This article has been edited and now appears in my Titan.
Frank Viola | Beyond Evangelical
Official Blog of Author & Speaker Frank Viola. Digging below the surface and moving beyond the shallows in today's Christianity.
On Suicide
Frank Viola | Beyond Evangelical
Official Blog of Author & Speaker Frank Viola. Digging below the surface and moving beyond the shallows in today's Christianity.
This article has been edited and now appears in my Titan.
The Ultimate Issue
Dominic Kelly used your views to highlight theological conflict by featuring a secondary comment (suicide isn’t unpardonable, though Kelly says some feel it is) when your primary point was how insensitive comments by so-called Christians at such times contravenes Christ’s core messages.
I found little in either piece to get worked up about. However, I did come away with a less troubling view of Christians committing suicide. I had thought suicide a nearly unforgivable sin based on the 6th commandment. However I realized that murder is taking a life other than your own. Suicide is not murder. And as can clearly be seen by anyone who looks with compassion on his brother or neighbor, it is often a result of unrelenting and intractable despair. Belief in and complete fidelity to Christ as Lord of life is only a solution for someone of sound mind. Sanity is a gift from God, and He can give it as well as take it away. Remember what happened to King Nebuchadnezzar when he found himself eating grass like a cow.
And if we have so little compassion on our brother’s suffering that we condemn him for his final act of desperation, we are the ones in danger of eternal punishment, not him. See Matthew 25:31-46.
Thanks for helping to shed much needed light on this issue.
Frank, Thank you for requesting comments. Seems two sperate issues get mixed up in this debate. Is suicide an unforgivable sin and how we respond to this tragic occurance. You do a great job of applying both scripture and grace in your article. I feel Opposing Views comes up short in its attempt to “sum” up your point by it’s quoting only your thoughts of granting people more grace. I felt you expressed clearly in your article a concern for the soul of those who commit suicide and that we clearly remember it’s our relationship with Christ that determines our eternal destiny
Hi Frank. The insensitive comments toward the Warren family at the end of your article l can barely fathom, and struggle to read. So l found myself launching into Opposing Views article sifting for compassion or a correct representation of Jesus Christ or yourself Frank. A damaged or troubled person would find hope in both articles. A Spirit filled Christ honouring follower would seek you Frank or anybody named for the O.V. article if they found that article first. Jesus is lifted up in both. For those trolling with agendas to attach, well l guess we can make the bible or any article say whichever we want. God Bless.
I thought your post was excellent, but felt Opposing Views used you to create an ‘opposing view’ that may or may not be yours. I don’t think they did you a terrible disservice, but it is clear they are focussed more on quantity than quality.
Clearly they had an end view in mind that was not yours. Maybe they only saw what they wanted to see.
I think the sentence that could be misconstrued starts with, “So as many Chrisitians continue to condemn the act of suicide…” The author used similar language to assert your opinion to finish the sentence, “…Viola says condemnation and criticism goes against the number one thing Jesus taught.” It could have been worded better because I can see where someone might get confused about your opinion, with which I agree.
There wasn’t much depth to the article anyway, nor any position really taken on the issue that I could tell.
Thanks Cherilyn. I think the point in the Opposing Views article is that suicide is not the unpardonable sin, that people don’t receive eternal life not because of suicide (or any sin), but because of rejecting Jesus, and that there should be compassion for the families.
On the other question I’ve gotten from some: I think I make pretty clear in my full article that suicide is a selfish act, therefore, wrong. However, every mortal has done things selfishly they later regretted, especially at times of intense pressure or when they weren’t thinking clearly. To my mind, suicide is no different in some cases on that particular score. That’s in my full article on the subject.
I believe they were twisting your meaning to show the point of view that people committing suicide are somehow covered and fine, while yours was about the compassion of those of us who are still living and how we treat those left behind. Good article from you, by the way. We need constant reminders to love others, if we aren’t listening to God’s Spirit. 🙂
I believe while they may not have quoted you accurately, the overall theme of both articles was agreeable and I myself am also in agreement. Too many people today claim to be Christians under the banner of simply believing in Jesus Christ, while the true definition of a Christian goes far deeper than that. We must be slow to condemn and quick to forgive and offer encouragement such as correctiom for edification but never condemnation. Jesus is the only judge and we are nowhere near qualified to judge others. We are to forgive, just as we have been forgiven.
Frank – I think Opposing Views did a pretty respectable job of passing along your thoughts on suicide. The idea of grace in those times of pain were clearly recommended.
I didn’t recognize some of their quotes they attributed to you. Did they interview you? Did they “cut and splice” from other blog articles that were unrelated to the Robin Williams’ suicide?
Regardless, I felt like they didn’t represent your blog and view. Your blog was intended to show how Christians should respond not just to suicide itself, but to the family members left to deal with their tragic loss.
Opposing Views article was very “light” in it’s direction.
It was a light interview. But I referenced the blog article in my answers and they had it in their possession and even linked to it. My concern is that it made my opinion on the subject *appear* as if I thought suicide was morally acceptable. Not sure if it did that or not.
I think they wanted to make a different point than you did, i.e., “suicide doesn’t automatically condemn one to hell” vs. “Christians can be really cruel to each other and as a result, undermine the testimony of Christ.” It doesn’t seem to me that they actually changed the meaning of the remarks they chose to use, though.
Thanks. My concern was that they were making my views out to suggest that suicide is morally fine.
I tend to agree with Vickie, in that they seemed to have a different focus in their article compared to your article. And that does mean that they haven’t represented your thoughts in their entirety. Hopefully people who are interested in reading more of your views would be clever enough to actually read your original post… however Opposing Views don’t seem to have linked to your actual article ‘A Jesus Response to Suicide’ but rather to a short one your wrote on ‘The Christian & Mental Illness: 3 Responses’. There are some links through the article to your newsfeed blog but they go to pages that can no longer be found which is unhelpful! So that is a shame as I think your blog post is much more in-depth and clear on the viewpoint being presented compared the Opposing Views article which feels a bit cut and paste and is less well-rounded or clear on the viewpoint they are trying to bring across…
No, they did not reflect your views accurately.
They made deductions from your words and created extensions aimed at fulfilling certain purposes.
Quotes from your words were not quotes; they were interpretations.
Finally, I clearly understood the point of your article but I did not get theirs.