Daniel Seabaugh

Is No-Contact a Biblical Response to Toxic Relationships?

Published by

Daniel Seabaugh

on

Is No-Contact a Biblical Response to Toxic Relationships?

I seem to meet more and more Christians who have no-contact relationships with members of their family or people they once considered close friends. Some grievance or wound—something that has caused deep hurt or emotional turmoil—has led the offended to want nothing to do with the offender. But is no contact a biblical response in such situations?

In most cases, I don’t think so.

It’s a sad reality that people hurt others in devastating, relationship-altering ways. This is particularly difficult when the offense comes from members of our family—people we hope will stand by our side when challenges surface or represent us in ways that are honoring and unifying.

The truth is that even the best families experience bitterness, offenses, and relational fallout at times. Yet, in the household of God, we’re told to love one another (1 Peter 4:8; Romans 12:10). Love looks like laying our lives down for the good of others (John 15:13). It looks like forgiveness. That’s much easier said than done, of course. Words and actions cut deep. They have lasting effects.

In many cases, the things that lead to no-contact relationships happened years ago, maybe even decades ago. When faults are discovered, whether through counseling or honest conversations with others, many people, even Christian people, cut relational ties. I think this is unhelpful and unbiblical.

Now, to be clear, there are times when measures should be taken to keep a healthy distance from those who have wounded us or may do so, particularly when vulnerable people are involved, or the abuse is physical in nature. Distance is wise in such situations and may look like avoiding physical contact. But I don’t believe communication should be cut off completely. There are ways to keep communication open (consider text messaging or emails)—ways that promote peace and forgiveness, even if reconciliation or physical contact isn’t possible or advisable.

Why do I think no-contact relationships are unbiblical?

To begin with, I can’t think of any relationships Jesus had that can be defined as no-contact. Healthy distance? Maybe. But Jesus was so close to people that he was killed by those who disagreed with him on some important issues. He didn’t hide from them or block their number.

“Well, I’m not Jesus,” you might say. While I appreciate the sentiment, I don’t think Christians are let off the hook. As followers of Jesus, we’re called to be like him. We should do the things Jesus would do if he were us. Our call is one of self-denial, cross-bearing, and living with a generous, others-oriented posture. Not being negligent or reckless with our needs personally or emotionally but possessing a hearty dose of “it’s not about me.” This posture is probably the hardest thing to do because, if we’re honest, we’d love to see the other person change. But we can’t change other people. We can only address our own heart, and that’s enough work for a lifetime.

What if, in our difficult relationships, we pursued kindness and humility instead of the cold shoulder and arrogance? What if we lived as people of grace and truth?

Indeed, we have all received grace upon grace from his fullness, for the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

—John 1:16-17 (CSB)

The Bible says that God’s kindness leads to repentance (Romans 2:4). Thank goodness! For if Jesus had a no-contact relationship with us, we’d be eternally doomed. Additionally, kindness is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22). Avoiding people or blocking them is the opposite posture of Jesus.

Justice matters. At the heart of every no-contact relationship, I think, is the desire for justice. That’s not a bad thing at all. In fact, we serve a God of justice. But we’re not the arbiters of it. He is. Take heart. Because of the cross, no one gets away with anything. Justice will be done by the God who is faithful and just.

We must trust that God will properly put all things to right. We must, for the sake of a person’s soul and their eternal destiny, not close ourselves off from offering grace, truth, and kindness. We must, for the sake of our joy, sanity, and life in Christ, not believe our days can be lived without any reference to God’s will. It shouldn’t. Truly, life is all about Jesus, not our self-focused attempts to avoid others or do our own thing, relationally or otherwise.

Here’s the main idea: Jesus didn’t quit on us. Let’s not quit on other people. Even when we must maintain a healthy distance, let’s seek forgiveness and never, ever forget the costly price God paid to reconcile us to himself.

And be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving one another, just as God also forgave you in Christ.

—Ephesians‬ ‭4‬:‭32‬ ‭(CSB)‬‬

13 responses to “Is No-Contact a Biblical Response to Toxic Relationships?”

  1. koalacroissantpluto34767 Avatar
    koalacroissantpluto34767

    Hey Daniel!! Amazing timing…..our Living Flame session on Saturday was on Forgiveness and that happens to be my Lenten focus and topic for sermon series since I am not doing weekly Lenten midweek service. I am going to share the recording from Saturday with you and the handouts as you might want to use them in some way….love you and see you Sunday! I am also using Sacred Fire!! Thanks so much!! Deb “Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit,* which is the word of God*. And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep praying for all the saints.” Ephesians 6:17-18

    Christ Evangelical Church 33 S Ellis Cape Girardeau, MO 63703 Office: 573-335-5611

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. TT Avatar
    TT

    2 Timothy 3:2-5, 7 AMP
    [2] For people will be lovers of self [narcissistic, self-focused], lovers of money [impelled by greed], boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy and profane, [3] [and they will be] unloving [devoid of natural human affection, calloused and inhumane], irreconcilable, malicious gossips, devoid of self-control [intemperate, immoral], brutal, haters of good, [4] traitors, reckless, conceited, lovers of [sensual] pleasure rather than lovers of God, [5] holding to a form of [outward] godliness (religion), although they have denied its power [for their conduct nullifies their claim of faith]. Avoid such people and keep far away from them.
    [7] always learning and listening to anybody who will teach them, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Karen Wilkinson Avatar
    Karen Wilkinson

    Pastor Seabaugh,

    While I appreciate your desire to think biblically regarding difficult relationships, I have some concerns with your conclusions. I’m hoping you’ll be open to hearing a different perspective. If the word “toxic” were not included in the title of your article, I would have been able to agree with many of your statements. In cases where the sin issue in the relationship happened once or twice, then many of your points are valid and the Scriptures quoted could be applied. However, in a toxic relationship, this is not the case. When I looked up a definition for “toxic relationship,” here is what I found.

    ”A toxic relationship is one that consistently undermines your sense of wellbeing, happiness, and, at times, safety. Occasional disagreements or conflicts are normal in any relationship, but a continual pattern of emotional harm, disrespect, and manipulation can lead to deterioration in mental and emotional health.” In addition, a toxic relationship may also be defined as abusive and destructive. 

    On the subject of justice, would you consider the following verses? Prov. 31:8-9 states, Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy. Prov. 21:3 To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice. Isaiah 1:17 See that justice is done. Defend widows and orphans and help those in need. Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

    Yes, the Bible clearly teaches we are to love one another according to 1 Peter 4:8, Romans 12:10, and John 15:13, among others. But should love always look like covering over others’ sins and laying down our lives for them? What if someone has done this repeatedly with no repentance on their part? Shouldn’t we then apply verses such as Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Peter 3:12? Is it more loving to allow someone to continue to sin against you, or to lovingly call that person to repentance? Or what if a man shows your wife or daughter inappropriate attention? Would you encourage her to communicate with him, or would you advise her to set a “no contact” boundary for her protection?

    I see that you concede that distance is OK when physical abuse has been present. Have you considered the long-term damaging effects of verbal, spiritual, and emotional abuse? Victims of domestic abuse frequently state the verbal and emotional abuse is often more harmful than the physical abuse, which tends to heal quicker and not require as much long-term management as emotional damage. Opening the door to email and/or text communications is most often counter-productive, allowing the toxic person to continue to vilify, harass, demean, and disrespect the victim. How does this honor Christ – or the recipient, who is also made in God’s image?

    While it is true that Jesus willingly laid down His life for us, He did not do so until it was the right time. Before that, Jesus did not always answer the questions people asked Him (Matthew 27:14). When He was in danger (prior to the cross), He left the area to avoid being harmed (Matthew 12:15). 

    Paul also taught that no contact is sometimes necessary. Consider 2 Thess. 3:14 “If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with them, that he may be ashamed. Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.” 

    And what about the godless people Paul talks about in 2 Tim. 3:1-9? Verse 5 states, “…Avoid such people.” What is this, if not a no-contact principle? This does not mean we have given up on people, but that we are concerned enough to show them that their destructive sin patterns have consequences and until/unless they are able to communicate with respect, we are no longer willing to be the recipients of their blame-shifting, name-calling, and accusations. Enabling others’ to sin against us is damaging to us and to them, as well.

    We cannot assume that someone who establishes no-contact is doing so out of arrogance or unforgiveness. Rather, it is likely that they have repeatedly attempted to establish healthy communication, but without success. As believers, we can – and should – be people who forgive. However, forgiveness and restoration are two entirely separate issues. While forgiveness does not require repentance from the other party, there can be no true relationship without it. Sometimes a healthy relationship is simply not possible (Rom. 12:18) and “living peaceably with all” may, by necessity, mean “no-contact.”

    Yes, thankfully, God’s kindness leads to repentance – but not always. 2 Tim. 2:25 states, “…God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth.” Isaiah 26:10 states, “But when grace is shown to the wicked, they do not learn righteousness; even in a land of uprightness they go on doing evil and do not regard the majesty of the LORD.”

    My hope is to be among those who are more eager to show grace and compassion to the victim of a perpetrator’s willful unrepentant sin than to the perpetrator who shows no intention of repentance based on their actions. I greatly appreciate your heart for showing love and kindness to all and it is my hope that you will carefully consider these additional Scriptures and how they apply to toxic relationships.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Virginia Avatar
      Virginia

      Thank you so much for this Karen! I know my decision to go no contact with my mother was right, but I feel so guilty and ashamed for protecting myself that I keep going back to the internet for articles like this to know if I dis the right thing. And it hit me when I read your response…I’m seeking my answers from the wrong source! Only God can provide solice! Thank you for that reminder & God bless ❤️

      Like

      Reply
      1. Karen Wilkinson Avatar
        Karen Wilkinson

        thank you for your encouragement, Virginia. I’m so glad my research was helpful to you.

        I’m sorry you found it necessary to make such a difficult and painful decision regarding your mother. I’m praying for you.

        Like

    2. Trigger Avatar
      Trigger

      With respect, I disagree. We are not told to repent to our daughters any more than we are not to pray to them either. And provide the lowest form of trauma you are calling abuse. Is that what you would accept on judgement day. Which side are you hunting souls for, the Bible is not a buffet you choose what to accept. If you want forgiveness, you must show grace. And twisting the first commandment that comes with a promise is risky business.

      Like

      Reply
  4. Karen Wilkinson Avatar
    Karen Wilkinson

    Pastor Seabaugh,

    While I appreciate your desire to think biblically regarding difficult relationships, I have some concerns with your conclusions. I’m hoping you’ll be open to hearing a different perspective. If the word “toxic” were not included in the title of your article, I would have been able to agree with many of your statements. In cases where the sin issue in the relationship happened once or twice, then many of your points are valid and the Scriptures quoted could be applied. However, in a toxic relationship, this is not the case. When I looked up a definition for “toxic relationship,” here is what I found.

    ”A toxic relationship is one that consistently undermines your sense of wellbeing, happiness, and, at times, safety. Occasional disagreements or conflicts are normal in any relationship, but a continual pattern of emotional harm, disrespect, and manipulation can lead to deterioration in mental and emotional health.” In addition, a toxic relationship may also be defined as abusive and destructive. 

    On the subject of justice, would you consider the following verses? Prov. 31:8-9 states, Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy. Prov. 21:3 To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice. Isaiah 1:17 See that justice is done. Defend widows and orphans and help those in need. Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

    Yes, the Bible clearly teaches we are to love one another according to 1 Peter 4:8, Romans 12:10, and John 15:13, among others. But should love always look like covering over others’ sins and laying down our lives for them? What if someone has done this repeatedly with no repentance on their part? Shouldn’t we then apply verses such as Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Peter 3:12? Is it more loving to allow someone to continue to sin against you, or to lovingly call that person to repentance? Or what if a man shows your wife or daughter inappropriate attention? Would you encourage her to communicate with him, or would you advise her to set a “no contact” boundary for her protection?

    I see that you concede that distance is OK when physical abuse has been present. Have you considered the long-term damaging effects of verbal, spiritual, and emotional abuse? Victims of domestic abuse frequently state the verbal and emotional abuse is often more harmful than the physical abuse, which tends to heal quicker and not require as much long-term management as emotional damage. Opening the door to email and/or text communications is most often counter-productive, allowing the toxic person to continue to vilify, harass, demean, and disrespect the victim. How does this honor Christ – or the recipient, who is also made in God’s image?

    While it is true that Jesus willingly laid down His life for us, He did not do so until it was the right time. Before that, Jesus did not always answer the questions people asked Him (Matthew 27:14). When He was in danger (prior to the cross), He left the area to avoid being harmed (Matthew 12:15). 

    Paul also taught that no contact is sometimes necessary. Consider 2 Thess. 3:14 “If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with them, that he may be ashamed. Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.” 

    And what about the godless people Paul talks about in 2 Tim. 3:1-9? Verse 5 states, “…Avoid such people.” What is this, if not a no-contact principle? This does not mean we have given up on people, but that we are concerned enough to show them that their destructive sin patterns have consequences and until/unless they are able to communicate with respect, we are no longer willing to be the recipients of their blame-shifting, name-calling, and accusations. Enabling others’ to sin against us is damaging to us and to them, as well.

    We cannot assume that someone who establishes no-contact is doing so out of arrogance or unforgiveness. Rather, it is likely that they have repeatedly attempted to establish healthy communication, but without success. As believers, we can – and should – be people who forgive. However, forgiveness and restoration are two entirely separate issues. While forgiveness does not require repentance from the other party, there can be no true relationship without it. Sometimes a healthy relationship is simply not possible (Rom. 12:18) and “living peaceably with all” may, by necessity, mean “no-contact.”

    Yes, thankfully, God’s kindness leads to repentance – but not always. 2 Tim. 2:25 states, “…God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth.” Isaiah 26:10 states, “But when grace is shown to the wicked, they do not learn righteousness; even in a land of uprightness they go on doing evil and do not regard the majesty of the LORD.”

    My hope is to be among those who are more eager to show grace and compassion to the victim of a perpetrator’s willful unrepentant sin than to the perpetrator who shows no intention of repentance based on their actions. I greatly appreciate your heart for showing love and kindness to all and it is my hope that you will carefully consider these additional Scriptures and how they apply to toxic relationships.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Daniel Seabaugh Avatar
      Daniel Seabaugh

      Hey, Karen!

      Thank you for engaging with my post and providing a thoughtful response. There’s a lot there. I’m not sure I can adequately answer it all.

      To begin, I could be wrong about my conclusions. This topic is so complex. I probably should’ve written a long-form article and not merely a blog post. Perhaps I’ll revisit it in the future.

      I certainly don’t condone covering over one’s sin. I’m saddened that you heard me say that. I do very much condone offering grace to people. For we all need it.

      Many of the people in my world who have no-contact relationships have them, I think, for reasons that aren’t great—mainly, unforgiveness or not wanting to work toward healing or reconciliation for various reasons. I know reconciliation isn’t always possible. But when I consider the heart of Christ, I see him moving toward us in our brokenness, not running away or distancing himself.

      I don’t think Jesus would want a person to stay in an abusive relationship indefinitely. But I do think forgiveness is a must. It’s not easy, for sure. But it’s also not optional. And grace for ourselves and others would go a long way in a world that’s already hyper-divisive.

      Thanks again for your response. I think you make some legitimate points that every Christian should consider.

      Like

      Reply
  5. earresponsible1 Avatar
    earresponsible1

    Pastor Seabaugh –

    Thank you for taking the time to thoughtfully consider my post. I appreciate your kind and gracious response.

    Karen

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  6. Laurie Avatar
    Laurie

    Greetings, Mr. Seabaugh, I wish I had known that I had biblical grounds to separate from my dad years ago. It wasn’t until I was in my 40s that I learned the concepts outlined by Karen above. I wish I had known and not kept putting myself in my dad’s path of destruction, believing that he was my sanctification opportunity. Thank you very much for considering both Karen’s words and understanding that these situations are complex. I long for us to hear more about the complexities from the pulpit rather than generalities which keep people in the path of destruction. I wrote this a few weeks ago after my shared birthday with my dad. It seems fitting here. God bless, Laurie Tims

    It was his birthday too.On the day he turned 73, I turned 46.27 years apart.I was on the phone with my sister.She had forgotten.I brought it uphalf asking for advice,half asking permission.I wanted to say,”Happy birthday, Dad.I am praying for you.I hope you have a nice day.And, I want to remain no-contact.”Would she pass it along?I could barely utter the request.Hard NO. She won’t be a middle person.That’s okay. I understand.Goodness—the pastors always talk about anger and pride fueling estrangement,the hardness of heart.That’s not why I can’t unblock him.It’s his ongoing, harmful patterns.I can’t read his texts with blessings canceled by curses in a single messagewithout feeling betrayal.If I reach out, I’ve betrayed myselfand confused him.He hasn’t changed.It’s plain to see in his messages to my sister,which I read from time to time.His messages are a steady confirmationof the difficult decision to go no-contact.It wasn’t our first nor forty-second choice, but necessary.I want him to know he was thought of,loved,but it would not be a mercy.It wouldn’t be a mercy to stir that emotionin him.And I’d have to block himagain.So I cried.Not lonely myself,living a full life,but knowing he was lonely.My sister let me grieve,though she does not suffer this much.She tells meagainmy heart is NOT hard.Her heart isn’t hard,but it’s also not woundedin the same way as mine is.He has exhaustedher sympathy.She cares,but it doesn’t stick to her like it does to mefor days, weeks,especially if I get my hopes up thatthis time he might get it andstay in the place of real blessing,goodness,kindness—but no.The snarling returns.The mocking.The scoffing.The scripture twisting.And my hope cuts me deeper.So, I don’t send the birthday message.Instead I say a prayerfor the one who is so stuckI cannot free him.I pray to the One who can free himon the other side of heaven.In this we have our sure and certain hope.We imagine our dad in a perfect heavenly body,an embrace of love, and free of the weight of his coercion and condemnation.

    Laurie Tims, 3/2/2025

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. Daniel Seabaugh Avatar
      Daniel Seabaugh

      Thank you, Laurie. I’m praying for you as you navigate this painful and complex relationship with your dad. I love what you wrote. I’m also thinking, in response to your comment about God being able to free your dad in heaven, that he could free him this side of heaven, as well. I’m praying that would happen. Grace and peace.

      Like

      Reply
  7. Hollee Bailey Avatar
    Hollee Bailey

    I don’t like the idea of chronically using “no contact” as a way to manage relationships either. Cancel Culture eventually gets cancelled. However, showing love does not mean granting open access to abusive or manipulative behavior. Forgiveness and reconciliation are two different things. This is why we have prisons. We can forgive those in prison and still put boundaries on how much contact we have with them. God is all knowing and we are not. He knows the hearts of everyone and knows exactly where they are at. We must make temporary righteous judgments and radically accept where people are right now by their behavior towards us. We do them a disservice if we don’t.

    If letting others chronically hurt us, hurts them more than us, we are enabling them because they never have to face any consequences. Communication limits don’t have to last forever either. It can be until the offending party shows genuine change in behavior. In addition, embodied contact is much better than text and e-mail because empathy starts with the eyes. Jesus’s compassion always began with seeing the plight of man. When we see with our own eyes, the impact of what we say and do, we are much more careful with our words and actions.

    If we are to follow His example. God is very merciful and has limitless love, but also has limits on his patience for unrighteous behavior.

    Genesis 6:3

    “And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years,”

    Here is the Bible’s 3 strikes you’re out law. I think it is a good rule of thumb.

    Matt 18

    15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

    17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

    Sounds like setting limits to me!

    Like

    Reply
    1. Daniel Seabaugh Avatar
      Daniel Seabaugh

      Hollee,

      Thanks for the response.

      I’m all for setting limits. I think limits are healthy and wise. Some people describe them as boundaries, which, if defined correctly, are super helpful. A boundary is meant to keep people inside our relational circle, not outside of it. Of course, that doesn’t mean everyone needs to be our best, closest friend. But it does mean the relationship isn’t ended as if the person were dead. That’s considered no-contact. And I don’t believe the verse you quote is promoting no-contact. After all, how are Christians to treat heathens and publicans? With grace so that they may come to know the love of God through Christ Jesus. That’s far from “you’re dead to me.”

      Some of what you say is absolutely true, such as forgiveness and reconciliation not being the same thing. Also, God certainly knows the hearts of every person. One thing I would caution against, however, is assuming we have “righteous judgment.” Ultimately, such thinking puts us in the position of God. He’s the only one who truly has righteous judgement.

      Romans 12:17-19 says, “Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”

      A couple things we see there. Our job is to promote peace. We’re not responsible for others’ behavior. Also, judgment belongs to God. We don’t have to manufacture consequences for people’s sin. Sin, and the fruit of it, is its own consequence. And everyone will give an account to God. No one gets away with anything.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a reply to Karen Wilkinson Cancel reply

Hi,

I’m Daniel

I’m a husband, father, pastor, and author. I pray the material here draws you closer to God’s heart. Thanks for reading!

Recent posts