The comment is made that it’s possible to “please a neighbor” but “to his injury and to your own also”; in real scenarios (friendships, church relationships, online engagement), what are examples of “pleasing” that actually harms edification, and how would you recognize the difference?
Another way to ask: Can you think of times you “please” someone (in friendships, church, or online) but it actually hurts them spiritually? How can you tell the difference between kindness that helps and kindness that harms?
Direct Answer
The transcript’s main distinction is that pleasing must be “for his good to his edification”; any pleasing that feels kind or agreeable but results in spiritual injury fails Paul’s standard.
Support from Transcript:
Paul’s qualifier is central: “Let each of us please his neighbor for his good to his edification.”
The comment (as quoted) warns: “He does not say merely to please your neighbor… it is very possible to please a neighbor, but to his injury and to your own also.”
David Bercot ties pleasing to the Golden Rule: “Whatever you desire for men to do to you, you shall also do to them.”
But self-pleasing is the problem: “Since all of us like to please ourselves,” we must aim beyond feelings.
The goal is building up, not avoiding discomfort—edification is the test.
Christ is the model of costly “good,” not comfort: He “did not please Himself.”
Discussion Follow-ups
In your life, what “peacekeeping” behaviors might actually be avoidance that blocks growth? How could you measure whether your words/actions are producing edification rather than momentary approval?
