"He's divisive." This is something I have heard about Charlie Kirk. Maybe that's a fair descriptor. I don't know. I was familiar with his work, but I'm not interested in dissecting it at this time. I'm not going to defend or lionize Kirk. What happened to him is disgusting and makes my heart break for his family and for our nation (people).
But this comment, "He's divisive," got me thinking.
I often hear this word used as a way to get people to ignore someone saying things they don't like or agree with—a way to quickly dismiss someone as a troublemaker.
Of course, there are people who are divisive for its own sake. We can probably all think of some people we know personally who have this malady. But when I hear people say "so-and-so is divisive" these days, what I hear is a passive person—someone who may have their head in the sand. If one speaks things that are not popular in the current culture, it is labeled divisive. As a Christian, a follower of the teachings of Jesus, what He said and taught are central for me. What the church has said, taught, and lived out over two thousand years is important to me—more than any political figure or person on social media, more than any position that has become acceptable in the last twenty years or so.
I think many people—even many Christians—are not familiar with Jesus’ teachings about this topic. So, let's look at some of the words of Jesus.
On being divisive
- Luke 12:51–53 "Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three."
- Matthew 10:34–36 "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
Jesus was so divisive that the governments of both Israel and Rome sought to kill Him—and succeeded. He claimed to be God. This was a direct threat to those in power. But is Jesus saying, Yeah, divide the people!? No, of course not. Let's look at more.
- Mark 3:24–25 "If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand."
- John 17:20–21 "My prayer is… that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you."
But more than this, Jesus was a radical.
- Matthew 5:44 "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you."
Furthermore, Jesus commanded His disciples to love one another.
- John 13:34–35 "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."
Is the church known for loving their brothers and sisters in Christ? In my experience, it’s a mixed bag. Today, it seems to me we could do better. We could show love and respect to those from different faith traditions than our own. We could seek to understand before being understood. We can and should talk about our points of disagreement, but we should do so in love. I believe the enemy has sought to divide the church along lines of disagreement. I have seen it my whole life: straw manning, mocking, and deriding Christians for being "wrong" or simply different from their own tradition. This is not the way of Jesus.
The church has also allowed politics to infect our lives. I truly believe many Christians are being discipled more by politics or the current culture than by their church and the teachings of Jesus. Jesus is the answer—not politics.
So, what are we to do? Retreat from debate and disagreement? No. Are we to seek to divide and make fools of those around us? I don't think so. Maybe this is helpful:
- Ephesians 4:15 "Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ."
- Colossians 4:6 "Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person."
- 1 Corinthians 13:1–2 Even if you speak with eloquence or deep knowledge, without love it amounts to nothing.
- 2 Timothy 2:24–25 The Lord’s servant should not be quarrelsome but kind, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting opponents with gentleness.
If you truly love your enemies, you want what is best for them. You do not wish them ill. You also do not wish them to stay in their current state—you want to win them over. If I hated someone, I would not naturally want to warn them of danger. But this is not the way of Jesus. The way of Jesus is to love them and pray for them. It is not to avoid conflict.
But do we always speak the truth in love? No, because we are human. We often fall short of Jesus’ example. It is not easy to be respectful to those who spit in your face and call you names. But you know what? This Christlike response changes hearts and minds. It is what is said to have convinced so many Romans to convert to Christianity when, at the time, it was considered a strange Jewish cult. It eventually led to Christianity spreading across an empire.
So what is my point? Speak the truth in love. There is a time and season for everything, and sometimes the truth can be spoken in hate and anger. This is not the way of Jesus. But keeping quiet isn’t the way of Jesus either. Our lives should reflect the love of Christ, and our words should be yes and amen. They should speak truth without fear. Only God can transform the hearts of men, but we are His hands and feet.
Text: “In the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.” Why It’s Controversial: This passage appears to endorse genocide, instructing the Israelites to exterminate entire populations, including men, women, and children, to secure the Promised Land. Critics argue it promotes ethnic cleansing and extreme violence, incompatible with modern ethics. Defenders often note the historical context of ancient warfare and the theological view of divine judgment on idolatrous nations, but the command’s brutality remains jarring.
Text: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” Why It’s Controversial: This verse prescribes the death penalty for homosexual acts, fueling debates about homophobia in religious texts. It has been used historically to justify discrimination and violence against LGBTQ individuals. Apologists argue it reflects the cultural norms of ancient Israel, meant to maintain ritual purity, and some modern interpretations downplay its applicability today, but its harshness is widely criticized.
Text: “Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” Why It’s Controversial: This verse, part of a lament about Babylonian captivity, expresses vengeful joy at the thought of killing Babylonian children. Its graphic imagery shocks modern readers, and critics see it as endorsing cruelty. Scholars contextualize it as an emotional outcry from oppressed Israelites, not a literal command, but the violent sentiment is deeply unsettling.
Text: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.” Why It’s Controversial: Attributed to Paul, this verse has been used to justify gender inequality in religious and social settings, promoting the subordination of women. Critics view it as misogynistic, clashing with modern values of equality. Some theologians argue it addressed specific cultural issues in the early church, like disruptive behavior, but its restrictive tone remains divisive.
Text: “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.” Why It’s Controversial: This passage appears to condone slavery and physical abuse, as long as the slave survives. It treats slaves as property, which critics find morally abhorrent and supportive of systemic oppression. Defenders note that the laws aimed to regulate, not endorse, slavery in a context where it was a societal norm, but the acceptance of such violence remains troubling.