—and maybe a lot of people. There is a reason Proverbs makes these kind of statements. They are not to be ignored. They are to be considered in the process. Nabal was not open to truth at all.
One mistake Christians commonly make is to indiscriminately dispense truth. Jesus didn’t do that. In fact, in the Sermon on the Mount he said (Matt 7:6) “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.”
At one point the disciples asked Jesus why he spoke in parables to the multitudes. Do you remember Jesus’ answer in Matthew 13:11? “He answered and said to them, Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 13 Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.” (NKJV) Jesus was not indiscriminate in the way he spoke to people. He dealt with the Pharisees according to their receptivity to truth. He dealt with the masses according to their receptivity to truth. And He dealt with the disciples according to their receptivity to truth.
Prov 9:7-8 “Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult; whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse. Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you; rebuke a wise man and he will love you.” Clearly, people’s receptivity is a factor in determining how to approach them. I recognize the dangers in teaching this. If our hearts are not right we can take this teaching and twist it and justify our own unwillingness to deal with issues. That’s why I must remind you that this sermon is dealing with some very specific issues in human relationships. Honest hearts will receive it in the context of the whole counsel of God.[7]
Another question we ask ourselves is How permanent is this relationship? In 1 Samuel 25 David was in a very different position that Abigail concerning Nabal. David’s relationship with the man was very casual. Abigail was married to the fool. David was in a position to just go his own way and leave him alone. Abigail did not have that luxury. The way we handle a person like this depends to some degree on the necessity and permanence of the relationship. When I was 19 years old I was driving through a local hang out where six bullies had taken over and were intimidating everybody on the premises. When they came to my vehicle, I got into a fight with them. My buddy wisely stayed in the car while those six guys beat the snot beat out of me. Do you know what I would do today? I would go to a different place. I didn’t have to be there. It wasn’t my responsibility to correct the problem. That’s why we have a police department.
The consequences of not dealing with a problem, depends significantly upon what my relationship is with that person. If it’s only a brief encounter like the one I had with those six bullies, why should I expend my energy trying to fix the problem? On the other hand, if I’m going to have to work with those guys every day, then just walking off probably won’t work. Tomorrow will probably be even worse. We intuitively make these kind of evaluations. But if we will objectively think it through we will be more consistent in our decisions.
Similarly, I must ask myself what my responsibility is in this relationship? Abigal was right to take action when the herdsmen told her about the problem. She could not just ignore the issue and let all these people who worked for her be slaughtered. In the early chapters of 1 Samuel Eli rightly discerned the lack of receptivity in his sons. They were not open to truth and they were not interested in changing their ways. But Eli had a responsibility to deal with them because he was in authority over them. Different relationships may entail different responsibilities in a relationship. All of this should be given due consideration before action is taken.
This might be a good time to emphasize the importance of prayer—the importance of asking God for wisdom—the importance of seeking godly counsel. Certainly everything that is done should be done in prayerful dependence upon the Lord. There is safety in getting wise, godly counsel. That’s a very different thing from finding people who will simply agree with your side of an issue. But some of these matters are quite demanding and sometimes we need an outside, objective perspective on the matter.
Having evaluated the situation (and of course much more could be said about that) but what then?
2. Address the issues.
Matthew 18 gives general instruction on how that is to be approached. The idea is that it should be resolved as intimately as possible with involving as few of people as possible.
Issues are not to be left unresolved. I think there is a lot of misunderstanding as to what it means to resolve issues. Did John the Baptist ever get his conflict resolved with Herod? Did Jesus ever get His conflict resolved with Pilot? What kind of resolution of a conflict is Matthew 18:17 ? “ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.”
As a practical matter we decide our course of action based upon the evaluations we made of the situation earlier. Most issues are certainly not worth walking through the whole Matthew 18 process. In most cases we are better off to suffer ourselves to be defrauded[8], genuinely forgive the offense and move on in life.
But our subject this morning is not the resolution of a specific conflict. We are talking about how to respond to relationships that are essentially unhealthy and resolving a particular conflict still leaves the issue on the table. What do I do with a fellow like Nabal?
If the relationship is distant and temporal I probably simply back off and leave the guy alone. Prov 22:24-25 “Do not make friends with a hot-tempered man, do not associate with one easily angered, 25 or you may learn his ways and get yourself ensnared.”
If I am responsible the way Eli was or in a situation where it not appropriate to just back off, then I’m going to have to confront the issues. The way I do that depends upon that person’s receptivity to truth and the exact nature of the relationship.
We do not have time this morning to deal with all the communication skills and confrontational skills that will be needed in that process. That is a whole teaching in itself. But we might make a couple of points concerning those things.
1. The confrontation should be done objectively, respectfully and humbly. Don’t attack the other person. Address the issues.
2. Constantly be redemptive and pursue everyone’s highest well being. The object is not to win the argument but to win the friend if at all possible.
3. Listen with an open mind to the other person. Be willing to see and acknowledge your own mistakes and shortcomings. Remember God is also working in your life to teach you His ways and develop His character in you.
4. Speak the truth in love. Make brief and clear statements of what your concerns are and what your expectations are. Say what you mean and expect the same of the other party.
We should always be very slow about writing people off in our lives. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Be slow in choosing a friend and slower in changing.”[9] In most relationships we can and should work through our differences respecting the needs and perspectives of one another. However, when we are dealing with difficult, antagonistic people the outcome of these confrontations is not always what we would want them to be. So what happens if there is no real change in the other person’s attitude?
Having addressed the issues (and this may be more than a one time shot) we must then
3. Follow up on the response to our efforts. How did the confrontation go? What changes did we discover that we need to make on our own side of the relationship? What changes is the other party willing to make? Everything must be prayerfully evaluated and then decisions have to be made based upon all the facts as we know them.
First, we must sincerely repent of any unhealthy attitudes and behaviors on our part. We must ask God’s forgiveness and we must humble ourselves and ask the other person’s forgiveness—not as a token, superficial ritual—but as a sincere desire to do what is thoroughly right. A willingness to change and be accountable for the change is an important part of the repentance.
Second, we must forgive all offenses whether the other party asks forgiveness or not—whether they do the right thing or not. We must not allow bitterness to take root in our hearts. Forgiveness is a choice. If the offenses were significant we may have to affirm that choice over and over until our feeling come in line with our decision.[10]
We can not control the other party’s decisions and we are not responsible to do so. But we must make sure that our heart is right in the matter. We can not make everybody be at peace with us. But we can from the heart be at peace with everybody desiring their highest eternal good.[11]
Rom 12:18-21 “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. 20 On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
It’s interesting that the next thing Paul talks about is submission to authority. Attitudes toward authority are significant for living in healthy relationships with others. We don’t have the time to deal with that fully this morning.[12]
Third, we must draw the appropriate boundaries in the relationship based upon everything we know at this point. This whole sermon drives toward this point; so please listen carefully. Without understanding this we are in danger of living in an endless loop of frustration. Boundaries are essential to living at peace in this imperfect world. When nations respect one another’s boundaries, there is peace. When nations violate one another’s boundaries there is war. The Bible tells us to “...seek peace and pursue it...”[13]
One way we do that is to properly establish and respect boundaries. Let me illustrate this essential with the three dysfunctional type people mentioned earlier.
If the Indirect Manipulators will not come clean and talk straight, then we must learn to side step their traps and get on with our lives in a proactive way. It is very common for a manipulator to say one thing and mean another. This is a highly dysfunctional mode of communication and good communication is basic to wholesome relationships. One way you deal with that is to take everything they say at face value. If they want to communicate something else they are going to have to say it forthrightly or you simple don’t hear it. You are drawing a line on the way you will communicate. You are speaking honestly and expected the other person to do so as well.
If the Emotional Leaches will not agree to a two way relationship, we must limit the time, money, energy we give to them. Productive people do not have the time to invest their lives in people who will not respond to the investment. God expect fruit from those He invests in (John 15:2) and it is not inappropriate for us to do likewise.[14] I do not have time this morning to balance this with an extensive teaching on showing mercy.[15] But I’m talking about drawing appropriate boundaries with people who take and don’t give. Such as I have give I unto you.[16] In the context of all my relationships I have to decide what I’m to appropriately give to a specific person. Leaches want it all. You have to decide what God wants you to give and if that upsets them, so be it! In 2 Corinthians Paul gives some good advice concerning what we give to others. 2 Cor 9:7 “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” We make sober decisions about what we will give. We don’t just respond to manipulation. We make wise choices. 2 Cor 8:12-13 “For if the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has, not according to what he does not have. 13 Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.” A boundary must be set on what we give these type people. Doesn’t mean we won’t in mercy give them something. But it is our responsibility to take charge of our lives and set the limits.
If the Aggressive Controller insists upon stepping over appropriate boundaries, then clear lines must be drawn. Sometimes parents don’t understand that when a son or a daughter leaves home and marries, the relationship dramatically changes at that point. Prior to that time the parent was responsible to exercise some control. After the marriage ceremony, that husband and wife have their own family and if they want your advice they will ask for it. The relationship can be rich and rewarding. But the new family unit has to be respected. To the Aggressive Controller we have to communicate a willingness to have a healthy relationship but an unwillingness to carry on an unhealthy relationship.
Listen to the instruction Paul gave in Titus 3:10 “Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.” One disturbed, antagonistic, difficult person can destroy the health of a whole church if he is not properly dealt with. It’s not a matter of whether we can forgive him. It’s a matter of limiting the destruction he can work in the community. We also have to know how to limit the destructive influence of toxic people in our own lives. When someone is drowning, one of the first rules of life saving is to not allow him to drown us while we’re trying to save him. That’s why an experienced life guard will sometimes let the drowning person wear down before he takes hold of him. Wisdom is needed when trying to save someone from drowning in a body of water. And wisdom is needed when trying to save someone from a sea of emotional confusion and spiritual bondage.
We are talking about extreme cases; but have to learn how to draw appropriate boundaries in all our relationships. Look at all the boundaries God set as He brought Israel into the Promise Land.[17] Look at Joshua 15 -19 and you will see God setting boundaries for Israel as a whole and boundaries for each tribe in Israel. It’s good for me to know what my responsibility is and what is yours. It’s good for me to know where the line is in a relationship. It is unhealthy to think that either I have a relationship with no boundaries or I don’t have one at all. People with that kind of either/or thinking experience a lot of conflict in their lives. When boundaries are respected people can live at peace with those they could not be at peace with otherwise.
It’s interesting to study the relationship between Jacob and his father in law, Laban. They we both manipulators and in a sense deserved one another. Genesis 31 tells about the conflict that arose between them and how it ultimately got resolved. Do you remember how it got resolved? They drew a boundary so that the relationship could be a peaceful one.[18] Gen 31:51-52 “Laban also said to Jacob, "Here is this heap, and here is this pillar I have set up between you and me. 52 This heap is a witness, and this pillar is a witness, that I will not go past this heap to your side to harm you and that you will not go past this heap and pillar to my side to harm me.” These men had come to realize that they could not live together in close proximity to one another. But notice how the relationship did not have to totally end. By agreed upon boundaries they we at least able to have some relationship though very limited in its interaction.
I said earlier, every relationship has to have boundaries in order to be healthy and peaceable. Where those boundaries are drawn depends upon many of the things we have talked about this morning. The emotional health of both parties is a vital factor in determining where the boundaries must be drawn. The unhealthier one or both of the parties are, the more distant we have to make the boundaries.[19] Learn to establish and respect healthy boundaries in your relationships.
The clip you are about to see is from an episode of Seinfeld. Jerry and George are to meet Elaine Benes and her father at the restaurant for dinner. Elaine has asked them to come because she has such difficulty relating to her father, who is a well-known author. Watch the clip and see if you can determine why Elaine might have trouble in her relationship with Mr. Benes.
Seinfeld: Episode 5: The Jacket chapter 2 (Begin 00:09:15 and End 00:13:45)[20]
Richard Tow
Grace Chapel Foursquare Church
Springfield, MO
www.gracechapelchurch.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Text was read at the beginning of the service. All quotes from New International Version unless otherwise indicated.
[2] Our congregation has a casual culture and this subtle humor worked well but might not work in more formal church setting.
[3] Kenneth C. Haugk, Antagonists in the Church: How to Identify and Deal with Destructive Conflict (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988) pp. 21-22
[4] 1 Samuel 25:37-39. Nabal’s death is a strong warning concerning the way we treat people, especially those anointed of the Lord and especially those who respond correctly on their side of the conflict.
[5] There is a powerful contrast here in Nabal to the wisdom described in James 3:17. In that verse the Greek word eupeithees is translated “easy to be entreated” in KJV. Spiros Zodhaites (NTWSD) gives its meaning as “easily persuaded, compliant”. One way we can distinguish an antagonist from a normal strong personality is by using the description James gives us of godly wisdom.
[6] I borrowed this term and the term “Indirect Manipulators” from Henry Cloud and John Townsend. I am indebted to their insight on this subject and would recommend their book entitled Boundaries: When to say yes and when to say no to take control of your life (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992).
[7] 2 Peter 3:16; Jude 4; Romans 6:1 are examples of the dangers we face when sharing truths.
[8] 1 Corinthians 6:7
[9] Paul Lee Tan, ed., Encycopedia of 7700 Illustrations: Signs of the Times (Rockville, Maryland: Assurance Publishers, 1985) p 465
[10] It is assumed that the listener has some understanding of this essential dynamic of human relationships.
[11] I have been significantly impacted by Charles Finney’s definition of love as the pursuit of the other party’s highest well being (Disinterested Benevolence). I think his lecture 22 of Systematic Theology dealt with this subject.
[12] See Series preached Feb. & March of 2002 entitled “Submission to Human Authority” available at www.sermoncentral.com or www.gracechapelchurch.org
[13] 1 Peter 3:11
[14] Jesus invested in Judas and got no fruit. However, He was justified in expecting fruit. Human relationships are complex and we must apply this teaching with that understanding. Our commission is to do the will of the Father (see Gal. 1:10) and we must always hear His voice concerning a specific situation.
[15] Jesus teaches that we are to give expecting nothing in return (Luke 6:35) which addresses the attitude of our hearts. Giving simply to get misses the true spirit of giving. But we must also understand this in the light of other scriptural teachings such as 2 Thess. 3:10.
[16] Acts 3:6
[17] Joshua 1:4 In His wisdom God set boundaries between Israel and the surrounding nations so they could live in peace. Imagine the turmoil that would be in the world today if there were no national boundaries. Imagine the conflict in your neighborhood if there were no boundaries between homeowners.
[18] Paul Wallace sermon entitled “Dealing with Difficult People part 2” available at www.sermoncentral.com
[19] Later if the person gains more emotional health then it might be possible to draw closer. In extreme cases this process may require some professional counsel.
[20] In our first service we have a shorter version of the message with the clip followed by a discussion of the subject. In our second service we do not have the clip. In the second service we lead the congregation in a time of prayerful inventory of personal relationships asking for commitment to address any relational issues the Holy Spirit might be speaking to them about.
