Boundaries - Relationship Improver or Destroyer?

[quintessentialramble]

I've heard this term come up quite a bit in Christian circles; it is clearly utilized more by females especially; though a man can certainly have boundaries.
I was angry at first, because boundaries were placed on me that I felt were not biblical (I was not allowed to bible studies because pastors family found me annoying). However, after a lot of research, I did give some room to the teaching, in particular when it regarded serious immorality.
But, more often than not, "boundaries" are just another avenue that either directly or indirectly leads to the end of relationships; which I have always seen as divisions within the church. It seems to me that females in particular need "emotional" boundaries," that quite frankly don't make sense to me most of the time. If a stranger is insulting you to your face constantly...ok, I get it...but where I don't understand boundaries is people you've had established relationships with you who are generally not all that bad...perhaps you find them annoying; but why don't we just have an honest discussion about whats bothering us, rather than just jump straight to the boundaries?

 

[com7fy8]

I was angry at first, because boundaries were placed on me that I felt were not biblical (I was not allowed to bible studies because pastors family found me annoying).

Ok, so you have given us a specific example.

And I do not know how you were relating at the Bible study; so I don't know.

Possibly, they were indeed taking you the wrong way.

Also, for all I know, it is possible that you were being ungodly and inconsiderate, maybe by distracting attention away from prayer and the scriptures and how they could benefit from God's word. I have seen how people can call a lot of attention to themselves, in a group. And I myself have had a lot of run-ins because of doing this. So, I can speak for myself, if not for you.

Possibly, it was a combination of both their not understanding you the way they should, but also you were somehow robbing attention which you were not due in a group.

In Biblical relating we are >

"submitting to one another in the fear of God." (Ephesians 5:21)

So, in our relating we need to not be bossing ourselves over others, but stay with prayerful and mutual submission. Others must not boss themselves over you, but you must not boss yourself over them with your dictating of how they have to accept you and give you attention and see you.

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

Arguing and complaining can be ways of seeking to lord ourselves over others, having an entitlement attitude for how we might want to use other people. But, instead, be God's example which can win people to find out how to love.

"with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love," (Ephesians 4:2)

Any of us can be wrong; so we always need to have "longsuffering" ready Otherwise, when someone we appreciate turns out to have some fault, we could get totally bent out of shape, feel betrayed, instead of having "longsuffering" ready and forgiveness ready, and be there for them as a good example to help them.

But I have been one to call for a lot of attention. I had an entitlement attitude that everyone should be giving me attention and praising how great a teacher and counselor I am. So, when people rejected this, I got upset and downcast and I would leave without being told or asked to leave a church or group.

And then it came to me how I was not loving the way Jesus wants. My criticizing and looking down on others was not loving them. And our Apostle Paul says >

"And I will very gladly spend and be spent for your souls; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I am loved." (2 Corinthians 12:15)

So, even if they were not loving me, clearly I was not at all loving them "the more abundantly".

So, in a way it didn't matter if they were wrong, because I was not being the example of love and humility which I needed to be. So, yes even if I did have the teaching gift, God was using it to teach me how to love, not how only to talk Bible smart!

So, in case people's boundaries are wrong, your good example can reach past boundaries to help people find out how to love. Yes, there are plenty of people who do not know how to love; so what do you do with this? Here is what our Apostle Paul says to do "first of all" >

1 Timothy 2:1-4

 

[quintessentialramble]

Ok, so you have given us a specific example.

And I do not know how you were relating at the Bible study; so I don't know.

Possibly, they were indeed taking you the wrong way.

Also, for all I know, it is possible that you were being ungodly and inconsiderate, maybe by distracting attention away from prayer and the scriptures and how they could benefit from God's word. I have seen how people can call a lot of attention to themselves, in a group. And I myself have had a lot of run-ins because of doing this. So, I can speak for myself, if not for you.

Possibly, it was a combination of both their not understanding you the way they should, but also you were somehow robbing attention which you were not due in a group.

In Biblical relating we are >

"submitting to one another in the fear of God." (Ephesians 5:21)

So, in our relating we need to not be bossing ourselves over others, but stay with prayerful and mutual submission. Others must not boss themselves over you, but you must not boss yourself over them with your dictating of how they have to accept you and give you attention and see you.

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

Arguing and complaining can be ways of seeking to lord ourselves over others, having an entitlement attitude for how we might want to use other people. But, instead, be God's example which can win people to find out how to love.

"with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love," (Ephesians 4:2)

Any of us can be wrong; so we always need to have "longsuffering" ready Otherwise, when someone we appreciate turns out to have some fault, we could get totally bent out of shape, feel betrayed, instead of having "longsuffering" ready and forgiveness ready, and be there for them as a good example to help them.

But I have been one to call for a lot of attention. I had an entitlement attitude that everyone should be giving me attention and praising how great a teacher and counselor I am. So, when people rejected this, I got upset and downcast and I would leave without being told or asked to leave a church or group.

And then it came to me how I was not loving the way Jesus wants. My criticizing and looking down on others was not loving them. And our Apostle Paul says >

"And I will very gladly spend and be spent for your souls; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I am loved." (2 Corinthians 12:15)

So, even if they were not loving me, clearly I was not at all loving them "the more abundantly".

So, in a way it didn't matter if they were wrong, because I was not being the example of love and humility which I needed to be. So, yes even if I did have the teaching gift, God was using it to teach me how to love, not how only to talk Bible smart!

So, in case people's boundaries are wrong, your good example can reach past boundaries to help people find out how to love. Yes, there are plenty of people who do not know how to love; so what do you do with this? Here is what our Apostle Paul says to do "first of all" >

1 Timothy 2:1-4

I am quite confident I was not disrupting the group as a whole. I am generally a quiet person.
While not 100% certain this seemed to be an issue with either some or all of the pastor's family personally finding my annoying, and distancing as a result.

 

[bèlla]

Sharing our displeasure or discomfort with the other person doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll change. They must view the behavior from your perspective and value the relationship enough to repair what’s wrong.

We all have challenges and quirks. It’s more important to choose companions who are genuinely supportive than seek the company of those who aren’t.

~Bella

 

[paul1149]

Life is about discernment. Boundaries are a way to implement discernment. They could be hard boundaries when a relationship is toxic, or it could be a more benign distancing. Jesus had an inner circle of three disciples that apparently He felt could receive close instruction better.

The letter of 1Cor. is strong on boundaries, because the church in that cosmopolitan city was immersed in a culture of immorality and dissipation. So they had to "come out from among them, and touch not the unclean thing", and they had to beware of being "unequally yoked".

That is what boundaries are about. Can boundaries be misused? Most definitely. Human society often degrades into mindless cliques, the innies and the outies, based not on spiritual principles, but on carnal desires for acceptance and comfort no matter the cost to truth and spirituality. But boundaries rightly motivated are a powerful and necessary tool in our arsenal of holiness. And yes, they do cause the demise of some relationships. If that was done for the right reasons then that too is a good thing; if not, it is another sad example of fallen human behavior.

 

[com7fy8]

While not 100% certain this seemed to be an issue with either some or all of the pastor's family personally finding my annoying, and distancing as a result.

Well, in case it is because someone does not know how to love . . . the person is having a problem. And so, you would not be the problem.

In my case, I know I can relate the wrong way, and this can help someone to have a problem with me. But, even so, if the person does not know how to love and relate with me . . . that is not my fault And I need to pray to do better, and care about that person in prayer. And have hope for him or her and pray to be ready to relate better with that person, and/or whomever God trusts me to share with.

I would say, in my case, that there are things people can see about me. So, they have natural boundaries with me, about how they are going to trust me or not. And they should not trust me, except how they find it is wise.

You should have boundaries about if and how you trust each person. The ones who are genuine good examples of Christ and how to love should have boundaries in you, which keep them with you And we need to have inner boundaries about whom we trust and how.

 

[Olmhinlu]

(The writing below consists of my thoughts, opinions etc. You should seek God, and consult with your Pastor; ultimately you are responsible for how you process it.)

I think it depends on the usage. There is a book that's somewhat famous in Christian circles called 'Boundaries' that, from my reading, advocated personal responsibility - the "boundaries" were essentially around your life, to determine what you can and can't control, and are and aren't responsible for.

I personally think this is wise; like the famous prayer: "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference".

I've also heard "boundaries" used a euphemism for measures taken to avoid premarital sex, which are often sensible, although I balk if those measures are then treated as though they were laws in and of themselves. For example, it may be prudent for a Church to have a standard that a single couple ought not to be alone together at night. If they turn around and think of that activity itself as a sin, I wonder if they've become Pharisees.

Finally, I've seen people [i.e. mostly, if not exclusively, women] use the term "boundaries" as a catch-all phrase to separate themselves from anything that they personally don't like, often using other buzzwords like "toxic", highlighting that "forgiveness doesn't mean you have to let them back in your life" etc. It could potentially be a buzzword used to put a spiritual veneer on general selfishness.

In all things seek God; the Bible doesn't lie or err.

 

[quintessentialramble]

(The writing below consists of my thoughts, opinions etc. You should seek God, and consult with your Pastor; ultimately you are responsible for how you process it.)

I think it depends on the usage. There is a book that's somewhat famous in Christian circles called 'Boundaries' that, from my reading, advocated personal responsibility - the "boundaries" were essentially around your life, to determine what you can and can't control, and are and aren't responsible for.

I personally think this is wise; like the famous prayer: "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference".

I've also heard "boundaries" used a euphemism for measures taken to avoid premarital sex, which are often sensible, although I balk if those measures are then treated as though they were laws in and of themselves. For example, it may be prudent for a Church to have a standard that a single couple ought not to be alone together at night. If they turn around and think of that activity itself as a sin, I wonder if they've become Pharisees.

Finally, I've seen people [i.e. mostly, if not exclusively, women] use the term "boundaries" as a catch-all phrase to separate themselves from anything that they personally don't like, often using other buzzwords like "toxic", highlighting that "forgiveness doesn't mean you have to let them back in your life" etc. It could potentially be a buzzword used to put a spiritual veneer on general selfishness.

In all things seek God; the Bible doesn't lie or err.

Yes I am quite familiar with the Boundaries book and am quite confident it is garbage: if we are indeed talking about the one written by Henry Cloud--it is plagiarized from a secular mental health source. Anne Katherine M.D. wrote a book called Boundaries in 1991...Cloud wrote his in '92 and its the same except bible added.
While there may be some valuable information; it is evidently clear that Cloud's intentions are to make money off uninformed Christians; as his catch all solution is counseling; usually from him or those in his circles. Do not listen to him. He is the scum of everything.

 

[Olmhinlu]

I'm not familiar with your plagiarism allegation, nor am I privy to his intentions. I would agree that there is some valuable information in there.

If his intention was to make money off uninformed Christians, a good question would be why was there such a gap* in the marketplace of Christian Contemporary "Literature" to exploit in the first place.

God loves a cheerful giver who does not give under compulsion; if a person doesn't know when they have the right to say 'no' how is their 'yes' free? Regardless of your opinion, it's a discussion worth having in my thinking.

With any secular writing I think the best approach is to eat the meat and spit out the bones, and I agree with the unspoken sentiment that modern psychology & psychiatry is fraught with many, many bones, a lot of junk, and little meat.

*[Wild tangent: I think there's a similar gap with respect to writing on men's lust - "Every Man's Battle" & the "Conquer" series aren't answers, and the void will be filled one way or another, in my opinion.]

 

[quintessentialramble]

I'm not familiar with your plagiarism allegation, nor am I privy to his intentions. I would agree that there is some valuable information in there.

If his intention was to make money off uninformed Christians, a good question would be why was there such a gap* in the marketplace of Christian Contemporary "Literature" to exploit in the first place.

God loves a cheerful giver who does not give under compulsion; if a person doesn't know when they have the right to say 'no' how is their 'yes' free? Regardless of your opinion, it's a discussion worth having in my thinking.

With any secular writing I think the best approach is to eat the meat and spit out the bones, and I agree with the unspoken sentiment that modern psychology & psychiatry is fraught with many, many bones, a lot of junk, and little meat.

*[Wild tangent: I think there's a similar gap with respect to writing on men's lust - "Every Man's Battle" & the "Conquer" series aren't answers, and the void will be filled one way or another, in my opinion.]

In terms of counseling; the general ideologies of psychology are to create positive thinking about your shortcomings...this really isn't in tune with the Gospel of forgiveness and grace calling all men to repent of their sins. There is actually quite a lot of this nuance in Christianity; and while I can disagree with the theology, I can still understand how it may help those with mental health issues.
This is not what happens in reference to someone taking mental health resources, invoking the Bible, and then coercing people into funding his scheme. This is damaging to the mentally ill, it's damaging to the church, it's damaging to the professionals he plagiarizes, and it's all entirely to line his pockets.
Many Christians worship this man; and if you do a youtube search--you'll notice he has about 3-5 catchphrase buzzword go to sermons that he never deviates from.
This man is the scum of the earth.

 

[Olmhinlu]

I'm on board with your overarching depiction of lot of psychology, "self-help" as anti-Christian, but find it odd that you jump from describing him as a huckster to "the scum of the earth". Is there something personal going on there - maybe someone using "boundaries" as a pretext to treat you in a way you disagreed with?

 

[quintessentialramble]

well you can find my threads on here; it is true a pastor implementing his teaching led to my study of Cloud...but my study brought me to this discovery and I still maintain my position on him.

 

[Ronit]

Yes I am quite familiar with the Boundaries book and am quite confident it is garbage: if we are indeed talking about the one written by Henry Cloud--it is plagiarized from a secular mental health source. Anne Katherine M.D. wrote a book called Boundaries in 1991...Cloud wrote his in '92 and its the same except bible added.
While there may be some valuable information; it is evidently clear that Cloud's intentions are to make money off uninformed Christians; as his catch all solution is counseling; usually from him or those in his circles. Do not listen to him. He is the scum of everything.

Wow! I have that book. Wow! Interesting