Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Divine Mysteries: Exploring the Trinity, Evil, and Human Destiny  /  Lessons God Has Taught Me  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 5
His attorney illustration (the pond/fence dispute) and “90% of lawsuits settle” point to the idea that “usually there is truth on both sides” and “both sides have committed wrong.” How does that realism challenge the way Christians often tell conflict stories—with a hero/villain narrative—and what would repentance look like in how we recount disputes?
Another way to ask: He suggests most conflicts have wrong on both sides, not just a hero and a villain. How does that challenge the way Christians retell conflict, and what would it look like to repent in the way we tell our side?

Direct Answer Bercot’s realism challenges the tendency to tell conflict stories as if one side is pure and the other is evil; he says people often omit or shade facts even when they think they’re truthful. Repentance would look like telling disputes with humility—admitting what we left out, seeking the other side, and allowing that “the truth lies somewhere in the middle.”

Support from Transcript:

  • In his first case, it looked “open and shut,” but in deposition he heard “a totally opposite side,” where his client was “totally abusing his rights.”
  • He says most cases settle because “usually there is truth on both sides…both sides have committed wrong,” so they “work out some sort of agreement.”
  • He describes how extreme the differences can be: the other side’s account was “so different I’d sit there wondering, ‘Are we even talking about the same situation?’”
  • He says people aren’t always lying: they “think they’re telling the truth,” but they can’t see objectively.
  • He adds fallen dishonesty: we “shade things to fit our side” and “leave out details” that explain the other party.
Discussion Follow-ups When you tell a conflict story, what details make you look less innocent? What would change if you refused to speak about a dispute without also stating the strongest version of the other person’s perspective?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next