By Jon Beaty
People are silencing voices they disagree with. It's an ancient practice, as old as Cain and Abel, echoing through history in various ways.
This phenomenon first found a modern resurgence on social media. Here, disagreement can be managed with a click—unfriend, unfollow, or block. Some internet platforms take it a step further by suspending or deleting accounts for sharing what's deemed false or harmful. It seems like a civil alternative to the brutal methods of the past.
In past eras, dissent led monarchs to send martyrs to the stake, the rack or the chopping block. Could it happen again?
It’s not unheard of for Christian martyrs to face a firing squad, a noose, or torture in nations where Christians are a minority. In nations with representative governments, the same evil spirit that led to bloody persecution in the past is the evil spirit moving today. These “enlightened” societies talk of legal limits and repercussions for speech that deviates from the accepted narrative, hinting at a future where words could lead to trials, and trials to prison or death.
In nations where freedom of speech once prevailed, the current trend has been aptly named "Cancel Culture" by those voices being silenced. By influencers claiming they want to protect the public from false narratives pushed by extremists, it’s called “Fact Checking” to curb misinformation.
History reveals that when people in power seize control over what information the public should hear the results are devastating. Whether it’s at home, in church, or in the public square, when one person or group shuts down another’s voice because it challenges their influence, views, or comfort, trust is broken, and relationships turn tense and contemptuous.
Revelation 14:12 describes the “patience of the saints” who embrace the three angels’ messages as those “who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” First, they love God with their whole being. Second, they love their neighbors (including enemies) as themselves.
How is love for others expressed in the way a follower of Jesus responds to speech they disagree with? Jesus relationship with Judas offers a good example.
"While [Judas] accepted the position of a minister of Christ, he did not bring himself under the divine molding. He felt that he could retain his own judgment and opinions, and he cultivated a disposition to criticize and accuse" (Ellen White, Desire of Ages, p. 716.4).
"[Judas] expressed doubts that confused the disciples. He introduced controversies and misleading sentiments, repeating the arguments urged by the scribes and Pharisees against the claims of Christ…He would introduce texts of Scripture that had no connection with the truths Christ was presenting. These texts, separated from their connection, perplexed the disciples,
and increased the discouragement that was constantly pressing upon them" (Ellen White, Desire of Ages, p. 719.2).
Judas had a toxic influence on the other disciples. Without silencing Judas, Jesus worked gently and patiently with him to lead him to repentance until Judas’ heart could no longer respond to Jesus’ love.
People in our sphere of influence will disagree with us at home, in church, in the places we work and go to school. If we gently and patiently walk alongside them in cooperation with the Holy Spirit, we may influence them to choose a different path than Judas. Could this in part be the patience of the saints attributed to Jesus’ end-times people?