I see how sympathy and empathy are very important to distinguished between; and can see where it really matters in regard to something like experiences with extra-terrestrials. To empathize with someone who has had an ET experience just makes their victimization worse. To sympathize with them and bring them to a correct, biblically based, understanding of their traumatic experience is essential to their healing.
I’m amazed Rigney says wives are “usually” the ones who pout and manipulative a false apology. How sexist. Petulance was my Christian father’s preferred method of passive aggression that kept my mom in check.
As a Mental Health professional who works with therapist, psychiatrists and psychologists and as a Christian woman, I can see the importance of understanding this distinction. Thank you! Pastor Doug you never disappoint! You are a treasure to the body of Christ!
You're rapidly becoming my favorite voice in the reformed church, I am not reformed but there's simply something about every lesson that's so incredibly Pastoral and deeply thought out.... Thank you Rev. Wilson, you're A sword 🗡️ of the kingdom cutting away at bad ideas
It's important to note that licensed psychotherapist and psychologists from CACREP accredited schools are taught the exact opposite definitions. Empathy requires the counselor "feel with" a client without becoming enmired/enmeshed. It is like coming alongside a person in the water after a shipwreck. Empathy requires we throw them a rope and a life preserver and guide them in how to use these tools to get in the boat. Sympathy requires I get in the water and do it for them. This is the definition in the textbooks I have read while in Seminary obtaining my Master's in Clinical Mental Health Counseling.
To all who want to argue: I'm not telling anyone what they *should* have as a definition. My point is that definitions of words mean different things to different people. If you actually care about communicating effectively with someone, it is wise to make sure you understand the definition they are using. If you merely want to feel *right* and *superior*, beat them over the head with your knowledge. They will despise you and your message (of the Gospel?), but you can feel smug with your sanctimonious self-righteousness.
What they’re describing as unhealthy/“unbiblical” is empathy without boundaries. Empathy is an emotional, social, and interpersonal skill we learn as young children that allows us to see things from others’ perspectives. If we can’t individuate ourselves from others, this will lead to inappropriate empathy and acting out in ways that are self harming. But it is not bad to experience empathy. Sympathy/compassion stem from the experiences empathy allows us to have.
@@NoProb4Rob being able to say "I have no idea what you're going through, because I've never experienced anything like that but it must be terrible" is a sympathetic statement. I doubt anyone would bemoan someone saying this.
Best response thus far. I think the problem here is they are defining empathy as it is being used today ( given their examples) rather than how it was originally defined and used historically . The problem as I see it is that they did not clearly explain that by the words “sin of empathy” they are referring to how empathy is defined and used today by many. I would not have used the words “sin of empathy” without further clarification and explanation; actually I would not have used the words “sin of empathy” at all as it could lead to misunderstanding- as it has done. I think they were trying to illuminate a point and problem as they see it. I think the problem created is not being clear that they are speaking about empathy as it is being used today- I get that by listening to them…. but they needed to clarify that rather than taking today’s use of “empathy” by many and using that to say “this is the difference between empathy and sympathy, and empathy is wrong/a sin”. Someone once said that “the danger and illusion of communication is that because we use the same words we think we mean the same thing-”
This discussion puts so much on the clear. The modern "social justice" ideology is almost entirely based on empathy. Don't worry about absolute standards or even God's law, but focus on "my experience" and "what offended me". Remove the offense of the Law, and all that's left is the standards of the offended party, therefore you must conform to them to atone for your "sin".
Doug & Joe are missing a key point: a person can empathize with another person's emotions while not agreeing with that second person's positions or decisions. Empathy is about connecting with another person's emotions because, as we are all humans, we all draw from the same array of human emotions, even though our personal situations differ. Empathy is not about taking on that person's perspective - that would be "identification" not empathy. Empathy is about connecting with other people's emotions, relating to them on the level of feeling, in order to better understand them. Empathy is important for any positions that seek to provide support (pastors, therapists, social workers, etc.) so that the person they are helping sees/hears that someone understands what their pain or sorrow can feel like, to an extent. Because we've all felt pain or sorrow. Or joy or anger or fear or contentment, etc. Compassion is the essence of both sympathy and empathy. I fear that in their efforts to be anti-woke, Doug & Joe are purposely missing this crucial point. Further, "sympathy" does not mean you are holding out a hand to a person in the mire, hoping to pull them out. The word for that is literally "help". Rather, sympathy is seeing that person in the mire and saying that you feel sorry for their situation. Empathy would be saying that they can understand the overwhelming feeling that person is having, sinking in mire. Empathy does not mean jumping into the mire with them because being empathetic does not mean a person is taking on that person's identity - it means that they understand that feeling of being overwhelmed because they've been overwhelmed too. That said, neither empathy nor sympathy alone are appropriate for this person in the mire because then no one is being pulled out of that mire. Help is what is required. That was a real fail as an analogy.
@@thepunygiant Yep, that two years comment caught my eye. Mainly because it does contextually put this video right in the middle of the ridiculous culture war that continues on to this day - a war in which both sides seek to create new definitions of words like empathy and racism. Ironic to me, since truly understanding and enacting the concept of empathy means rejecting two-sides binaries and instead embracing human commonalities. One would think two pastors would be on board with that. Particularly as the goal of empathy aligns completely with Jesus' teachings.
Well if the scriptures are not your standard than you can say anything. Empathy is not biblical. It doesn't exist. Did you not listen to the beginning?
@@danielmann5427 Why exactly do you think Jesus wept? Please consider how the word "empathy" is used today - and how it describes the way Scripture maintains we should be treating others. Doug & Joe are creating a new definition of empathy to further their callow points. Do you honestly think Jesus would be against a person using the word empathy to describe treating people the way that God intended? This is only something that Doug & Joe care about. "Empathy" may not be a biblical word, but there are many words used today that are not in the Bible. The ancient word "sumpatheia" means "with feeling" and the ancient word "empatheia" means "in feeling". There is not a lot of difference between those two words, when they were originally used. But words and their meanings may change over time. This does not mean "empathy" is now a sin! Please don't buy into the straw man nonsense that this video is selling.
My definition of Empathy is simply putting yourself in one's shoes. You don't have to feel the same way, like be depressed or angry towards the person who wronged your friend. For example, you can still empathize with someone who lost a parent even if you haven't experience it. You simply need to imagine how it feels to lose a parent. Most times its hard to even empathize when you don't share the same experience, this is where 'sympathy' is more applicable. You can at least try to imagine how your friend feels though. You can empathize if if you actually lost a parent. Get it? Compassion on the other hand is simply empathy/sympathy + action (a desire to help). Empathy is NOT a sin brothers and sisters. Too much empathy IS, i guess.
Empathy/sympathy and compassion needs to be balanced with Truth and responsibility. I can sympathize with an addict, addiction is powerful, but I must balance it with the understanding that only the addict can overcome the addiction. Sympathy alone isn't enough.
thankfully, there already is a definition of empathy, so you don't need to make one. it's a measurable biological trait. it involves self sacrifice. it evolved out of the mother-infant pair bond. (i know evolution is a hot topic around here, but you can see evolution more easily than you can see genesis 1:1, so i'll take it as part of what is created.) every trait has its problems. one problem with empathy is self-sacrifice at the expense of yourself, to the point where you can no longer self-sacrifice. your self is exhausted. another problem with empathy is the tendency to overreact to competition, and to oversimplify problems. a baby cannot rationalize, and since empathy is specifically biologically tailored towards care of those who cannot help themselves, empathy is irrational by definition. you cannot tell a baby to grow the hell up and feed itsself. when the baby complains, it requires aid. there is no valid argument, there is no conversation to be had. it does not take much of a stretch to see that this trait is a catastrophe when it manifests in relationships with adult men. in fact, many men bond in ways which are socially accepted forms of abuse, from sports, to first person shooter video games. men bond over unempathic activity, more often than not. empathy is not a sin in and of itsself. it is a tool, a projectile, designed to strike certain targets truly. sin is derived from an old greek archery term, to miss the mark is to sin. it is a sin to use the wrong tool for the right job. the right job for empathy is caregiving. when empathy is used for politics, it is a sin. communism ran on empathy, and it ran into mass graves. it is the instinct to care of the mother bear that gets you eaten. i rest my case.
Definition of empathy from per the dictionary: 1: the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner also : the capacity for this 2: the imaginative projection of a subjective state into an object so that the object appears to be infused with it Does my definition not fit the description?
@@ImmyT89 look up the research done on the big 5 personality traits. when people say words which are related to empathy, they are referring to a human-universal psychological construct, which can be obtained by averaging linguistic constants across various cultures and languages. the dictionary is not necessarily the most definitive source for the true nature of things, especially because recently the dictionary has been changed by political activists.
One of the best talks I have ever heard on being a Christian man, husband and citizen. Biblical wisdom in "plain talk" that even a man listening while working in his shop can understand, apply and teach. Thank you guys.
I found this conversation to be fantastically supported and so well laid out. Wonderful episode. As the wife of a Christian man and the mother of a young boy who we are raising according to the Bible, I find myself listening to things like Man Rampant because I value the views and insights they provide. Thank you for speaking the truth in love and being strong men. Christian women really do want to see strong Christian men, both as husbands and as our brothers in our communities.
Just because some people take "empathy" too far doesn't mean empathy in every case is a sin. You could've instead called this "The Sin of Too Much Empathy". Surely you don't believe that trying to understand someone else's thoughts and experiences is sinful! But in most people's minds, that's what empathy refers to. It's imprudent to label "empathy" as a sin, because in many people's minds it refers to something that is truly virtuous. This episode created controversy because it redefines "empathy" in order to label it a sin, which causes confusion for those who are still using the default definition.
Yeah, you wouldn't want to have too much empathy would you?! Empathy is defined as the dictionary as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another." Could you imagine someone having too much of that?! Like if God were to give up his omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience in order to leave as a human so that he could understand and share every feeling and temptation humanity faces?! Wouldn't that be so wild?!
@@dankxng so the point, I think, is you get lost in empathy. If you really feel their emotion, you are stuck right where they are. I think they're saying you should stand back so you can determine truth first, before you get emotionally entangled.
@@TheRealMonnie So we should not have the heart that Paul writes we should have in 1 Corinthians 9 striving to be all things for all people, we should not emulate Romans 12:15 by rejoicing with those who rejoice and weeping with those who weep in order to not "really feel their emotion" otherwise we well become too "emotionally entangled," nor should we be like Jesus in 11:33-35 and feel the emotions of those around us? Interesting. So your version of Christ is not in step with Scripture? That's wild, my dude!
This is a redefinition of empathy, and either confuses or pushes people away. Empathy is rooted in our biology. The problem is if that empathy isn’t tethered to anything outside of the person (I.e. scripture, truth) or the person emphasizing loses their sense of self.
Exactly, it's rooted into our biology. Our bodies. Our flesh. Hence why standing back and thinking about the real meanings of he word as they have been passed down from the Greek are needed. What's sym and what's em? What's pathos? Do people still use the words based on the meaning that has been handed down to them in a straight line from the Greeks? With and in Suffering Yes Hence the need to rise above our carnal biology, and seek after the virtuous thing. Suffering WITH, rather than suffering IN. We should only be IN our Creator and Messiah. But we're commanded to be WITH our neighbour
@@rufinoty6958 Ah, I should have been clear that I was debating the point made in the discussion, not you. Per their discussion, I think you are correct - that is exactly what they are saying. As far as cognitive vs. intuitive... I'd say that the sympathy is actually intuitive (spontaneous, not requiring conscious thought) and that empathy is both cognitive (ability to recognize another's emotional state) and affective (ability to share those feelings).
@@markmonday1242 Why then is this discussion titled, The Sin of Empathy? You sound in favor of empathy over sympathy. The panelists of this discussion are in favor of sympathy. By standard or criteria is this question resolved? In what perspective is this to be understood? This is like taking a point in the continuum between empathy and sympathy without really resolving which is what.
@@rufinoty6958 I think the discussion is so titled because it is easy clickbait - attacking a humanistic and liberal strategy and mislabelling it as "a sin" in order to score an obscure semantical point, and clicks, when no such point need have been made in the first place. Further, Doug & Joe speak against scripture and the character of Jesus when they label empathy a sin - surely Jesus was the most empathetic of all. They construct a work-around to what scripture says and what has been established as the character of Jesus by ascribing a new definition to the word empathy. This is a typical strategy for both the right and the left: creating new definitions of old words to further their own political rhetoric. As far as my own perspective goes, I am strongly in favor of both empathy and sympathy; although personally, I would prefer that someone be empathetic to my emotions than sympathetic, because the latter can feel condescending. But to say one is opposed to the other is to engage in reductive, binary thinking. And to be against empathy, or sympathy, is to be against the ideals espoused by Christ and the New Testament.
The golden rule "“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”" is exactly what empathy is. So let's not redefine empathy to mean something entirely different from what it is commonly understood to be.
Well Jesus said the golden rule thing...but to answer the question you are actually asking (who says empathy is personified by the golden rule?) that would be...hmm it says Jesus again. Jesus had empathy for everyone, I would list examples, but someone beat me to it (they call it the new testament). A short list of Jesus showing empathy for those not in his tribe would be the woman at the well, the Roman centurion, and literally his entire life. To use your sympathy is standing on the shoreline analogy...Jesus dove right into humanity he did not stay on the shore.
@@iancampbell1494 well they define it wrong. Or you're making that up. What we as Christians shouldn't do is throw out the whole thing and call it a sin. Now that gay people can get married, which is against the biblical definition, meaning society changed the definition. Does that mean we call marriage a sin?
What concerns me the most is not the changing of the meaning of empathy to suit the position of the proponents. Nor is it the danger of Christians only offering "thoughts and prayers" and disengaging with the lost and hurting. But the framing of empathy as sin because Jesus had empathy and under this statement empathy is sinful the authors, perhaps unintentionally are saying Jesus sinned.
This hit me hard and was really excellent. I am so encouraged when men of God talk this way and help people like me see the Gospel even clearer. Keep spreading the good news, brothers!
Doug is a great interviewer and very discerning, he hit the bulls eye with laser specific questions. We need more spiritually discerning men in the body of Christ.🙏🏾
Joe Rigney's The Things of the Earth is an eye opener for me. What a book! Thank you Canon Press for releasing this Man Rampant episode for free on UA-cam! God bless.
Daniel Goldman's book on emotional intelligence (EQ) states that one of the pillars of EQ is empathy... would you substitute empathy with compassion or sympathy? Because it seems to me that the main driver behind being more empathetic is being a better leader and increasing EQ when dealing with people.
Empathy is feeling exactly what people go through, sympathy is feeling sadness or bad about it. Empathy is deeper rooted and seems mor spiritual because you are almost weeping with them in your heart because you know eviscerating what it feels like in the moment.
@@ew8311 I don’t see how they are describing codependency. Empathy and codependency are very different things. I could see how overly empathetic people could easily find them selves in codependent relationships. Please explain what you mean, I would love to hear your thoughts.
I did somewhat struggle with the definitions in the beginning as I think arguments can be made for entering into suffering, but as they hashed out the discussion I could and can completely agree with the positions taken.
They define Empathy and Sympathy the opposite of how I learned it. Joe defined it without a biblical reference. I am not saying he has none but I want to hear it.
Probably because there’s no Biblical passages they can use to justify their argument. Jesus empathised with people otherwise he . Empathy is not saying sin is ok, so they’re twisting meanings to suit their views.
@@danpilgrim1785 the question is, did Jesus really empathize with us? He most certainly sympathized for us. Hebrews 4:15 [15] For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. But the Bible never teaches that Jesus empathized with us. He was without sin, and therefore could not empathize with our sin. With that said, I do agree this whole discussion is arguing semantics and there is more nuance and presuppositions we are dealing with
@@TheThunderkatana not as far as I know. Empathy’s dictionary description is “someone who understands the feelings of others”. Jesus understood why people were angry, upset or resistant of God. Jesus went out to the pariahs shunned by society who would feel lost and angry as a result. Like the parable of the prodigal son or lost sheep, still going out of his way to bring that person back into the light. Empathy isn’t saying sin is ok, it’s being a listening ear and counsellor. They’re swapping the dictionary definition of both words around as far as I can tell?! Which makes it super confusing semantics. Empathy is walking is someone else’a shoes and understanding why they feel a certain way. Sympathy is feeling sorry for someone. If you want to evangelise and convert someone, it helps to understand where they’re coming from.
They're making empathy automatically toxic, which it isn't. Empathy is being able to feel/understand how someone feels without experiencing it. Sympathy is sharing the feelings.
I wrote a dissertation that partially researched Empathy and other relational ideas in scripture. The Fruit of the Spirit covers the waterfront of relational interactions that include empathy and sympathy and compassion. Scripture also fosters the idea that anger is included in the imago Dei since God/ Jesus had anger as well as gentleness. Jesus and all humans are multidimensional so I will never indicate it is wrong to listen carefully and understand others’ emotions.
I myself being highly empathetic find it more of a curse mostly. My fallen nature revels in distortion and I need to remember this. What good does it really do within the Kingdom to be able to “feel” what others feel? These are broken feelings we all deal with day in and day out, some in varying degrees. The greatest enemy of an empath is a narcissist because we can be taken advantage of, I know from experience. But we were once ALL enemies of God until Jesus came. LORD please deliver me from myself.
**In all their affliction he was afflicted,** and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and **in his pity** he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. ISA 63 For we have not an high priest which cannot be **touched with the feeling of our infirmities;** but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. HEB 4 _ "follow me, and let the dead bury their dead." - JESUS
Just discovered Mr Wilson and so glad I did. Love your enthusiasm for speaking to all sides and the patience you show is staggering. I used to be an ardent atheist but didn't like the arrogance that I started noticing from people like Dawkins. So much more to religion then I thought. Not quite a believer in the one true God but getting closer. I particularly liked your analogy of learning a language and that if you want to believe then you have to expose yourself to it more. And that's what I'm doing.
I’m not sure of the relevance of the above shared video in reply to your comment. But I am praying fervently for you, my friend, that this crazy algorithm of UA-cam points you to more informative brothers like Douglas Wilson. If you are philosophically inclined I would recommend RC Sproul or, despite some serious controversy postmortem, Ravi Zacharias. I enjoy the conviction and common sense of Voddie Bauchaum as well (though I may have misspelled his last name..).
You can email me at wstevens1313@gmail.com if there is any questions or other sources I could maybe send your way, or if you just want to chat through some stuff!
@@bassistguy13 how can you still recommend Ravi? Ravi was my favorite apologist to listen to. His way of explaining Truth was like no other in my opinion. However, i was duped. I plan to never listen to another video and throw all his books in the garbage. I still love Ravi, and hope he was or is a genuine convert who fell into sin like we all can as believers. But I don’t know if he was truly a believer?
@@johnjaso385 I don't know, I am a believer and struggle with sanctification every day. I have not fallen into the particular sin that Ravi had, but I recognize the wretchedness that the Lord is constantly putting to death in me. I think Zacharias has made some wonderful contributions to the apologetics community, and while abusing his clout and power to seek inappropriate sexual relationships is a sin, I also believe it is a sin possible of forgiveness in Christ. I never found myself in a position of worshipping the man in the past; perhaps this is why I was sad for him and his family but not crushed by the allegations? I recognize the fallibility of man in all things, can take the good from his life and pray for forgiveness in the bad.
I find it interesting and telling that Pastor Doug Wilson went immediately to an example of someone lying about sexual abuse. Like honestly does that happen so often. I would think more often you would have to curtail your empathy when dealing with regular interpersonal misunderstandings. Sexual abuse is pretty clear cut and I don't think a lot of people lie about that and fabricate it.
40 % of rape alligation are false. There are also mother that divorced their husband and course the kids to lie about sexual abuse it’s called “the silver bullet”. Because they will have full custody.
@@yesorno1768 of course that happend BUT men lie too. I personally know women that were raped and a man that was falsely accused of rape. I also personally know women who were abused, adults who were sexually abused by their fathers as children and men who were falsely acccused during divorse proceedings, however these cases are the minority. I wouldn't assume someone was lying because lying about it is much more rare than the actual occurence.
@@rebekahguilder602 your first argument was doesn't really happen that often and they showed that known lies are at 40% now your argument is changed to well men lie too. My questions going to be how many of that 40% were ever punished?
@@grantarmbruster6591 I'm not sure where that 40% is coming from. I would need to see the study. That number seems high to me. And when you say 40% lie, to whom? The courts, their counselors? My point initial point still stands: I find it telling that was the example Pastor Wilson used. I think a more prevalence example of why you can't immediately be empathetic would be couseling a couplw or even just one spouse in a situation when they both think their perspective is 100% reflective of the truth. This happens all of the time, hence the saying every story has two sides.
@@grantarmbruster6591 and to be clear, I think that there should be some sort of punishment for when people lie in divorce proceedings to gain an advantage. I don't know how that would look practically but to lie and try to distroy another person for your own benefit is abhorrent.
Being empathetic at times I suppose is not a sin. But always being empathetic all the time is most likely a sin. The culture says you have to always be empathetic but only for people who aren’t white and aren’t male. That is also racist and sexist, which is also a sinful and ultimately the actual problem.
In current psychological language the word he is using for empathy is identification. The idea with empathy is a partial-identification a connection with a distance, a spacious connection.
@@NathanShattuckIsHere interesting. I have a different take but there is something good about that. The space leaves the option for indifference. I take his answer to be the atheistic or rational one, where Melanie Klein’s depressive position (capacity for concern) is more about recognising how small your problems are compared to the big picture of the universe (imagine looking at your life from the moon). While a more theistic (or relational) depressive position is in recognising that the pain of love can be borne (Jesus on the cross) that after the death in guilt we rise in a powerful love and newfound connection. What this means is that I can identify (partially) with others without drowning with them, but I can also go down to pretty painful and dark places confident that I will rise, confident that I am not held or consumed or defined by this pain or darkness but rather have chosen to bear this with the other because I know the one who has overcome, or I know that this can be overcome. So it is always only partial or at worst temporary and if I am operating in this space, then it is chosen freely. Jesus on cross was total identification but only for three days did it consume him, then it was dissolved in his triumph in resurrection. This was Jesus empathy for his enemies bring them into his tribe. It is begun in sympathy but it maintains the sense of self and true thought so that it is a true understanding and as such it is redemptive - and is not about anxiety or identity because you are free, can truly think, and can maintain your sense of self.
@@jonathonray6198 Very much agree. Beautifully said, btw. Also, my professor used the benevolent indifference term somewhat in a tongue and cheek way but meant very much what you articulated so well above. Zooming back out to the larger theme of this video, it does seem that some kind of shift has taken place in our culture where any space withheld in empathy, any other thoughts concurrent in the person engaging empathetically that may not agree with what the person is feeling or thinking about the situation or experience are seen as threatening and labeled as unsafe and unloving. That could be what Doug Wilson and Joe Rigney may be overstating in an overreaction to here. At least to me, so much of what they say here resonates as true and very important given current cultural trends, but framing it all as a dichotomy b/w sympathy (good) and empathy (bad) doesn’t seem accurate, nor the best way to frame the fundamental problem they are trying to address.
@@NathanShattuckIsHere yes my thoughts exactly. They are putting there finger on it, and then mislabelling it. The culture is narcissistic, and yet attempting to be emotionally enlightened, all you get is a charade. The emperor has no clothes.
I've enjoyed listening to this episode again. The claim, of the sin of empathy, is well qualified, explained, and worked through. They are definitely parts where, to paraphrase Voddie, "if I can't say amen, I ought to say ouch."
Galatians 6:2 King James Version 2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. One does not have to compromise ethics to empathize.
People without empathy are sociopaths. Are you (rampant man) a sociopath? A sociopath is a term used to describe someone who has antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). People with ASPD can't understand others' feelings. The point of empathy is being able to understand others feeling.
@@bman5257 You can assume whatever you want... these guys are evil, judgemental, asses who are leading the weak-minded astray with their word-salad, re-definition of the English language to give people permission to be terrible to other people.
It seems to me that they made the proper distinctions and clarifications to render the message that people have permission to be terrible to others to be a gross straw man and uncharitable to dismiss their argument as one made by evil and judgmental people.
It strikes me that this entire conversation is built around a clear equivocation of what empathy means, and most likely it appears that they are guilty of the etymological fallacy. A lot of what they say is true, but no one defines empathy as they have, not even secular academics. So it's a long conversation based on an incorrect definition. It's not really helpful, and the claim "empathy is sinful" actually should mean "empathy that excludes God from the conversation, dehumanizes the other person, assumes the individual is faultless, blameless and completely honest, has their own reality in their head, and acts as an uncritical advocate for that person while sinning with them without offering any help or way out based on their owne experience, is sinful Well yes. Obviously. No one disagrees with that.
The speakers are making a case against a particular understanding of the word "empathy". I'm missing the rationale for how it is that the word "empathy" is by definition a bad word. I've not heard of this way of defining the term before in such an exclusive way.
Kook alert. "Smart" people being clowns. Sympathy is extending a courtesy. Empathy extends emotion. Jesus wept: empathy. Sorry you got a speeding ticket: sympathy. It has to be the last days: calling good words evil.
I agree. He trying to chang the word to fit his definition that fits with his argument. Though I agree with his argument for “unhealthy” empathy I found it annoying listening trying to restrict the word’s meaning as though he is lobbying to change the Webster’s dictionary.
"Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep." Romans 12:15 As Christians, we are certainly called to use discretion and wisdom. We are also called to engage with others on an emotional level, when appropriate.
So I "love" the redefinition of empathy here - where you separate out the core of empathy (feeling with someone) assign it to sympathy and then brutalize whatever is left. Very reminiscent of John Piper's redefinition of complimentarianism. Empathy is relating to another person (I would say this is very much "feeling with"). Jesus is the architect of empathy, being himself devine he took on flesh to relate and restore humanity. Grace comes from empathy. Mercy comes from sympathy. Both are necessary.
Thanks so much for your wisdom guys. All absolutely agree. I also think the more people learn appropriateness for feelings and when to leave them at the door. Too many are judging everything on feelings and not facts or reality. Pray to be each adequately.
Something they touched on in the beginning but didn't unpack too well; is the idea of jumping in with both feet, even if all the facts being presented are true, and all the emotions are justified; if you become depressed because they are depressed or enraged because they are enraged, then someone needs to now save you both from your depression or rage.
Sense...... who decides what is sensible, you? Truth is true but it doesn’t come from self. Damn pietistic idealogs, turning Christianity into authoritarianism.
@@rafaeldesouza8839 hopefully, you're not being sarcastic here is one scriptural example of empathy (not just sympathy) applied to preaching the gospel 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings. - 1 Corinthians 9:20-23 ESV for additional excellent discussions, look at the posts from Paul Edgar, Andrew Wallace, and Puny Giant on this thread.
Like, poking fun at all the talking heads who intro their videos with non-joking “I’m so important because I do this, this, and this” monologues. Douglas isn’t serious. He’s being funny.
I guess I learned another definition of empathy today. My definition of empathy, is a HUGE foundation of my Christian faith, and is probably the most important quality I want my children to see in me. Empathy is viewing life from another’s perspective. Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. I’m not sure the Lord has taught me thankfulness, and shown me His grace any more, than when I’m empathetic. Empathy forces me to shamefully admit that it’s NOT all about me. The vast majority of the time, the individual isn’t aware I’m even being empathetic. The opposite of this practice is not sympathy. The opposite is me living for and worrying about myself. So, where am I misguided? Honestly, I’m not looking for an argument. But if I’m wrong I need to know. Thanks.
Your definition is a good one. And describes a godly virtue. I like a lot of Doug's content but, imho, this one just added to the "noise." Ah well, they can't all be zingers.
@@AnHebrewChild unfortunately, when I hear the ones that are just noise, I wonder how genuine were the the ones that I agreed with. I guess only thing I can do is NEVER listen to him again and tell everybody else to do the same. Okay, maybe that’s too far 🤣🤣.
@@DrPhilGoode actually, I was being polite (perhaps over-polite) in what I said. A wise man once said, "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" Increasingly I steer clear of "celebrity pastors." Jesus is our pastor, "and all [we] are brethren." This talk here missed the mark big big time.
This is an excellent discussion. Thanks so much for your desire to be balanced in your appreciation of dynamics of healing from a Reformed perspective. As a Christian who for over 30 years and who utilizes Bowen Systems theory; the one whose shoulders upon whom Edwin Friedman stands to articulate his view on empathy, one important point needs to be made. Empathy a human characteristic in itself is neither good or bad. It’s relative benefit or liability lies in how it is implemented. In Bowen theory one major way of understanding when a characteristic is not useful is whether it’s expression is organized out of the state of fusion or differentiation. If empathy is expressed out of a fused state, it’s sinful. If it’s expressed out of a differentiated state it’s helpful and appropriate.
Conversations like this are why I'm not a Protestant anymore. There is no "sin of empathy." Empathy is what we are called to as Christians, or at least it used to be before we became a Prosperity seminar, a Trump sign and a bowl of Chicken Soup.
@@CanonPress I think it sounds like secular psychology, given a very thin religious veneer. Where, exactly, in Scripture is empathy defined as elevating a suffering person above God, which is the same as calling empathy a form of idolatry? Are there specific Scriptural admonitions against caring too much, which most of us would call empathy, and do they outnumber or otherwise trump the numerous Scriptural calls to compassion at expense of one's own interest and well being, which also entails empathy? Does Scripture call it a sin to be overly compassionate?
When Christ came to the home of Lazarus, who lay dead, He wept. Of course, as a man, He was sad over the death of his friend, as well as sympathetic towards the sisters and family of Lazarus. But the people around Him who mourned Lazarus were feeling a despair that Christ could not entirely share. They thought Lazarus was dead and gone. Christ knew he had come to the house to bring him back from the dead. For Him, as the man Jesus (wholly human as well as wholly God,) to fully appreciate the suffering of Lazarus' loved ones, He must have been able to step outside of Himself, His own knowledge and His own emotions and step, as it were, into the emotions of the people around Him. To feel their suffering as they felt it, to understand the situation from a knowledge more limited than His own, to genuinely cry with them and for them. Does this not demonstrate our Lord's empathy? Why would I not want to emulate that? Why would it be sinful for me to do so?
Seventeen minutes in and so far, what they want therapists to do is what any good therapist would do. Obviously there are loads of bad therapists, but challenging the client is commonly understood to be the therapists role.
Many here are still confounding the terms empathy and sympathy . Sympathy for Jesus' friends, Mary and Martha for the death of their brother, and his friend, Lazarus, is shown by his weeping. Empathizing (at least by the definition being used here) would be to join a sense of dispair over the idea of him not coming back.
"Were called to grieve for others but not lose ourselves in the grief." Biblical empathy does not place the object of empathy above God, yet so many in modern churches do precisely that, e.g. "Critical race theory."
Critical race theory is FAKE empathy. At best, it is misinformed or misused empathy. This whole argument is basically a concession of the realm of caring and empathy to the secular world. This is a lie from the Enemy.
I don't want to disagree in this forum. As a minister it's not my place to step in even if I don't agree. However, from what source are you getting your definition of sympathy and empathy? Honest question not trying to be flippant or dismissive.
You should disagree with this...in any forum...especially as a minister. No matter how intelligent and cunning the speaker, we have an obligation to the TRUTH.
@@cross-eyedmary6619 I don't know enough about the terms they are using or the lingo they utilize (as counselors). Their definition of empathy is not what I have always understood it to be. Having said that, I don't disagree with their statements, I would call what they discribe as weak willed, unprincipled or complacent. I have always understood empathy as the ability to "see another persons point of view, even though you yourself have not experienced the same thing". This is highly utilized in the Special Operations. You don't look for a suicide bomber in a stand of trees, we understand he wants to kill as many "infidels" as possible. Since we can empathize with him we look for him around groups of people, especialy ones he would consider "unclean". I do not share his sentiments and I can in no way sympathize with him but I can try and think as he does in order to help him quicklyand efficiently meet allah. Sympathy is what I would call what they are talking about but that is why I requested what and where they are getting the definitions they are using. If somebody assaults another person, most assume that means their was a physical confrontation. In the military an assault is a violent invasion. A police officer knows an assault is a threat of physical violence. I want to know their definitions.
They’re conflating things that have nothing to do with sympathy or empathy. Rigney equates empathy with a failure to ask probing questions and understand the truth of a situation. Failure or inability to properly ask probing questions is simply a sign of a bad counselor, and has nothing to do with empathy. I’m beginning to wonder if he coined this “sin of empathy” term to be provocative and get views.
“For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” Hebrews 4:15 Christ could not empathize in our weaknesses because He did not sin.
@@youbloodybloodworktimejasper don't mind cross-eyed Mary she has been imbued with the power to read minds and to see people's intentions ironically what she accuses of lot of people of doing
Pastor Wilson and Dr. Rigney talk about the bible as footnotes or talk about authors who talk about the Bible, but really they are only using rhetoric not the Bible. Say what you will about John Piper, but he brings Scripture exegesis into every conversation and so this falls into a category as to what happens after a leader with vision leaves, Scripture is sidelined and a political or "tribal" discussion takes presidence in order to defend an idiology.
@ 4:04 "He went to Nazareth High" BWAGAHHAAHAHAHAHAAa!! That seriously made me roll. Oh man....I love Douglas Wilson. Just the tone of his voice when he said that. Thanks for that Doug.
I LOVE DOUG WILSON! I feel so proper watching this. I think I might make a hot tea and soak in a bathtub while finishing it up. Haha. God bless you all at Canon Press!
You could also reject empathy on philosophical grounds. Genuine empathy is an epistemological fantasy. We cannot actually know the experience of any other person because the only way we know anything is through our own experience, which is the lens through which all experience is filtered. Empathy is merely an elaborate fiction dressed up in the language of compassion; it proposes to identify with another's experience by conjuring up a scenario to represent something genuinely experienced by the other, but in reality it is merely a fictional account of another's circumstance as imagined by oneself (which cannot provide real knowledge of another person's actual experience unless you're omniscient like God)
My daughter was 4 years old when she witnessed a woman that was heavily intoxicated, the woman was sitting down across the room talking and my daughter looked over at me and said, "Mommy, that woman is dizzy in her head"...how did she know what she was feeling? Is it possible that empathy exists but you just haven't experienced it?
@@grantarmbruster6591 It was my 4 year old daughter, not me...Empathy exists just as narcissism exists. Narcissists feel very little if anything, will empaths feel a lot. It's just a fact, nothing to divide over ;)
I had been prepared to not like this video based on some negative press. This made me interested to watch! I was surprised that I agreed with the hard-hitting analysis of it about 85% of the time. What was given was both logical and Christlike advice for the most part but I think it’s very hard for them to keep their own proclivity to an authoritarian model in check. I’m happy to report that I am married to an evolved male and pray more of my Christian brothers (and sisters) were like this… able to cut the marrow from the bone. Respect is to be earned!
This is such a ridiculous conversation from beginning to end. You are both teaching falsehood. The scripture is full of empathy from the command to mourn with those who mourn to Jesus challenging the Pharisees who were going to stone a sinning woman to cast the stones if they had no sin. Hebrews says that Christ is our high priest who perfectly understands what we are going through because he was tempted in every way as a human being. By your own definition of entering fully in - that is empathy. And Hebrews says without sin. Beyond that - anyone who has even a rudimentary understanding of the professional standards of counseling and psychology and sociology would be able to pick this apart in 5 minutes. Nice mentions of “blacks”. Racism. Me too women and casting doubt on women with stories of abuse who come looking for help are to be judged by the two of you instead of helped. You both would be better served by reading Ezekiel 34 about how God judges those who shepherd his sheep poorly instead of sitting around talking nonsense and teaching scripture incorrectly.
The problem today seems to often be empathy complately in allegiance to certain kinds of subjective truth, and people demonized if they are unwilling to do that. Perhaps.
I'm so grateful that God delivered me out of this type of environment and these type of men. You have managed to twist empathy into a sin with word salad. You throw around the feminist word likes it's dirty. To hear you say as a pastor that you keep abreast of what's happening but you don't want to ....you are not interested in what's happening across the country....what are you talking about.....keeping your head in the sand....must be nice to be able to do that. It's possible to stay informed about your neighbor and see what is right and wrong, what is inhumane and what's inhumane. You can be in the world and not of the world.
As an unbeliever, I find myself tentatively agreeing with many of the Christian criticisms of the current trends regarding empathy. Among fellow unbelievers, many of whom identify as ex-Christian, there is an extremely vocal segment that fanatically demands that everyone around them empathize with the pain and turmoil they are experiencing in their own lives, often centering on their personal sexual or gender confusion.
He trying to chang the word to fit his definition that fits with his argument. Though I agree with his argument for “unhealthy” empathy I found it annoying listening to him trying to restrict the word’s meaning as though he is lobbying to change the Webster’s dictionary.
This is why lifeguards who are out in the ocean carry bouys and or wait until the other person tire themselves out before going in to help them. And I can see why it seems God waits until we are at the end of our rope to step in.
I’ve seen it stated in this thread that the message title is communicating is: facts don’t care about your feelings. That statement is far more political than it is Biblical. In John 11 Jesus comes to both Martha and then Mary. They essentially say the same thing to him: had you been here my brother would not be dead. Jesus says to Martha “I am the resurrection and the life.” And to Mary, he weeps. Christians need both truth and tears. Jesus cares about how we feel, even if we are misguided (also read the entire book of job).
Sure but too much is indeed a problem in fact employing empathy in the manner which is commonly utilized in our progressive and or woke society is absolutely counter productive. Facts don’t care about your feelings which is absolutely true, furthermore, of course we should share feelings with others, but those feelings are valid only if their based in absolute truth, why should we validate feelings which are based off of sin or blatant mistruths? Validating someone’s feelings indefinitely destroys Gods truth because it places within the individual an exceptional amount of power, power which they use to manipulate and turn truth to their whim and to fit their own narrative and those who validated those feelings irrelevant of the basis of those feelings are equally guilty because to empathize with feelings that are based in falsehoods is to, in a way, claim those falsehoods to be valid in and of themselves. We bolster validity in our omissions just as well as our submissions, that is the key issue here. Furthermore, it doesn’t always matter how the professional world uses and defines a word, what matters is how pop culture defines the word because that’s is the most likely way a common person is relating to that word, in this case empathy. Psychologists are indeed taught a variant definition of empathy then that which Doug is claiming, but majority society doesn’t claim that definition in common use, therefore this talk using this definition is warranted and needed. There are a plethora of Christians who are caught in the trap of validating anti truth in the name of empathy, in fact entire congregations base their existence on that very act.
59:57 "find an external enemy" yep, and that would be the church. I'm praying for a revival first, but expecting a wholesale persecution of the church from w/in her own ranks. The religious had Jesus put to death, the religious killed the prophets, and throughout the centuries the religious persecuted the church. Matthew 10:36 "a man's enemies will be those of his own household".
Empathy is just knowing the contents of the vessel from within. It's like the lamp that lights and searches the souls of men. We're going to give an account for everything because it's personal to God. Adding the extra step of agreement and affirmation of sin as a requirement of empathy is misleading. One can know another's emotions and judgments and know that they are clearly wrong. I think the anxiety over touching the unclean is what drives the assumption that empathy is sin. We are to take care lest we fall in the sin. And if someone's anxiety is going to threaten their faith or cause them to sin, they should avoid it. But they shouldn't go around teaching others how to make a sin out of what is not sinful.
This is what I believe. I can know where a person is and truly understand their feelings, but not agree or affirm their choice to rebel against God. I use that to lead them to Christ!! They have truly conflated agreement, affirmation, and identification onto empathy.
@@Journeytaker101 How can we be saved if we are not known by God? And being known by God is the most personal and painful thing to God, the Cross. Clean transactions are what pharisees demand. If God demanded it, we would all be dead.
An hour long discussion that hinges on the redefinition of a word? Hmm interesting. I don't even know how "well maybe she's lying" managed to be your first example. How about this: "I was raped and my pastor thought I was lying" "That happened to me too, I know how hard that is." There, empathy is easy, stop with the weird rape apologetics.
Yes, it’s very revealing and explains why there are so many examples of 21st century churches covering up abuse. It’s shameful. Don’t go to your pastor for help. We have police for that.
What's the fancy theological term for when people are too lazy to think so they go to ridiculous extremes? Is it the same as for when people want over-simplistic rules and laws, so that they can avoid being actually engaged in Truth seeking on a regular basis?
This is a garbage straw man using a purposefully crap definition of empathy. You can have empathy for a drug abuser without doing drugs. You can have empathy for a person suffering a major loss without inflicting that loss upon yourself. The whole show set up on a totally garbage metaphor. These guys have no idea what they’re talking about.
By the way, the description of empathy as a tribal element is not empathy at all. It is simply affirmation with or without any knowledge of what is actually happening. One can affirm without knowing anything about the contents of another's thoughts, emotions, and pursuits. One can just assume that because someone is pursuing transgenderism that the goal is clear, however it is not. Our hearts are desperately wicked and deceitful above all things, even our own intentions are often hidden from our eyes. And one's emotions and internal workings are not at the exclusion of another. When I have empathy for someone, I also have empathy for God's pursuits. We are to take care not to grieve the Holy Spirit, and it would be good for us to know why in our hearts not just our minds. The lies that ensnare those possessed by the spirit of this age are seen in respect to the love of God that is honest towards them. But this is just one level. There is a covenantal/contractual level with God which supersedes our subjective struggling and God's desire to show us mercy. God desires that we are all saved, but we have other plans... This is tragedy.
What the actual f*ck??? I am really sorry for the people in the churches of these "Christians", especially sorry for the wives. They do have some interesting points in here, but I got really furious when I came to the part when they talk about not apologing to you wife, just because you want to make up with her, although you didn't do anything wrong. Like, I understand their frustration when they have to do it, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it or that you marriage is built on a lie, as they claim. The problem in relationships is that relationships are not logical. Some people are more emotional then others. And simply by apologizing to them mean that you actually acknowledge that you hurt that person even though you didn't intent on doing so, and so the healing proces can begin. But in general, calling empathy a "sin" is complete misunderstanding of the concept (even within the boundaries of their definition) and misinterpretation of the Bible. And as I see it, they just call it sin, because it is emotional, which only shows that these guys don't understand emotions biblically. This is not Christianity, what you guys are presenting. This is exactly how the Pharisees argued and what Jesus actually criticized.
They’re quick to say a woman might lie about abuse, and never consider that a husband may be so obscenely inobservant of his own assholeness that he might believe he’s done nothing wrong and yet has been a complete jerk to his wife. Men who are abusers also are rarely ever thinking they have done anything wrong. So, yeah, empower those bastards hiding around in the pews of self-righteous theological orthodoxy to become more unbearably horrid to their wives/victims and children/victims. Ugh!
@@grantarmbruster6591 In a nutshell: In 24:44 they agree over a definition on empathy that makes it sound more like a pathological disturbance (and it can be!) than a crucial social tool. It's a frantic attempt to absolutize for the sake of discourse. By the way, he did something similar at 22:15 with "truth is a person".
@@Blackgrass1 I think that they explained that they want to define it as it's used not as the dictionary definition. And yes empathy is being used culturally in this way as a weapon against the church and it's believers. Just like redefining love or marriage or tolerance and acceptance.
Sympathy requires a person to take personal responsibility for their actions/choices while helping them navigate their pain to heal from it and move forward, or make restitution for it if they've hurt others. Empathy absolves them of personal responsibility while validating their pain and keeping them shackled to it and making others the enemy. Proverbs 18:13 "He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and a shame unto him" check out the facts before giving an answer. Reacting is taking immediate offense. Responding is considering what you want to do with the information/situation presented to you (weighing the pros and cons of your actions/response).
I’m curious how Doug Wilson would address this topic in light of Covid. I think this was recorded before the pandemic, but this topic seems extremely relevant in today’s times.
Rom 15:1 We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Rom 15:2 Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification. Rom 15:3 For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me. Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Gal 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Gal 6:3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. Gal 6:4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. Gal 6:5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
This discussion deceptively redefines empathy. These men are improperly defining “empathy” as “codependency.” Properly defined, Empathy is: “The ability to feel someone else’s pain so that I am able to understand their experience and stand in their shoes.” Meanwhile, Codependency is: “An imbalanced and unhealthy relationship dynamic where one person enables another person's self-destructive behavior.” The nefarious goal of conflating these ideas seems to be aimed at condemning as sinful any emotional connection in the work of compassion. Inevitably, this instruction will foster detached ministry personalties and breed austere self-righteousness.
Watch all of Man Rampant Season One FREE on the Canon App!
canonpress.com/app/
Sympathy and compassion are not the same thing.
Sympathy is feeling pity for someone, compassion is to be moved to action by feeling pity for someone.
I see how sympathy and empathy are very important to distinguished between; and can see where it really matters in regard to something like experiences with extra-terrestrials. To empathize with someone who has had an ET experience just makes their victimization worse. To sympathize with them and bring them to a correct, biblically based, understanding of their traumatic experience is essential to their healing.
I’m amazed Rigney says wives are “usually” the ones who pout and manipulative a false apology. How sexist. Petulance was my Christian father’s preferred method of passive aggression that kept my mom in check.
As a Mental Health professional who works with therapist, psychiatrists and psychologists and as a Christian woman, I can see the importance of understanding this distinction. Thank you!
Pastor Doug you never disappoint! You are a treasure to the body of Christ!
You're rapidly becoming my favorite voice in the reformed church, I am not reformed but there's simply something about every lesson that's so incredibly Pastoral and deeply thought out....
Thank you Rev. Wilson, you're A sword 🗡️ of the kingdom cutting away at bad ideas
@@JW-tg1nn apparently everyone is.
@@JW-tg1nn there's a lot he teaches it's very beneficial and then there's his baptism stance which is nonsensical
I'm curious about what your thoughts are on Wilson's positive views on sexism.
It's important to note that licensed psychotherapist and psychologists from CACREP accredited schools are taught the exact opposite definitions. Empathy requires the counselor "feel with" a client without becoming enmired/enmeshed. It is like coming alongside a person in the water after a shipwreck. Empathy requires we throw them a rope and a life preserver and guide them in how to use these tools to get in the boat. Sympathy requires I get in the water and do it for them. This is the definition in the textbooks I have read while in Seminary obtaining my Master's in Clinical Mental Health Counseling.
Thank you for commenting this. Was thinking the same thing.
www.grammarly.com/blog/empathy-sympathy/
Or refer to the 20 volumes OED (Oxford English dictionary) for definition and derivation of the words.
Doug Wilson makes a living mischaracterizing and defining terms in a way that is supposed "opponents" do not.
I just googled it, those guys are right about the definition.
To all who want to argue: I'm not telling anyone what they *should* have as a definition. My point is that definitions of words mean different things to different people. If you actually care about communicating effectively with someone, it is wise to make sure you understand the definition they are using. If you merely want to feel *right* and *superior*, beat them over the head with your knowledge. They will despise you and your message (of the Gospel?), but you can feel smug with your sanctimonious self-righteousness.
I did a frustrated UA-cam search and stumbled on this
What they’re describing as unhealthy/“unbiblical” is empathy without boundaries. Empathy is an emotional, social, and interpersonal skill we learn as young children that allows us to see things from others’ perspectives.
If we can’t individuate ourselves from others, this will lead to inappropriate empathy and acting out in ways that are self harming.
But it is not bad to experience empathy. Sympathy/compassion stem from the experiences empathy allows us to have.
Well said.
Yet sympathy today is considered by many to be more like a distant / disconnected appearance of caring.
@@NoProb4Rob being able to say "I have no idea what you're going through, because I've never experienced anything like that but it must be terrible" is a sympathetic statement. I doubt anyone would bemoan someone saying this.
Best response thus far. I think the problem here is they are defining empathy as it is being used today ( given their examples) rather than how it was originally defined and used historically . The problem as I see it is that they did not clearly explain that by the words “sin of empathy” they are referring to how empathy is defined and used today by many.
I would not have used the words “sin of empathy” without further clarification and explanation; actually I would not have used the words “sin of empathy” at all as it could lead to misunderstanding- as it has done.
I think they were trying to illuminate a point and problem as they see it. I think the problem created is not being clear that they are speaking about empathy as it is being used today- I get that by listening to them…. but they needed to clarify that rather than taking today’s use of “empathy” by many and using that to say “this is the difference between empathy and sympathy, and empathy is wrong/a sin”.
Someone once said that “the danger and illusion of communication is that because we use the same words we think we mean the same thing-”
well said yes!
This discussion puts so much on the clear. The modern "social justice" ideology is almost entirely based on empathy. Don't worry about absolute standards or even God's law, but focus on "my experience" and "what offended me". Remove the offense of the Law, and all that's left is the standards of the offended party, therefore you must conform to them to atone for your "sin".
Doug & Joe are missing a key point: a person can empathize with another person's emotions while not agreeing with that second person's positions or decisions. Empathy is about connecting with another person's emotions because, as we are all humans, we all draw from the same array of human emotions, even though our personal situations differ. Empathy is not about taking on that person's perspective - that would be "identification" not empathy. Empathy is about connecting with other people's emotions, relating to them on the level of feeling, in order to better understand them. Empathy is important for any positions that seek to provide support (pastors, therapists, social workers, etc.) so that the person they are helping sees/hears that someone understands what their pain or sorrow can feel like, to an extent. Because we've all felt pain or sorrow. Or joy or anger or fear or contentment, etc.
Compassion is the essence of both sympathy and empathy. I fear that in their efforts to be anti-woke, Doug & Joe are purposely missing this crucial point.
Further, "sympathy" does not mean you are holding out a hand to a person in the mire, hoping to pull them out. The word for that is literally "help". Rather, sympathy is seeing that person in the mire and saying that you feel sorry for their situation. Empathy would be saying that they can understand the overwhelming feeling that person is having, sinking in mire. Empathy does not mean jumping into the mire with them because being empathetic does not mean a person is taking on that person's identity - it means that they understand that feeling of being overwhelmed because they've been overwhelmed too. That said, neither empathy nor sympathy alone are appropriate for this person in the mire because then no one is being pulled out of that mire. Help is what is required. That was a real fail as an analogy.
@@thepunygiant Yep, that two years comment caught my eye. Mainly because it does contextually put this video right in the middle of the ridiculous culture war that continues on to this day - a war in which both sides seek to create new definitions of words like empathy and racism. Ironic to me, since truly understanding and enacting the concept of empathy means rejecting two-sides binaries and instead embracing human commonalities. One would think two pastors would be on board with that. Particularly as the goal of empathy aligns completely with Jesus' teachings.
Thank you for this comment
Yes! I agree. Great comment.
Well if the scriptures are not your standard than you can say anything.
Empathy is not biblical. It doesn't exist.
Did you not listen to the beginning?
@@danielmann5427 Why exactly do you think Jesus wept? Please consider how the word "empathy" is used today - and how it describes the way Scripture maintains we should be treating others. Doug & Joe are creating a new definition of empathy to further their callow points. Do you honestly think Jesus would be against a person using the word empathy to describe treating people the way that God intended? This is only something that Doug & Joe care about.
"Empathy" may not be a biblical word, but there are many words used today that are not in the Bible. The ancient word "sumpatheia" means "with feeling" and the ancient word "empatheia" means "in feeling". There is not a lot of difference between those two words, when they were originally used. But words and their meanings may change over time. This does not mean "empathy" is now a sin! Please don't buy into the straw man nonsense that this video is selling.
My definition of Empathy is simply putting yourself in one's shoes. You don't have to feel the same way, like be depressed or angry towards the person who wronged your friend. For example, you can still empathize with someone who lost a parent even if you haven't experience it. You simply need to imagine how it feels to lose a parent. Most times its hard to even empathize when you don't share the same experience, this is where 'sympathy' is more applicable. You can at least try to imagine how your friend feels though. You can empathize if if you actually lost a parent. Get it? Compassion on the other hand is simply empathy/sympathy + action (a desire to help). Empathy is NOT a sin brothers and sisters. Too much empathy IS, i guess.
Empathy/sympathy and compassion needs to be balanced with Truth and responsibility. I can sympathize with an addict, addiction is powerful, but I must balance it with the understanding that only the addict can overcome the addiction. Sympathy alone isn't enough.
@@Justheory11b exactly. That's why temperance (moderation) is a fruit of the spirit.
thankfully, there already is a definition of empathy, so you don't need to make one.
it's a measurable biological trait. it involves self sacrifice. it evolved out of the mother-infant pair bond. (i know evolution is a hot topic around here, but you can see evolution more easily than you can see genesis 1:1, so i'll take it as part of what is created.)
every trait has its problems.
one problem with empathy is self-sacrifice at the expense of yourself, to the point where you can no longer self-sacrifice. your self is exhausted.
another problem with empathy is the tendency to overreact to competition, and to oversimplify problems. a baby cannot rationalize, and since empathy is specifically biologically tailored towards care of those who cannot help themselves, empathy is irrational by definition. you cannot tell a baby to grow the hell up and feed itsself. when the baby complains, it requires aid. there is no valid argument, there is no conversation to be had.
it does not take much of a stretch to see that this trait is a catastrophe when it manifests in relationships with adult men. in fact, many men bond in ways which are socially accepted forms of abuse, from sports, to first person shooter video games. men bond over unempathic activity, more often than not.
empathy is not a sin in and of itsself. it is a tool, a projectile, designed to strike certain targets truly.
sin is derived from an old greek archery term, to miss the mark is to sin.
it is a sin to use the wrong tool for the right job.
the right job for empathy is caregiving. when empathy is used for politics, it is a sin.
communism ran on empathy, and it ran into mass graves.
it is the instinct to care of the mother bear that gets you eaten.
i rest my case.
Definition of empathy from per the dictionary:
1: the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner
also : the capacity for this
2: the imaginative projection of a subjective state into an object so that the object appears to be infused with it
Does my definition not fit the description?
@@ImmyT89 look up the research done on the big 5 personality traits.
when people say words which are related to empathy, they are referring to a human-universal psychological construct, which can be obtained by averaging linguistic constants across various cultures and languages.
the dictionary is not necessarily the most definitive source for the true nature of things, especially because recently the dictionary has been changed by political activists.
One of the best talks I have ever heard on being a Christian man, husband and citizen. Biblical wisdom in "plain talk" that even a man listening while working in his shop can understand, apply and teach. Thank you guys.
I found this conversation to be fantastically supported and so well laid out. Wonderful episode.
As the wife of a Christian man and the mother of a young boy who we are raising according to the Bible, I find myself listening to things like Man Rampant because I value the views and insights they provide. Thank you for speaking the truth in love and being strong men. Christian women really do want to see strong Christian men, both as husbands and as our brothers in our communities.
Just because some people take "empathy" too far doesn't mean empathy in every case is a sin. You could've instead called this "The Sin of Too Much Empathy".
Surely you don't believe that trying to understand someone else's thoughts and experiences is sinful! But in most people's minds, that's what empathy refers to. It's imprudent to label "empathy" as a sin, because in many people's minds it refers to something that is truly virtuous.
This episode created controversy because it redefines "empathy" in order to label it a sin, which causes confusion for those who are still using the default definition.
Yeah, you wouldn't want to have too much empathy would you?! Empathy is defined as the dictionary as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another." Could you imagine someone having too much of that?! Like if God were to give up his omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience in order to leave as a human so that he could understand and share every feeling and temptation humanity faces?! Wouldn't that be so wild?!
@@dankxng so the point, I think, is you get lost in empathy. If you really feel their emotion, you are stuck right where they are. I think they're saying you should stand back so you can determine truth first, before you get emotionally entangled.
@@TheRealMonnie So we should not have the heart that Paul writes we should have in 1 Corinthians 9 striving to be all things for all people, we should not emulate Romans 12:15 by rejoicing with those who rejoice and weeping with those who weep in order to not "really feel their emotion" otherwise we well become too "emotionally entangled," nor should we be like Jesus in 11:33-35 and feel the emotions of those around us? Interesting. So your version of Christ is not in step with Scripture? That's wild, my dude!
@@dankxng wow that went past you so fast.. huh...
@@dankxng Perfect analogy, thank you!
This is a redefinition of empathy, and either confuses or pushes people away. Empathy is rooted in our biology. The problem is if that empathy isn’t tethered to anything outside of the person (I.e. scripture, truth) or the person emphasizing loses their sense of self.
Theory of mind requires empathy. They are describing codependency and calling it empathy. They are asking to be misunderstood.
Very well put 🙌🏽
Not necessarily A redefinition but the definition of how it's being used practically in critical race Theory
Exactly, it's rooted into our biology. Our bodies. Our flesh. Hence why standing back and thinking about the real meanings of he word as they have been passed down from the Greek are needed. What's sym and what's em? What's pathos? Do people still use the words based on the meaning that has been handed down to them in a straight line from the Greeks?
With and in
Suffering
Yes
Hence the need to rise above our carnal biology, and seek after the virtuous thing. Suffering WITH, rather than suffering IN. We should only be IN our Creator and Messiah. But we're commanded to be WITH our neighbour
You either didn't understand them, or didn't listen to the video.
If I get it right, in empathy reason acquiesces to emotion, whereas, in sympathy reason shepherds emotion.
Rather, empathy understands emotions while sympathy evokes only one emotion: sorrow. Reason should shepherd both.
, @@markmonday1242 what I sated is what I understand from the discussion. so from what you said, empathy is intuitive, whereas sympathy is cognitive.
@@rufinoty6958 Ah, I should have been clear that I was debating the point made in the discussion, not you. Per their discussion, I think you are correct - that is exactly what they are saying. As far as cognitive vs. intuitive... I'd say that the sympathy is actually intuitive (spontaneous, not requiring conscious thought) and that empathy is both cognitive (ability to recognize another's emotional state) and affective (ability to share those feelings).
@@markmonday1242 Why then is this discussion titled, The Sin of Empathy? You sound in favor of empathy over sympathy. The panelists of this discussion are in favor of sympathy. By standard or criteria is this question resolved? In what perspective is this to be understood? This is like taking a point in the continuum between empathy and sympathy without really resolving which is what.
@@rufinoty6958 I think the discussion is so titled because it is easy clickbait - attacking a humanistic and liberal strategy and mislabelling it as "a sin" in order to score an obscure semantical point, and clicks, when no such point need have been made in the first place. Further, Doug & Joe speak against scripture and the character of Jesus when they label empathy a sin - surely Jesus was the most empathetic of all. They construct a work-around to what scripture says and what has been established as the character of Jesus by ascribing a new definition to the word empathy. This is a typical strategy for both the right and the left: creating new definitions of old words to further their own political rhetoric. As far as my own perspective goes, I am strongly in favor of both empathy and sympathy; although personally, I would prefer that someone be empathetic to my emotions than sympathetic, because the latter can feel condescending. But to say one is opposed to the other is to engage in reductive, binary thinking. And to be against empathy, or sympathy, is to be against the ideals espoused by Christ and the New Testament.
The golden rule "“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”" is exactly what empathy is. So let's not redefine empathy to mean something entirely different from what it is commonly understood to be.
Says who?
Well Jesus said the golden rule thing...but to answer the question you are actually asking (who says empathy is personified by the golden rule?) that would be...hmm it says Jesus again.
Jesus had empathy for everyone, I would list examples, but someone beat me to it (they call it the new testament). A short list of Jesus showing empathy for those not in his tribe would be the woman at the well, the Roman centurion, and literally his entire life. To use your sympathy is standing on the shoreline analogy...Jesus dove right into humanity he did not stay on the shore.
@@CanonPress The Logos Himself in action. 😂
That’s not how society defines empathy at all.
@@iancampbell1494 well they define it wrong. Or you're making that up. What we as Christians shouldn't do is throw out the whole thing and call it a sin.
Now that gay people can get married, which is against the biblical definition, meaning society changed the definition. Does that mean we call marriage a sin?
Commenting for the algorithm.
Same
Same
good idea
Same
Hi Algorithm! :D
God bless you Doug keep speaking church now is not the time for shrinking faith but glorious proclamation praise Jesus
What concerns me the most is not the changing of the meaning of empathy to suit the position of the proponents. Nor is it the danger of Christians only offering "thoughts and prayers" and disengaging with the lost and hurting. But the framing of empathy as sin because Jesus had empathy and under this statement empathy is sinful the authors, perhaps unintentionally are saying Jesus sinned.
This was such an eye opening and healing conversation. Thank you Lord!!
This hit me hard and was really excellent. I am so encouraged when men of God talk this way and help people like me see the Gospel even clearer. Keep spreading the good news, brothers!
I am grateful for this interview!
I have to think 🤔 atleast four times before I ask an apology to my wife....man this is wonderful!!!
It is clear that empathy is not understood by the Desiring God community.
Doug is a great interviewer and very discerning, he hit the bulls eye with laser specific questions. We need more spiritually discerning men in the body of Christ.🙏🏾
Joe Rigney's The Things of the Earth is an eye opener for me. What a book! Thank you Canon Press for releasing this Man Rampant episode for free on UA-cam! God bless.
Yes! That book has helped me so much.
Daniel Goldman's book on emotional intelligence (EQ) states that one of the pillars of EQ is empathy... would you substitute empathy with compassion or sympathy? Because it seems to me that the main driver behind being more empathetic is being a better leader and increasing EQ when dealing with people.
Empathy is feeling exactly what people go through, sympathy is feeling sadness or bad about it. Empathy is deeper rooted and seems mor spiritual because you are almost weeping with them in your heart because you know eviscerating what it feels like in the moment.
I'm so glad to see other biblical Christians seeing through this and speaking up.
If you can get 9mins in, you’ll push past the title of this and understand what they are talking about. Phenomenal job.
They’re not describing empathy. They’re describing codependency. Terms are important.
@@ew8311 I don’t see how they are describing codependency. Empathy and codependency are very different things. I could see how overly empathetic people could easily find them selves in codependent relationships. Please explain what you mean, I would love to hear your thoughts.
I did somewhat struggle with the definitions in the beginning as I think arguments can be made for entering into suffering, but as they hashed out the discussion I could and can completely agree with the positions taken.
@@Repentee I agree but I hope @E W, puts in their two cents; I am genuinely interested in their opinion.
@@ew8311co-dependency or enablement…sorta the same things?
They define Empathy and Sympathy the opposite of how I learned it. Joe defined it without a biblical reference. I am not saying he has none but I want to hear it.
Probably because there’s no Biblical passages they can use to justify their argument.
Jesus empathised with people otherwise he .
Empathy is not saying sin is ok, so they’re twisting meanings to suit their views.
@@danpilgrim1785 the question is, did Jesus really empathize with us? He most certainly sympathized for us.
Hebrews 4:15
[15] For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.
But the Bible never teaches that Jesus empathized with us. He was without sin, and therefore could not empathize with our sin.
With that said, I do agree this whole discussion is arguing semantics and there is more nuance and presuppositions we are dealing with
@@TheThunderkatana not as far as I know.
Empathy’s dictionary description is “someone who understands the feelings of others”.
Jesus understood why people were angry, upset or resistant of God.
Jesus went out to the pariahs shunned by society who would feel lost and angry as a result.
Like the parable of the prodigal son or lost sheep, still going out of his way to bring that person back into the light.
Empathy isn’t saying sin is ok, it’s being a listening ear and counsellor.
They’re swapping the dictionary definition of both words around as far as I can tell?!
Which makes it super confusing semantics.
Empathy is walking is someone else’a shoes and understanding why they feel a certain way.
Sympathy is feeling sorry for someone.
If you want to evangelise and convert someone, it helps to understand where they’re coming from.
They're making empathy automatically toxic, which it isn't. Empathy is being able to feel/understand how someone feels without experiencing it. Sympathy is sharing the feelings.
I wrote a dissertation that partially researched Empathy and other relational ideas in scripture. The Fruit of the Spirit covers the waterfront of relational interactions that include empathy and sympathy and compassion. Scripture also fosters the idea that anger is included in the imago Dei since God/ Jesus had anger as well as gentleness. Jesus and all humans are multidimensional so I will never indicate it is wrong to listen carefully and understand others’ emotions.
I myself being highly empathetic find it more of a curse mostly. My fallen nature revels in distortion and I need to remember this. What good does it really do within the Kingdom to be able to “feel” what others feel? These are broken feelings we all deal with day in and day out, some in varying degrees. The greatest enemy of an empath is a narcissist because we can be taken advantage of, I know from experience. But we were once ALL enemies of God until Jesus came.
LORD please deliver me from myself.
**In all their affliction he was afflicted,** and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and **in his pity** he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. ISA 63
For we have not an high priest which cannot be **touched with the feeling of our infirmities;** but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. HEB 4
_
"follow me, and let the dead bury their dead." - JESUS
Just discovered Mr Wilson and so glad I did.
Love your enthusiasm for speaking to all sides and the patience you show is staggering.
I used to be an ardent atheist but didn't like the arrogance that I started noticing from people like Dawkins.
So much more to religion then I thought.
Not quite a believer in the one true God but getting closer. I particularly liked your analogy of learning a language and that if you want to believe then you have to expose yourself to it more. And that's what I'm doing.
I’m not sure of the relevance of the above shared video in reply to your comment. But I am praying fervently for you, my friend, that this crazy algorithm of UA-cam points you to more informative brothers like Douglas Wilson.
If you are philosophically inclined I would recommend RC Sproul or, despite some serious controversy postmortem, Ravi Zacharias. I enjoy the conviction and common sense of Voddie Bauchaum as well (though I may have misspelled his last name..).
You can email me at wstevens1313@gmail.com if there is any questions or other sources I could maybe send your way, or if you just want to chat through some stuff!
@@bassistguy13 cheers for the suggestions. Had heard and watched Ravi. Never heard of the allegations until now am shocked. Will check out the others.
@@bassistguy13 how can you still recommend Ravi? Ravi was my favorite apologist to listen to. His way of explaining Truth was like no other in my opinion. However, i was duped. I plan to never listen to another video and throw all his books in the garbage. I still love Ravi, and hope he was or is a genuine convert who fell into sin like we all can as believers. But I don’t know if he was truly a believer?
@@johnjaso385 I don't know, I am a believer and struggle with sanctification every day. I have not fallen into the particular sin that Ravi had, but I recognize the wretchedness that the Lord is constantly putting to death in me. I think Zacharias has made some wonderful contributions to the apologetics community, and while abusing his clout and power to seek inappropriate sexual relationships is a sin, I also believe it is a sin possible of forgiveness in Christ. I never found myself in a position of worshipping the man in the past; perhaps this is why I was sad for him and his family but not crushed by the allegations? I recognize the fallibility of man in all things, can take the good from his life and pray for forgiveness in the bad.
I find it interesting and telling that Pastor Doug Wilson went immediately to an example of someone lying about sexual abuse. Like honestly does that happen so often. I would think more often you would have to curtail your empathy when dealing with regular interpersonal misunderstandings. Sexual abuse is pretty clear cut and I don't think a lot of people lie about that and fabricate it.
40 % of rape alligation are false.
There are also mother that divorced their husband and course the kids to lie about sexual abuse it’s called “the silver bullet”. Because they will have full custody.
@@yesorno1768 of course that happend BUT men lie too. I personally know women that were raped and a man that was falsely accused of rape. I also personally know women who were abused, adults who were sexually abused by their fathers as children and men who were falsely acccused during divorse proceedings, however these cases are the minority. I wouldn't assume someone was lying because lying about it is much more rare than the actual occurence.
@@rebekahguilder602 your first argument was doesn't really happen that often and they showed that known lies are at 40% now your argument is changed to well men lie too.
My questions going to be how many of that 40% were ever punished?
@@grantarmbruster6591 I'm not sure where that 40% is coming from. I would need to see the study. That number seems high to me. And when you say 40% lie, to whom? The courts, their counselors? My point initial point still stands: I find it telling that was the example Pastor Wilson used. I think a more prevalence example of why you can't immediately be empathetic would be couseling a couplw or even just one spouse in a situation when they both think their perspective is 100% reflective of the truth. This happens all of the time, hence the saying every story has two sides.
@@grantarmbruster6591 and to be clear, I think that there should be some sort of punishment for when people lie in divorce proceedings to gain an advantage. I don't know how that would look practically but to lie and try to distroy another person for your own benefit is abhorrent.
EMPATHY IS NOT A SIN
Being empathetic at times I suppose is not a sin. But always being empathetic all the time is most likely a sin. The culture says you have to always be empathetic but only for people who aren’t white and aren’t male. That is also racist and sexist, which is also a sinful and ultimately the actual problem.
In current psychological language the word he is using for empathy is identification. The idea with empathy is a partial-identification a connection with a distance, a spacious connection.
One of my professors in grad school called it benevolent indifference.
@@NathanShattuckIsHere interesting. I have a different take but there is something good about that. The space leaves the option for indifference. I take his answer to be the atheistic or rational one, where Melanie Klein’s depressive position (capacity for concern) is more about recognising how small your problems are compared to the big picture of the universe (imagine looking at your life from the moon). While a more theistic (or relational) depressive position is in recognising that the pain of love can be borne (Jesus on the cross) that after the death in guilt we rise in a powerful love and newfound connection. What this means is that I can identify (partially) with others without drowning with them, but I can also go down to pretty painful and dark places confident that I will rise, confident that I am not held or consumed or defined by this pain or darkness but rather have chosen to bear this with the other because I know the one who has overcome, or I know that this can be overcome. So it is always only partial or at worst temporary and if I am operating in this space, then it is chosen freely. Jesus on cross was total identification but only for three days did it consume him, then it was dissolved in his triumph in resurrection. This was Jesus empathy for his enemies bring them into his tribe. It is begun in sympathy but it maintains the sense of self and true thought so that it is a true understanding and as such it is redemptive - and is not about anxiety or identity because you are free, can truly think, and can maintain your sense of self.
@@jonathonray6198 Very much agree. Beautifully said, btw. Also, my professor used the benevolent indifference term somewhat in a tongue and cheek way but meant very much what you articulated so well above.
Zooming back out to the larger theme of this video, it does seem that some kind of shift has taken place in our culture where any space withheld in empathy, any other thoughts concurrent in the person engaging empathetically that may not agree with what the person is feeling or thinking about the situation or experience are seen as threatening and labeled as unsafe and unloving. That could be what Doug Wilson and Joe Rigney may be overstating in an overreaction to here. At least to me, so much of what they say here resonates as true and very important given current cultural trends, but framing it all as a dichotomy b/w sympathy (good) and empathy (bad) doesn’t seem accurate, nor the best way to frame the fundamental problem they are trying to address.
@@NathanShattuckIsHere yes my thoughts exactly. They are putting there finger on it, and then mislabelling it. The culture is narcissistic, and yet attempting to be emotionally enlightened, all you get is a charade. The emperor has no clothes.
I've enjoyed listening to this episode again. The claim, of the sin of empathy, is well qualified, explained, and worked through. They are definitely parts where, to paraphrase Voddie, "if I can't say amen, I ought to say ouch."
Galatians 6:2
King James Version
2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
One does not have to compromise ethics to empathize.
People without empathy are sociopaths. Are you (rampant man) a sociopath? A sociopath is a term used to describe someone who has antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). People with ASPD can't understand others' feelings. The point of empathy is being able to understand others feeling.
Thanks for weighing in DJW1959Aus
What a great witt combined with truth!
In the fight between good vs evil, this is message is Evil! Compassion and empathy are good. How have you strayed so far?
He's a false teacher
I assume you just read the title and made your comment.
@@bman5257 You can assume whatever you want... these guys are evil, judgemental, asses who are leading the weak-minded astray with their word-salad, re-definition of the English language to give people permission to be terrible to other people.
It seems to me that they made the proper distinctions and clarifications to render the message that people have permission to be terrible to others to be a gross straw man and uncharitable to dismiss their argument as one made by evil and judgmental people.
It strikes me that this entire conversation is built around a clear equivocation of what empathy means, and most likely it appears that they are guilty of the etymological fallacy.
A lot of what they say is true, but no one defines empathy as they have, not even secular academics.
So it's a long conversation based on an incorrect definition. It's not really helpful, and the claim "empathy is sinful" actually should mean "empathy that excludes God from the conversation, dehumanizes the other person, assumes the individual is faultless, blameless and completely honest, has their own reality in their head, and acts as an uncritical advocate for that person while sinning with them without offering any help or way out based on their owne experience, is sinful
Well yes. Obviously.
No one disagrees with that.
I agree that no one defines empathy as us however they act as if empathy is this similar to the way feminism is defined versus how it is
"No one disagrees", so only you are allowed to use rhetorical devices. How convenient.
The speakers are making a case against a particular understanding of the word "empathy". I'm missing the rationale for how it is that the word "empathy" is by definition a bad word. I've not heard of this way of defining the term before in such an exclusive way.
Kook alert. "Smart" people being clowns. Sympathy is extending a courtesy. Empathy extends emotion.
Jesus wept: empathy.
Sorry you got a speeding ticket: sympathy.
It has to be the last days: calling good words evil.
I agree. He trying to chang the word to fit his definition that fits with his argument. Though I agree with his argument for “unhealthy” empathy I found it annoying listening trying to restrict the word’s meaning as though he is lobbying to change the Webster’s dictionary.
"Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep."
Romans 12:15
As Christians, we are certainly called to use discretion and wisdom. We are also called to engage with others on an emotional level, when appropriate.
Can you say Pompous?!
Definitely are in the last days man definitely are!
It's much less about the word proper, and much more about cultural trends and naming them and distinguishing them from Scripture.
So I "love" the redefinition of empathy here - where you separate out the core of empathy (feeling with someone) assign it to sympathy and then brutalize whatever is left. Very reminiscent of John Piper's redefinition of complimentarianism.
Empathy is relating to another person (I would say this is very much "feeling with"). Jesus is the architect of empathy, being himself devine he took on flesh to relate and restore humanity. Grace comes from empathy. Mercy comes from sympathy. Both are necessary.
This makes so much more sense to me than J.Peterson's blabbing 😅
Thanks so much for your wisdom guys. All absolutely agree. I also think the more people learn appropriateness for feelings and when to leave them at the door. Too many are judging everything on feelings and not facts or reality. Pray to be each adequately.
Started watching just because of the name!
Something they touched on in the beginning but didn't unpack too well; is the idea of jumping in with both feet, even if all the facts being presented are true, and all the emotions are justified; if you become depressed because they are depressed or enraged because they are enraged, then someone needs to now save you both from your depression or rage.
I can't remember the last time i heard 2 men talk sense together. Thank you
Sense...... who decides what is sensible, you? Truth is true but it doesn’t come from self. Damn pietistic idealogs, turning Christianity into authoritarianism.
Everything wrong in today's Christianity in one video?
This is too good. I recently came across Doug and I can’t get enough of his wisdom.
Right!??
1Tim.6:19 I am doing what you are beginning, and have grown
So much so quick. Welcome brother.
unfortunately you are deceived - this video is not wisdom, it is two men's opinions which do not conform to Christ
@@culater1132 please change my mind.
@@rafaeldesouza8839 hopefully, you're not being sarcastic
here is one scriptural example of empathy (not just sympathy) applied to preaching the gospel
20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings. - 1 Corinthians 9:20-23 ESV
for additional excellent discussions, look at the posts from Paul Edgar, Andrew Wallace, and Puny Giant on this thread.
This is great. Soaking it in.
I love listening to this
One minute in and he says "we are very important" and I'm already out. No one actually worth a damn declares themselves important like that.
It was a joke
Like, poking fun at all the talking heads who intro their videos with non-joking “I’m so important because I do this, this, and this” monologues.
Douglas isn’t serious. He’s being funny.
@@juliafarris9663 Oh, good. That makes a lot more sense in the context of the whole video.
Doug does take some getting used to #TongueInCheek Listen to just about anything he says on his Plodcast and you will get it #PastorJokes
I guess I learned another definition of empathy today.
My definition of empathy, is a HUGE foundation of my Christian faith, and is probably the most important quality I want my children to see in me. Empathy is viewing life from another’s perspective. Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. I’m not sure the Lord has taught me thankfulness, and shown me His grace any more, than when I’m empathetic. Empathy forces me to shamefully admit that it’s NOT all about me. The vast majority of the time, the individual isn’t aware I’m even being empathetic.
The opposite of this practice is not sympathy. The opposite is me living for and worrying about myself.
So, where am I misguided? Honestly, I’m not looking for an argument. But if I’m wrong I need to know. Thanks.
@@JW-tg1nn “out Pharisee” 🤣
@@JW-tg1nn thank you for your feedback. I meant to include this earlier but got tickled with the out Pharisee comment.
Your definition is a good one. And describes a godly virtue.
I like a lot of Doug's content but, imho, this one just added to the "noise."
Ah well, they can't all be zingers.
@@AnHebrewChild unfortunately, when I hear the ones that are just noise, I wonder how genuine were the the ones that I agreed with. I guess only thing I can do is NEVER listen to him again and tell everybody else to do the same. Okay, maybe that’s too far 🤣🤣.
@@DrPhilGoode actually, I was being polite (perhaps over-polite) in what I said.
A wise man once said, "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump"
Increasingly I steer clear of "celebrity pastors."
Jesus is our pastor, "and all [we] are brethren."
This talk here missed the mark big big time.
This is an excellent discussion. Thanks so much for your desire to be balanced in your appreciation of dynamics of healing from a Reformed perspective.
As a Christian who for over 30 years and who utilizes Bowen Systems theory; the one whose shoulders upon whom Edwin Friedman stands to articulate his view on empathy, one important point needs to be made. Empathy a human characteristic in itself is neither good or bad. It’s relative benefit or liability lies in how it is implemented. In Bowen theory one major way of understanding when a characteristic is not useful is whether it’s expression is organized out of the state of fusion or differentiation. If empathy is expressed out of a fused state, it’s sinful. If it’s expressed out of a differentiated state it’s helpful and appropriate.
I don't always agree with what Doug Wilson says, but this was rather excellent, and I thank the Lord for men like him.
Conversations like this are why I'm not a Protestant anymore. There is no "sin of empathy." Empathy is what we are called to as Christians, or at least it used to be before we became a Prosperity seminar, a Trump sign and a bowl of Chicken Soup.
Would love to hear more of what you think about the arguments made in the episode! Cheers!
@@CanonPress I think it sounds like secular psychology, given a very thin religious veneer. Where, exactly, in Scripture is empathy defined as elevating a suffering person above God, which is the same as calling empathy a form of idolatry? Are there specific Scriptural admonitions against caring too much, which most of us would call empathy, and do they outnumber or otherwise trump the numerous Scriptural calls to compassion at expense of one's own interest and well being, which also entails empathy? Does Scripture call it a sin to be overly compassionate?
When Christ came to the home of Lazarus, who lay dead, He wept. Of course, as a man, He was sad over the death of his friend, as well as sympathetic towards the sisters and family of Lazarus. But the people around Him who mourned Lazarus were feeling a despair that Christ could not entirely share. They thought Lazarus was dead and gone. Christ knew he had come to the house to bring him back from the dead. For Him, as the man Jesus (wholly human as well as wholly God,) to fully appreciate the suffering of Lazarus' loved ones, He must have been able to step outside of Himself, His own knowledge and His own emotions and step, as it were, into the emotions of the people around Him. To feel their suffering as they felt it, to understand the situation from a knowledge more limited than His own, to genuinely cry with them and for them. Does this not demonstrate our Lord's empathy? Why would I not want to emulate that? Why would it be sinful for me to do so?
Seventeen minutes in and so far, what they want therapists to do is what any good therapist would do. Obviously there are loads of bad therapists, but challenging the client is commonly understood to be the therapists role.
Many here are still confounding the terms empathy and sympathy . Sympathy for Jesus' friends, Mary and Martha for the death of their brother, and his friend, Lazarus, is shown by his weeping. Empathizing (at least by the definition being used here) would be to join a sense of dispair over the idea of him not coming back.
"Were called to grieve for others but not lose ourselves in the grief." Biblical empathy does not place the object of empathy above God, yet so many in modern churches do precisely that, e.g. "Critical race theory."
Critical race theory is FAKE empathy. At best, it is misinformed or misused empathy. This whole argument is basically a concession of the realm of caring and empathy to the secular world. This is a lie from the Enemy.
I don't want to disagree in this forum. As a minister it's not my place to step in even if I don't agree. However, from what source are you getting your definition of sympathy and empathy? Honest question not trying to be flippant or dismissive.
Thank you.
You should disagree with this...in any forum...especially as a minister. No matter how intelligent and cunning the speaker, we have an obligation to the TRUTH.
@@cross-eyedmary6619 I don't know enough about the terms they are using or the lingo they utilize (as counselors). Their definition of empathy is not what I have always understood it to be. Having said that, I don't disagree with their statements, I would call what they discribe as weak willed, unprincipled or complacent. I have always understood empathy as the ability to "see another persons point of view, even though you yourself have not experienced the same thing". This is highly utilized in the Special Operations. You don't look for a suicide bomber in a stand of trees, we understand he wants to kill as many "infidels" as possible. Since we can empathize with him we look for him around groups of people, especialy ones he would consider "unclean". I do not share his sentiments and I can in no way sympathize with him but I can try and think as he does in order to help him quicklyand efficiently meet allah. Sympathy is what I would call what they are talking about but that is why I requested what and where they are getting the definitions they are using. If somebody assaults another person, most assume that means their was a physical confrontation. In the military an assault is a violent invasion. A police officer knows an assault is a threat of physical violence. I want to know their definitions.
They’re conflating things that have nothing to do with sympathy or empathy. Rigney equates empathy with a failure to ask probing questions and understand the truth of a situation. Failure or inability to properly ask probing questions is simply a sign of a bad counselor, and has nothing to do with empathy. I’m beginning to wonder if he coined this “sin of empathy” term to be provocative and get views.
Great discussion…. Thank you.
Joe Rigney is making sense to me.
EXCELLENT. Man rampant is like masculinity 101-201.
“For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.”
Hebrews 4:15
Christ could not empathize in our weaknesses because He did not sin.
But he did empathize with the temptation.
Didn’t even sin in His heart .
@@travis6694 empathy - is in not with
@@danielmann5427 okay
Oh this is exactly what I needed to hear
You spelled wanted wrong.
@@cross-eyedmary6619 Why the random hate?
@@youbloodybloodworktimejasper don't mind cross-eyed Mary she has been imbued with the power to read minds and to see people's intentions ironically what she accuses of lot of people of doing
God Bless you
Pastor Wilson and Dr. Rigney talk about the bible as footnotes or talk about authors who talk about the Bible, but really they are only using rhetoric not the Bible. Say what you will about John Piper, but he brings Scripture exegesis into every conversation and so this falls into a category as to what happens after a leader with vision leaves, Scripture is sidelined and a political or "tribal" discussion takes presidence in order to defend an idiology.
Yes, empathy can be dangerous. You can get sucked in & worn out.
@ 4:04 "He went to Nazareth High" BWAGAHHAAHAHAHAHAAa!! That seriously made me roll. Oh man....I love Douglas Wilson. Just the tone of his voice when he said that. Thanks for that Doug.
I LOVE DOUG WILSON! I feel so proper watching this. I think I might make a hot tea and soak in a bathtub while finishing it up. Haha. God bless you all at Canon Press!
Tmi
Is it tea? I thought they were drinking wine.
I am so happy i came across your channel
"put yourself in my/their shoes and have some empathy!!!!!" almost always means "discard your life experience and do what I want"
"You can't export what you don't have." Excellent!
GOD IS GOOD
For His mercy endureth forever.
You could also reject empathy on philosophical grounds. Genuine empathy is an epistemological fantasy. We cannot actually know the experience of any other person because the only way we know anything is through our own experience, which is the lens through which all experience is filtered.
Empathy is merely an elaborate fiction dressed up in the language of compassion; it proposes to identify with another's experience by conjuring up a scenario to represent something genuinely experienced by the other, but in reality it is merely a fictional account of another's circumstance as imagined by oneself (which cannot provide real knowledge of another person's actual experience unless you're omniscient like God)
My daughter was 4 years old when she witnessed a woman that was heavily intoxicated, the woman was sitting down across the room talking and my daughter looked over at me and said, "Mommy, that woman is dizzy in her head"...how did she know what she was feeling?
Is it possible that empathy exists but you just haven't experienced it?
@@KISStheSON... you could be observational experience not necessarily empathy
@@grantarmbruster6591
It was my 4 year old daughter, not me...Empathy exists just as narcissism exists.
Narcissists feel very little if anything, will empaths feel a lot.
It's just a fact, nothing to divide over ;)
@@KISStheSON... yes, my you was a universal statement not a specific person.
I had been prepared to not like this video based on some negative press. This made me interested to watch! I was surprised that I agreed with the hard-hitting analysis of it about 85% of the time. What was given was both logical and Christlike advice for the most part but I think it’s very hard for them to keep their own proclivity to an authoritarian model in check. I’m happy to report that I am married to an evolved male and pray more of my Christian brothers (and sisters) were like this… able to cut the marrow from the bone. Respect is to be earned!
This is such a ridiculous conversation from beginning to end. You are both teaching falsehood. The scripture is full of empathy from the command to mourn with those who mourn to Jesus challenging the Pharisees who were going to stone a sinning woman to cast the stones if they had no sin. Hebrews says that Christ is our high priest who perfectly understands what we are going through because he was tempted in every way as a human being. By your own definition of entering fully in - that is empathy. And Hebrews says without sin.
Beyond that - anyone who has even a rudimentary understanding of the professional standards of counseling and psychology and sociology would be able to pick this apart in 5 minutes.
Nice mentions of “blacks”. Racism.
Me too women and casting doubt on women with stories of abuse who come looking for help are to be judged by the two of you instead of helped.
You both would be better served by reading Ezekiel 34 about how God judges those who shepherd his sheep poorly instead of sitting around talking nonsense and teaching scripture incorrectly.
Super eye opening.
I need more teaching like this.
So rooted in absolute truth
So glad you're enjoying it! Be sure to download the Canon App to watch the whole season. There also tons of other free content there.
@@CanonPress Thanks for that! Starting Episode 2 now
The problem today seems to often be empathy complately in allegiance to certain kinds of subjective truth, and people demonized if they are unwilling to do that. Perhaps.
This is excellent! Really glad I found you guys!
I'm so grateful that God delivered me out of this type of environment and these type of men. You have managed to twist empathy into a sin with word salad. You throw around the feminist word likes it's dirty. To hear you say as a pastor that you keep abreast of what's happening but you don't want to ....you are not interested in what's happening across the country....what are you talking about.....keeping your head in the sand....must be nice to be able to do that. It's possible to stay informed about your neighbor and see what is right and wrong, what is inhumane and what's inhumane. You can be in the world and not of the world.
As an unbeliever, I find myself tentatively agreeing with many of the Christian criticisms of the current trends regarding empathy. Among fellow unbelievers, many of whom identify as ex-Christian, there is an extremely vocal segment that fanatically demands that everyone around them empathize with the pain and turmoil they are experiencing in their own lives, often centering on their personal sexual or gender confusion.
He trying to chang the word to fit his definition that fits with his argument. Though I agree with his argument for “unhealthy” empathy I found it annoying listening to him trying to restrict the word’s meaning as though he is lobbying to change the Webster’s dictionary.
This is why lifeguards who are out in the ocean carry bouys and or wait until the other person tire themselves out before going in to help them. And I can see why it seems God waits until we are at the end of our rope to step in.
I’ve seen it stated in this thread that the message title is communicating is: facts don’t care about your feelings. That statement is far more political than it is Biblical.
In John 11 Jesus comes to both Martha and then Mary. They essentially say the same thing to him: had you been here my brother would not be dead.
Jesus says to Martha “I am the resurrection and the life.”
And to Mary, he weeps.
Christians need both truth and tears. Jesus cares about how we feel, even if we are misguided (also read the entire book of job).
Sure but too much is indeed a problem in fact employing empathy in the manner which is commonly utilized in our progressive and or woke society is absolutely counter productive. Facts don’t care about your feelings which is absolutely true, furthermore, of course we should share feelings with others, but those feelings are valid only if their based in absolute truth, why should we validate feelings which are based off of sin or blatant mistruths? Validating someone’s feelings indefinitely destroys Gods truth because it places within the individual an exceptional amount of power, power which they use to manipulate and turn truth to their whim and to fit their own narrative and those who validated those feelings irrelevant of the basis of those feelings are equally guilty because to empathize with feelings that are based in falsehoods is to, in a way, claim those falsehoods to be valid in and of themselves. We bolster validity in our omissions just as well as our submissions, that is the key issue here. Furthermore, it doesn’t always matter how the professional world uses and defines a word, what matters is how pop culture defines the word because that’s is the most likely way a common person is relating to that word, in this case empathy. Psychologists are indeed taught a variant definition of empathy then that which Doug is claiming, but majority society doesn’t claim that definition in common use, therefore this talk using this definition is warranted and needed. There are a plethora of Christians who are caught in the trap of validating anti truth in the name of empathy, in fact entire congregations base their existence on that very act.
59:57 "find an external enemy" yep, and that would be the church. I'm praying for a revival first, but expecting a wholesale persecution of the church from w/in her own ranks. The religious had Jesus put to death, the religious killed the prophets, and throughout the centuries the religious persecuted the church.
Matthew 10:36 "a man's enemies will be those of his own household".
Empathy is just knowing the contents of the vessel from within. It's like the lamp that lights and searches the souls of men. We're going to give an account for everything because it's personal to God. Adding the extra step of agreement and affirmation of sin as a requirement of empathy is misleading. One can know another's emotions and judgments and know that they are clearly wrong. I think the anxiety over touching the unclean is what drives the assumption that empathy is sin. We are to take care lest we fall in the sin. And if someone's anxiety is going to threaten their faith or cause them to sin, they should avoid it. But they shouldn't go around teaching others how to make a sin out of what is not sinful.
Amen.
This is what I believe. I can know where a person is and truly understand their feelings, but not agree or affirm their choice to rebel against God. I use that to lead them to Christ!! They have truly conflated agreement, affirmation, and identification onto empathy.
@@Journeytaker101 How can we be saved if we are not known by God? And being known by God is the most personal and painful thing to God, the Cross. Clean transactions are what pharisees demand. If God demanded it, we would all be dead.
An hour long discussion that hinges on the redefinition of a word? Hmm interesting. I don't even know how "well maybe she's lying" managed to be your first example.
How about this:
"I was raped and my pastor thought I was lying"
"That happened to me too, I know how hard that is."
There, empathy is easy, stop with the weird rape apologetics.
Humans lie sometimes.
Yes, it’s very revealing and explains why there are so many examples of 21st century churches covering up abuse. It’s shameful.
Don’t go to your pastor for help. We have police for that.
needed this
What's the fancy theological term for when people are too lazy to think so they go to ridiculous extremes? Is it the same as for when people want over-simplistic rules and laws, so that they can avoid being actually engaged in Truth seeking on a regular basis?
This is a garbage straw man using a purposefully crap definition of empathy.
You can have empathy for a drug abuser without doing drugs. You can have empathy for a person suffering a major loss without inflicting that loss upon yourself.
The whole show set up on a totally garbage metaphor. These guys have no idea what they’re talking about.
By the way, the description of empathy as a tribal element is not empathy at all. It is simply affirmation with or without any knowledge of what is actually happening. One can affirm without knowing anything about the contents of another's thoughts, emotions, and pursuits. One can just assume that because someone is pursuing transgenderism that the goal is clear, however it is not. Our hearts are desperately wicked and deceitful above all things, even our own intentions are often hidden from our eyes. And one's emotions and internal workings are not at the exclusion of another. When I have empathy for someone, I also have empathy for God's pursuits. We are to take care not to grieve the Holy Spirit, and it would be good for us to know why in our hearts not just our minds. The lies that ensnare those possessed by the spirit of this age are seen in respect to the love of God that is honest towards them. But this is just one level. There is a covenantal/contractual level with God which supersedes our subjective struggling and God's desire to show us mercy. God desires that we are all saved, but we have other plans... This is tragedy.
What the actual f*ck???
I am really sorry for the people in the churches of these "Christians", especially sorry for the wives. They do have some interesting points in here, but I got really furious when I came to the part when they talk about not apologing to you wife, just because you want to make up with her, although you didn't do anything wrong. Like, I understand their frustration when they have to do it, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it or that you marriage is built on a lie, as they claim.
The problem in relationships is that relationships are not logical. Some people are more emotional then others. And simply by apologizing to them mean that you actually acknowledge that you hurt that person even though you didn't intent on doing so, and so the healing proces can begin.
But in general, calling empathy a "sin" is complete misunderstanding of the concept (even within the boundaries of their definition) and misinterpretation of the Bible. And as I see it, they just call it sin, because it is emotional, which only shows that these guys don't understand emotions biblically. This is not Christianity, what you guys are presenting. This is exactly how the Pharisees argued and what Jesus actually criticized.
They have a political agenda
They’re quick to say a woman might lie about abuse, and never consider that a husband may be so obscenely inobservant of his own assholeness that he might believe he’s done nothing wrong and yet has been a complete jerk to his wife. Men who are abusers also are rarely ever thinking they have done anything wrong. So, yeah, empower those bastards hiding around in the pews of self-righteous theological orthodoxy to become more unbearably horrid to their wives/victims and children/victims. Ugh!
That divide between sympathy and empathy is plumb ludicrous and to say the latter is sin, downright preposterous.
Tell us how you really feel. Lol
Dead on. Best comment of all and more useful than the video.
Please explain.
@@grantarmbruster6591 In a nutshell:
In 24:44 they agree over a definition on empathy that makes it sound more like a pathological disturbance (and it can be!) than a crucial social tool. It's a frantic attempt to absolutize for the sake of discourse. By the way, he did something similar at 22:15 with "truth is a person".
@@Blackgrass1 I think that they explained that they want to define it as it's used not as the dictionary definition. And yes empathy is being used culturally in this way as a weapon against the church and it's believers. Just like redefining love or marriage or tolerance and acceptance.
Sympathy requires a person to take personal responsibility for their actions/choices while helping them navigate their pain to heal from it and move forward, or make restitution for it if they've hurt others.
Empathy absolves them of personal responsibility while validating their pain and keeping them shackled to it and making others the enemy.
Proverbs 18:13 "He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and a shame unto him" check out the facts before giving an answer.
Reacting is taking immediate offense.
Responding is considering what you want to do with the information/situation presented to you (weighing the pros and cons of your actions/response).
I’m curious how Doug Wilson would address this topic in light of Covid. I think this was recorded before the pandemic, but this topic seems extremely relevant in today’s times.
Religion is the work of man.
Theology is the work of God.
Rom 15:1 We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves.
Rom 15:2 Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.
Rom 15:3 For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.
Gal 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
Gal 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
Gal 6:3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
Gal 6:4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
Gal 6:5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
This discussion deceptively redefines empathy. These men are improperly defining “empathy” as “codependency.”
Properly defined, Empathy is: “The ability to feel someone else’s pain so that I am able to understand their experience and stand in their shoes.” Meanwhile, Codependency is: “An imbalanced and unhealthy relationship dynamic where one person enables another person's self-destructive behavior.”
The nefarious goal of conflating these ideas seems to be aimed at condemning as sinful any emotional connection in the work of compassion. Inevitably, this instruction will foster detached ministry personalties and breed austere self-righteousness.
*Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep*
Rom 12:15