Censorship, Coercion, and Losing the Argument

My parents were SBC missionaries. They took me to Brazil, where I grew up under a military dictatorship.

The military wanted to be the morality police. They imposed all sorts of laws to that end, but it did not effect any real change. Thousands of people were “disappeared,” silenced, exiled, left the country, or used coded speech to get around censorship laws.

With the fall of the dictatorship, what had been repressed exploded from the shadows.

Censorship does not change minds. Censorship does not address who people are. Censorship is not the way of Jesus.

Jesus did not deal with coercion. He allowed people to walk away.

When we resort to coercion, we are giving up on Jesus. It is our stating the way of Jesus is not enough. It says we don't trust him. It is like Peter pulling out a sword only to have Jesus call him down, telling him to put it away.

The way of Jesus is love.

It is setting an example.

It is demonstrating a better way.

Jesus’ reign is not of this world. It does not follow the paths of violence, fear, shame, and coercion.

Jesus’ concern was the welfare of all. He did not work for that by condemnation.

The religious community readily condemned people–the same people Jesus called friends.

Rather than stoop to condemnation, Jesus called people to an abundant life.

He taught that God is love.

He taught and was echoed saying that perfect love casts out fear.

Love displays respect for all.

Love allows people to walk away, to be wrong, to be different.

If we must resort to coercion, imposing our notions of what is right upon others, we have given up seeking to convince others. It is a short-term approach with no meaningful or lasting results. It is the approach of those who failed to make their point, who don’t trust Jesus, who grasp for straws.



— ©Copyright 2024, Christopher B. Harbin 



http://www.sermonsearch.com/contributors/104427/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Gospel Is Not Conservative

Image
Fundamentalism and conservativism are intrinsically averse to change. They are tied with conserving a status quo or moving back to a former era. They seek a safe place, a respite from change and transformation in the world around them. They are threatened by new ideas. They fear that the foundations on which they base their lives will be uprooted, causing their view of reality to fall apart. Growth depends on change. Life requires change. Survival depends on responding to changes in our environment. It requires new ideas. It requires new answers to old questions, as well as new questions with even newer answers. Jesus was by no means conservative. Jesus challenged the status quo. He fought against the groundwork of much of the religious thought around him, as well as the structures erected to empower its values. He called out those who benefited from social, religious, and political power. He demonstrated God's love, forgiveness and grace to those deemed una...
Read more

God in the Hands of Angry Sinners

Image
Jonathan Edwards’ famous sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” set a very poor direction for much of Christianity in the Colonies. His Puritan tradition presented God as an essentially angry deity whose desire was to condemn and torture. Grace or mercy existed simply in regard to how long God waited until calling down judgment upon sinners. That is not good news. It never was. Such is not the message of Jesus whom the gospel writers claim as good news. They echo the words of the celestial messengers declaring Jesus’ birth as good news of great joy to all peoples. Rather than look to Jesus as the clearest example of God’s identity, character, and will, that tradition surrounding Edwards began with an altogether different understanding that could not account for what Jesus actually taught. The Puritan perspective began with angry sinners and projected that upon God. Anger begins with fear, uncertainty, discomfort, and the inability to control one’s environment, ot...
Read more

Our Language of Choice

Image
I woke up this morning and decided to be a woman. I really like the idea of earning less money on the job. I like the idea of being passed over for promotions. I like that I will be held more accountable for the care of my home and familial responsibilities than any of the men around me. I’m looking forward to having my expertise ignored. I like that I’ll more likely be treated as a lower-level assistant to male colleagues than an actual colleague. It should be a good experience to live as more of a target for domestic violence and abuse. It will be so freeing to let go of my bodily autonomy and place it in the hands of men who will not understand me. With so many voices in our society shifting back toward the attitudes of 70 years ago, I am really looking forward to setting aside all trappings of male privilege and power to live as a second class citizen whose voice and opinions are essentially irrelevant. Just look at all the advantages women have! They get t...
Read more