Nuancers
August 7, 2023 at 4:06 PM 9 comments
I hope everyone is having a wonderful day today! There’s much to be thankful for in spite of all the growing woes in society. I wanted to talk briefly about a subject that is important to me and should be to all because of its connection with deception. I’m referring to people – whether they are political leaders or leaders within Christendom – who are very good at using nuance to persuade and/or dissuade, depending upon their aim.
We know too many politicians are well-versed in using words most of us understand to mean one thing, but they will use it to mean something slightly different. At first, their meaning may not seem obviously different from how we normally use and understand those words. Yet, if we parse their verbiage so to speak, we will come to understand that they mean something other than what is generally meant and accepted as having that specific meaning.
We also of course have those politicians and bureaucrats who simply lie with a straight face. I’m not talking about those individuals at all. Those of us who have and use critical thinking skills see the lies for what they are and reject them. For instance, when Mayorkas can look at people in Congress during a congressional hearing and point blank state that the USA’s southern border is “secure,” we understand him to be lying. He is not wordsmithing nor is he nuancing. He is simply outright lying.
Wordsmithing is generally accepted to be something along the lines of:
- A fluent and prolific writer, especially one who writes professionally.
- An expert on words. [1]
A wordsmith is so good at using language to communicate, that they often are able to paint a beautiful, honest picture that the hearer can actually see in their head. To read works written by wordsmiths is a joy. It is often uplifting and invites readers or listeners to come alongside and enjoy the story that is being told.
A person who nuances, on the other hand, is often someone who tries deftly to bend the normally accepted meaning of the words to their advantage. Nuancers often resort to subtle guilt cues in an effort to cause people to see error in the way they think. They may do this by even using themselves as an example, opining how difficult the journey has been but in Christ, it is a journey that must be pursued. The problem is that nuancers often have something to hide. That something is the actual truth.
Often, nuancers deal with subjects that, interestingly enough, are the same subjects that the Left often rallies around, except we wouldn’t necessarily claim that these nuancers in the pulpits are “Leftists,” would we? They’re just getting us to think and consider, right?
White supremacy is a hot topic these days. While the Left attacks anyone – normally white people and especially white males – outright without holding back, the nuancer in the pulpit will use a much softer approach so as not to outright offend. So, “Racial Reconciliation” is a huge subject within parts of Christendom. Of course, the need for reconciliation is based on the erroneous idea that all white people are inherently racist and must unlearn their racism.
Many in the pulpits who teach on this subject, will often do so in terms that are not necessarily meant to ridicule or attack parishioners, but are said in a way that makes people think they need to “admit” their own feelings of racial superiority, confess it, accept God’s forgiveness and begin working with people of color to set things right. Rather than attack or directly guilt people into changing, these thought leaders choose to persuade congregations via much more subtle expressions. The use of “racial reconciliation,” for instance, is very soft, yet it ultimately means the same thing as “white supremacy” except you don’t picture the Left’s KKK burning crosses in people’s yards or lynching blacks and Republicans a few generations ago. Instead, in your mind, you envision people of color and whites coming together to “reconcile” over the differences in race. Wouldn’t Jesus want that? Of course, if it actually was the truth about white people. It’s not.
My question has always been and remains, who decides when racial reconciliation has been met and satisfied? Who is the person who gets to say, “Okay, things are normalized and good now!” Where is this sort of thing in the Bible? If I’ve personally offended a specific person of color, yes, I have an obligation to do what I can to right that wrong. That is Scriptural (Matthew 18). However, the idea that because I’m white, I am automatically a white supremacist standing above people of color is patently absurd and an obscene lie.
But again, the many people who stand in pulpits today who speak glowingly of what needs to be done to achieve “racial reconciliation” are nuancers. They twist meanings, they use soft guilt cues, and they attempt to tear down one culture by elevating another above it. This can apply not only to race but also to gender, even though the Bible is very clear about the specific roles that men and women play in life.
I’ve listened to many nuancers. I’m amazed at how many people stand in awe of these people. In the end, nuancers twist words toward a different meaning than what has normally been accepted as true. The Free Dictionary defines nuancing as having “…subtle shades of meaning, feeling, or tone.” [2]
Not all nuance is wrong, but when nuancing words leads to deceptive practices, we have a problem. I believe this is one reason Jesus talked about speaking plainly to people. Matthew 5:37 highlights this point and I believe Jesus meant several things in that specific address to people. He meant we should not mince words but to say either “yes” or “no” when it came to making promises. The Pharisees were masters at the art of nuancing. They’d say one thing but then excuse themselves later stating what they meant was something else. For instance, they’d make a vow to do or give something, then when it was time to collect, they’d explain it away. Their “yes” became a “no” through the art of nuancing, which for the Pharisee, was sinful because they essentially went back on their vow.
But I also believe Jesus was stating that in the course of our conversations, we should be honest and forthright. We shouldn’t try to hide our intentions but should instead be straightforward. The context of what Jesus was saying in His Sermon on the Mount is seen in Matthew 5:33-37.
33 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ 34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36 Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. 37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.
Notice His very last phrase here, “For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.” Really? Interesting. Have you ever watched a congressional hearing when a person is asked a question and they often respond by not even answering the original question, while trying to give the impression that they did answer it? It’s evil. It’s a lie, subterfuge and an attempt to deceive.
Brothers and sisters, we were warned by Jesus a few thousand years ago that there would be many deceivers in the last days. Since we are in the last days, we have seen and continue to see this warning come true. One of the more sinister ways of trying to deceive people in churches these days is not by someone claiming from the pulpit that they are God, but by using nuancing to change meanings of words, or at least cause people listening to start thinking and then wondering and then questioning things they’ve always seen as one way, but now, maybe it means something else.
Remember, Satan always nuances. It’s what he does. He started off that way in Genesis 3 and he continues it. Nuancing causes people to question what they’ve always understood to be true and it is usually done so subtly. Once they begin questioning it, there’s a good chance they’ll reject what they’ve known to be true and accept what is being presented solely because it may sound reasonable.
I’ve deliberately not used any specific person in this article. I could have but I’d rather not and allow readers to look critically at people they may be following, reading or listening to and ask if those people are nuancers. If they are, there’s a good chance they are slipping in lies that sound like truth.
This world is on edge. It is hurtling toward judgment and because of that we can clearly see the way the enemy of our souls is shaping thought and dialogue throughout global society. We need to understand what is happening and resist it. By resist it, I mean don’t fall for it and keep going. Live your life. Do the things you’ve always done. Don’t fear what the enemy is attempting. Turn instead to a greater dependence on God, who will reward you with greater insight and wisdom to face life.
[1] https://www.wordnik.com/words/wordsmith
[2] https://www.thefreedictionary.com/nuancing
Entry filed under: Atheism and religion, christianity, Demonic.
9 Comments Add your own
Leave a comment
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
StudyGrowKnow 
1.
Maranatha Today | August 9, 2023 at 2:08 PM
Good article…deceit comes in many forms…it’s being pushed at a rate never seen in the history of mankind and everyone is being caught in the crosshairs!
I have never used the word “nuance” before so this has really given me understanding of how it’s being used in this way. Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
2.
modres | August 9, 2023 at 2:51 PM
Thanks Maranatha. Amazing the subtlety isn’t it?
LikeLike
3.
Lynn Holzinger | August 9, 2023 at 9:54 AM
I agree with what you’re saying. And sometimes I can pick nuance out quite easily but other times, I find myself analyzing everything said. A year ago, we moved to a different church. Both churches teach the gospel. Our old church was Word and Spirit with a heavy focus on the Spirit and our new church is Calvinist. I struggle with both doctrines and see nuance or maybe it’s presuppositions I see. My question is, how does one know if their understanding of the Scripture is the plain teaching? I try to research both sides of an argument and pray I will know the truth. How is nuance different from presuppositions?
LikeLiked by 1 person
4.
modres | August 9, 2023 at 10:21 AM
To answer your last question first, nuancers and those who nuance do so in a deliberate attempt to deceive the hearers. They use words as a mask to hide true meaning if God’s Word.
People with presuppositions usually base their belief on the whole of God’s Word, even though they may end up being wrong at points.
Calvin had a complete system as it were to interpret Scripture that falls under the acronym TULIP – Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace & Perseverance of the Saints.
Scholars have debated these ideas for centuries and ultimately each believer needs to decide what the Bible actually teaches.
With respect to nuancers, it appears to me that their main goal is to deceive and one of the red flags for me is when the area they are discussing is within the area of a social gospel. So often these nuancers will teach, write and reflect on things like racial reconciliation, critical race theory, women as pastors, homosexuality being okay, etc.
It’s one thing to discuss and even debate biblical doctrine. It’s healthy and the discussion itself can promote grace among believers with different perspectives. However, the growing emphasis on the social gospel within Christendom demeans God and His Word. It promotes ideas that are often antithetical to His Word and deceived listeners by adding something to God’s Gospel or twisting it in some way to make it say something it doesn’t say.
The belief – no matter how softly it’s portrayed be expositors – that all whites are racist, as a for instance, is opposed to God’s Word. It’s abhorrent but it’s more and more being taught in evangelical circles.
Another red flag for me is when supposed Christian leaders receive accolades from devout Leftists. There’s something wrong and should serve to warn people to avoid that particular teacher. Whether it’s Tim Keller, Andy Stanley, Matt Chandler, Russell Moore, Beth Moore and a literal host of others, they should be avoided because much of what they teach is diametrically opposed to God’s Word and EVERYTHING they teach is based on FEELINGS, which powers the social gospel.
No person who has ever lived (like Calvin, Luther et al), has ever been 100% correct about everything in His Word. Beyond this, there have been many that have taught and do teach doctrine that is expressly opposed to God’s Word. This group is fairly easy to spot as we come to know God’s Word.
The nuancers however, are not so obvious in their intentional error. The are deliberate in trying to obfuscate God’s truth with the subtlety of their lies, just as Satan and his messengers do (whether spirit beings or people in this physical realm). They are more difficult to see for what they are – deceivers – because of how subtle they can be, but once you begin to see the telltale signs of their deceptive verbiage it starts to jump out at you and you cannot unsee it.
Here’s an example or two without naming the person quoted:
“The gospel is not just the A-B-C’s but the A-Z of Christianity. At first glance, that statement appears to be truly profound. A close look at it tells us that the “A-B-C’s” of Christianity have the exact same meaning as “the A-Z of Christianity.” There’s virtually no difference, but imagine people hearing that and going, “Oooh…ahhh, so deep and profound. No, ABC’s of something imply an all-inclusive end to it, just like “A-Z.”
“The irony of the gospel is that the only way to be worthy of it is to admit that you’re completely unworthy of it.” Here’s another one that ultimately means nothing or the same thing. The person quoted starts off with a wrong notion – that we can be worthy of it, then notes that we are not. It is simply another comment designed to make listeners go, “Wow, this guy is DEEP!” when in reality, he’s not deep at all, but superficially attempting to make a statement regarding Christianity that is already apparent in itself, yet he manages to contradict himself.
These types of statements remind me of the Sphinx from the movie, “Mystery Men,” where the character, the Sphinx was always issuing trite sayings. The superheros hearing him would go gaga over everything he said, except Mr. Furious who immediately saw through the charade.
Nuancers are almost always deceivers and it doesn’t matter if they are in the secular world as motivational speakers or within Christendom’s pulpits as preachers. The goal is to actually puff themselves up with their clouded verbiage.
LikeLike
5.
lynn5982 | August 9, 2023 at 11:46 AM
I think I see what you’re saying. So, Tim Keller, Andy Stanley, Beth Moore, etc. are intentionally deceiving? I wouldn’t have come to that conclusion. I would have said they are sincere in what they teach, even if sincerely in error. I have a book by Tim Keller, The Reason for God, which I find to be sound (no social gospel). And some of Beth Moore’s older Bible studies seemed biblical though without looking at them again, I don’t know if there were signs. Her story always played on people’s emotions. And I know she moved into more of a social gospel.
Joyce Meyer is another one I used to listen to and found helpful but now don’t because of her WOF teaching. However, you’re saying that Charismatic (Word and Spirit) and Calvinistic doctrines don’t fall under nuance because there is no intention to deceive and they have been debated for years. They also have different presuppositions which lead them to believe they have it right.
Though I thought Matt Chandler was a Word and Spirit church because he came to speak at our old church once. I didn’t realize he was social gospel. I think he’s also a New Calvinist. And Sam Storms, who I find very fascinating, even though I disagree with him on many issues. He came because he is a continuist and spoke on all Christians having the gift of healing whenever God decided to give it to them in the moment. He’s also a New Calvinist but I don’t think he’s social gospel.
I know you came out of a Charismatic background and have written on this blog about their error. I have also read your book, Deception in the Church. It was very helpful when I was trying to understand the direction my church at the time had gone.
I am so glad you have decided to keep writing…and on all kinds of topics. You introduce things I have not thought about and help me to think through and ask questions about my assumptions and beliefs about others.
Am I still misunderstanding anything you’re saying? I admit, I’m still a bit confused when trying to determine nuance (intentional deceit) in specific individuals.
LikeLike
6.
modres | August 17, 2023 at 11:45 AM
I believe they’ve gotten to the point where deception is part of what they’re selling. Beth Moore used to be very good, very Scriptural, but then starting going off on a specific tangent. I think she has now come to the point where her own deception pushes her to the extremes she finds herself in. Tim Keller – not so sure, but I do know he has made some deceptive statements. Not sure if it is because he’s deceived or because he tends toward wokeness. Andy Stanley? He seems to be purposefully moving away from authentic Christianity to wokeness. I half expect him to come out as bisexual soon (half kidding).
I have another article on nuance in the works which I hope to publish soon.
I have NO idea why I didn’t see your comments until today. I’m sorry about not getting this approved and responded to earlier. My apologies.
LikeLike
7.
Jack Morrow | August 7, 2023 at 6:26 PM
I’ll mention a specific person. Tim Keller comes to mind; for several years I’ve been referring to him as “The Great Nuancer.” The apostle Paul, on the other hand, used “great plainness of speech.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
8.
modres | August 7, 2023 at 6:26 PM
Yes, I’ve heard of him👍🏼😎
LikeLike
9.
modres | August 7, 2023 at 8:59 PM
I was in a hurry before Jack, but yes, Paul spoke plainly. So did Jesus unless He was teaching via a parable. Like Keller, there are too many “great nuancers” today who sway unthinking people because of their nuanced verbiage. It’s really a sad problem for Christendom today.
LikeLike