In light of rhetorical approaches to interpersonal communication, this paper compares the ethics behind the "rhetorical sensitivity" concept of Roderick Hart and Don Burks and the ethics of Christian communication. Outlined are Hart and Burks' exposition of the characteristics of the rhetorically sensitive person which are then compared to the characteristics of Jesus and Paul as they are presented in the Bible. The main characteristic of rhetorical sensitivity, as it differs from Christian interpersonal values, is then described: the interpersonal rhetor analyzes the situation and selects from his/her repertoire of behaviors those that promise to be maximally adaptive. The paper argues that Hart and Burks would find the Christian perspective too restrictive for optimally effective rhetorical interaction and would allow internal inconsistency in rhetorical discourse in order to achieve desired ends. In comparison, the paper argues that while the Christian ethical system easily accommodates the notion of rhetorical adaptation, it is a deontological, rather than a teleological, approach that explicitly limits both means and ends. Finally, the paper describes the rules-based ethic of Christianity as driven by a concern for the Other, thus clarifying its essential distinction from Hart and Burks' situation ethic, which is driven by a concern for the complexity of the Other. (SRT)