Does Matt Harrell Use Fear Of Damnation To Promote Morality?

To further provide evidence of the unethicality of using fear of damnation to promote morality, Matt Harrell presented the three means by which ethics of communication are judged. The three means are the communicator’s intent, the nature of the means employed, and the accompanying circumstances (Johannesen, 2008). These three factors either point to ethical human rationality or show evidence of unwise, unethical behavior. Matt said that he believed the issue at hand violated the first criteria, the communicator’s intent (Johannesen, 2008). I too believe that whoever is communicating and portraying hell and damnation to scare people into behaving morally could very well have a bad intent. In addition, I also believe that some people are trying

The external source is Louis Pojman’s, “Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong, found in the bibliography section in our “Ethics in Human Communication”, textbook by Johannesen. Pojman discusses the Domains of Ethical Assessment, a standard used to decide whether a certain behavior is right or wrong (Pojman, 2006). The four domains are Action, Consequences, Character and Motive (Pojman, 2006). Action is what the individual does, whether it is optional or obligatory. Immanuel Kant presented that two kinds of commands for actions exist. They are hypothetical and categorical (Pojman, 2006). Hypothetical is, if you want X, do Y to get X. For example, if you want to escape hell and damnation, behave morally. Categorical commands are universally rational, that people typically know, for example, “never break your promise.” A Consequence, the next domain, brings forth utilitarianism; choose the action that will most likely have the best consequence and will make everyone happy (Pojman, 2006). Character, the third, is being virtuous, honorable, and overall good as much as one can. Aristotle believes establishing virtuous character is the key to developing consistently right actions from an individual (Pojmam, 2006). Thus, if a preacher behaves morally and honorable themselves in the way that they share The Gospel, that will create consistent and moral actions

It is unethical according to the Human Rational Capacity that Matt introduced, Franklyn Haiman’s perspective, The Bible, the Three Means that Communication Ethics is judged by, Pojman’s Domains of Ethical Assessment, and Kant’s view in his Categorical Imperative. Using hellfire, brimstone, and damnation in order to get people to behave morally is unethical. The message of The Gospel and the sin in each person’s life should not be pointed out by someone yelling at them in a demeaning and fearful way on the street corner or from the pulpit. Rather, it should be done so with kindness that reveals the true character of Jesus. When Jesus was on earth, He invested in and spent time with sinners; He did not stand and alarm people by threatening them with damnation. Rather, He spoke with truth saturated in love and grace. This is what the preacher on the corner, the pulpit, and all should model. This is ethical, this is just, and this is love. This is The Message that should be shouted with joy from the rooftops, not screamed from the street