A link to the past! Also, to another blog. . . .
First things first. One, I totally agree that scare tactics and guilt-tripping are bad. They're usually mean, and overall, just harmful. Either it works and you've potentially damaged someone; or you just make people upset with you. Two, it's really, really, REALLY hard to get much context at all from a quote like that. I have no idea what the sermon was about, if the preacher even used strong/harsh words - honestly, we've got pretty much nothing but one person's take on one person's reaction.
And that take is worded very dramatically, which makes me question just how honest the whole thing is. Not that a boy didn't approach the writer with tears in his eyes and talking about his old school friends; more that I bet HE (and others who saw it) would relate it MUCH differently. I know people who are habitual exaggerators and this sounds a lot like that.
But putting all that aside, we'll get to the topic at hand. What is a warning? And what are scare tactics?
Is it using scare tactics to tell your child that if they put their fingers in the electrical socket that they will get hurt? Is it using scare tactics to tell them that if they touch the stove, they will get burnt? If they drink and drive they could kill someone and end up in prison for the next few decades? All those things, if they believe you, will scare them. But for what purpose?
There are things in the world that we ought to have a respectful fear of because it's healthy. The ocean is one. My uncle drowned in the ocean. The ocean can sweep you away. Fire is another. Having control of a vehicle. These are all things that are dangerous and require some kind of instruction. People aren't born knowing how to swim, how to handle fire, how to drive a car - they require teaching (or at least, experience).
So what's the difference? If fear is part of what keeps a child from touching the stove, how is it not classified as scare tactics? Well, parents usually don't tell their children not to touch the stove because they want the child to be afraid of the stove; it's because they don't want their child to get hurt. I don't want my daughter to burn herself, to drown, to kill someone with her car, etc. etc. I will warn her because there is danger, because I want her safe.
I think there are two major differences. One is the accuracy of the statement. Fire WILL hurt you. But a warning also has something else - a positive reason. People give warnings so that something bad doesn't happen. If you weren't worried about someone getting hurt, you probably wouldn't say anything about their dangerous activity.
Unless you had a more devious purpose in mind. Fear-mongering is exaggerated for the sadistic purpose of terrorizing people. For example, a warning about touching the stove might sound like this: "That's hot! Don't touch it. It will burn your hand and that will hurt a lot." Fear-mongering would sound like this (and I've heard things like this from parents): "If you touch the stove, your hand will start on fire and all your skin will melt right off! You'll be deformed for the rest of your life."
One is true; one is a gross exaggeration. (I know - I've touched a hot stove. I got a worse scar from my bunny.) One, the major purpose is protecting the child; the other, the major purpose is frightening the child. That fear-mongering goes on within Christianity is not something with which I would argue (although I've personally never heard it); but it's dangerous to assume because you don't believe in something (like Hell) that it can't hurt you.There are scores of people in prisons who didn't believe the warnings about driving drunk. They learned the hard way.
So did the pastor engage in fear-mongering? From that status, I think it's impossible to tell. Telling people that they are going to Hell can be a warning; it can also be scare tactics. THAT is why once Christians give the warning (all have sinned; sin requires Hell), we ought always to follow it up quickly with an offer of the Answer - Jesus saves. Fear-mongering would be preaching on an exaggerated description of Hell - or saying that everyone is going there and leaving it at that. There is no good that comes from either of those; the purpose is to simply frighten people. Everyone who believed it would live in terror and despair.
Quick aside: Some people are very sensitive and they will get very afraid from just a warning. That does not mean that warnings are bad. I had an irrational fear of lighting a match for a long time because my parents warned me not to play with fire; that doesn't mean that they were wrong for warning me.
The message of the Gospel is not one of fear or guilt. It's one of hope and the joy of reconciliation. But in order to be reconciled to someone, you have to be aware that there is a break in the relationship. In closing, why do you think that God tells us that we have sinned (Rm. 3:23) and that the wages of sin is death (Rm. 6:23)? It's a warning. He's not trying to just strike fear into us (there's a faster, easily way than using words); He's telling us what's coming if we don't change, if we don't trust Him. The Gospel is not that everyone is a sinner and on their way to Hell; the Good News is that Jesus SAVES us from our sin so we don't have to go to Hell.
No comments:
Post a Comment