Backbiting - H5643 - From H5641; a cover (in a good or a bad, a literal or a figurative sense).
- H5641 - A primitive root; to hide (by covering), literally or figuratively.
The word 'backbiting' is used only once. The Hebrew word 5643 has 36 matches in 36 verses.
Secret, secretly, protection, covert, covering, disguiseth, secret place, hiding place, and privily.
Hiding place - makes me think of Corrie Ten Boom, who knew, really knew what it meant to be hidden in God.
Psa 32:7 Thou art my hiding place; thou shalt preserve me from trouble; thou shalt compass me about with songs of deliverance. Selah.
Psa 119:114 Thou art my hiding place and my shield: I hope in thy word.
How does an angry countenance drive away a backbiting tongue?
Gill's commentary:
"so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue; drives it away, discourages and silences it. When a man puts on a stern countenance, a frowning and angry look, on such who bring him slanderous reports and idle tales of their neighbours, and reproach and backbite them, it checks them, and puts a stop to their practices; whereas listening to them, and especially with an air of pleasure, encourages them in them; were there not so many that take pleasure in hearing those talebearers and backbiters, were they more roughly dealt with, as the blustering north wind does with the rain, there would not be so much of this evil practised."
Have you ever given someone the 'eye' - the look which says, don't EVEN go there! A frown which discourages?
This makes me think of communication - a lot of it is electronic now days and there is always the possibility of what you've said being misconstrued because the tone, inflection, body language is missing. Words said in jest, without the twinkle in the eye may be perceived as harsh, whereas a reproof or reprimand may not be taken seriously.
I've been doing a little research on communication, made up of - words, tone/inflection, body language. There are variables out there percentage wise about how much each plays into what's being said/received. Also, factor in how well you do or don't know the person you're communicating with and that adds another layer.
I found it interesting that deaf people are considered to be superior in interpreting body language. I distinctly remember taking a class with a woman whose daughter was deaf and she mentioned an incidence. She was correcting her daughter, who wasn't taking her seriously, because her facial expression did not match what was being said/signed.
How often has something been said in 'jest' but with the undercurrent of what was said was really meant more harshly? Or someone says something and you're offended, and the response is, I was only joking. Can't you take a joke?
So how do we measure up to this admonishment?
Eph 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
Gill's commentary:
"so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue; drives it away, discourages and silences it. When a man puts on a stern countenance, a frowning and angry look, on such who bring him slanderous reports and idle tales of their neighbours, and reproach and backbite them, it checks them, and puts a stop to their practices; whereas listening to them, and especially with an air of pleasure, encourages them in them; were there not so many that take pleasure in hearing those talebearers and backbiters, were they more roughly dealt with, as the blustering north wind does with the rain, there would not be so much of this evil practised."
Have you ever given someone the 'eye' - the look which says, don't EVEN go there! A frown which discourages?
This makes me think of communication - a lot of it is electronic now days and there is always the possibility of what you've said being misconstrued because the tone, inflection, body language is missing. Words said in jest, without the twinkle in the eye may be perceived as harsh, whereas a reproof or reprimand may not be taken seriously.
I've been doing a little research on communication, made up of - words, tone/inflection, body language. There are variables out there percentage wise about how much each plays into what's being said/received. Also, factor in how well you do or don't know the person you're communicating with and that adds another layer.
I found it interesting that deaf people are considered to be superior in interpreting body language. I distinctly remember taking a class with a woman whose daughter was deaf and she mentioned an incidence. She was correcting her daughter, who wasn't taking her seriously, because her facial expression did not match what was being said/signed.
How often has something been said in 'jest' but with the undercurrent of what was said was really meant more harshly? Or someone says something and you're offended, and the response is, I was only joking. Can't you take a joke?
So how do we measure up to this admonishment?
Eph 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
No comments:
Post a Comment