Duke University

In the past I have argued against using pressure and bullying to get others to either agree or to conform with a certain course of action (e.g. HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE).

I have seen this some variations of this tactic used against Christians recently, but it isn't always against Christians. Sadly, Christians also know how to do a little "arm-twisting" of their own. Enter Duke University and Franklin Graham.

Duke University in Durham, North Carolina recently accepted a plan to have a Muslim call to prayer come from the Duke Chapel bell tower. Some of the members of the Duke Muslim Students Association would chant the call from the bell tower each Friday at 1 p.m., starting on January 16th. The chant, which includes the words “Allahu Akbar” would be amplified across the campus to announce the call to prayer. There was a great backlash against this plan.

I think this was ill-advised, especially starting barely a week after terrorists in France forced their way into the offices of the periodical  Charlie Hebdo, shouting "Allahu Akbar" while killing 12 people. But I think the method used by Franklin Graham to kill the plan was also ill-advised, and crossed over the line from convincing free speech to bullying in submission. What was Graham's plan? Hit them where it hurts. He urged Duke alumni and other supporters to pull their funding and withhold their donations.* According to its web site, Duke is a private university that "maintains a historic affiliation with the United Methodist Church." As a private university, this kind of pressure is much more significant than for a public university. The university cited a "credible and serious security threat" as their primary reason for nixing they call to prayer from the bell tower. I have no further information on that, but it is likely that Graham's threat played a significant role. Muslim students will still pray as they have, but without the amplified call to prayer from the bell tower.

This private university had the right to agree to such a plan. Alumni and concerned citizens had the right to oppose it. How much better had they convinced them of the error of their ways with reasoned arguments than to push them to pursue a certain course? Have we decided that doesn't work, or whatever works is "reasonable"? When Christians such as Graham teach others how to use this tactic, it will be used against them when the shoe is on the other foot -- and when they are powerless to stop it.

Some links on the topic.
* Duke reverses decision to allow Muslim call to prayer
* Duke backs down, cancels Muslim call to prayer from chapel tower
* Security threat nixes Islamic prayer call from Duke Chapel 

* There may be a fine line between an individual choosing not to support Duke because of the Muslim call to prayer, and an organized boycott to not support Duke because of the Muslim call to prayer. But I believe there is a line. The first is an individual to pursuing a course of action consistent with his or her conscience, while the second is aimed at hurting (or at least threatening to hurt) in order to guarantee a certain course of action is followed.

Another example of LGBT bullying

* Thousands Sign Petition To Cancel TLC's '19 Kids And Counting' Over Stars' Anti-LGBT Sentiments

Huff Post reports on a petition to cancel '19 Kids And Counting'. According to the creator of the petition: "The Duggars have been using their fame to promote discrimination, hate, and fear-mongering against gays and transgendered people," Wissick wrote in a letter to TLC which was posted on the Change.org petition page. "You need to take a stand on the side of justice and cancel their show."

This illustrates the viewpoint intolerance of some of the LGBT lobby and its supporters. I wouldn't know anything about '19 Kids And Counting' if I didn't hear others talk about it. I have never watched it and have not desire to do so. I don't petition to cancel LGBT, socialist, porno or other shows whose viewpoints with which I don't agree. Such is bullying them off the networks, not winning by the triumph of truth. Why not speak what you believe -- and if you don't want to watch something, just don't watch it!!

Bandwagon Beliefs

Three days ago I wrote about bully theology. Today I want to speak of its cousin, Bandwagon Beliefs. Both relatives arise from the slum of what others think, though one is pressured upon you from the outside while the other pressures up from the inside.

"Jumping on the bandwagon" is well known in political discussion.  In our county, when the wheels began to fall off the old Democratic bandwagon, most politicians climbed off it and jumped on the Republican bandwagon that was whizzing by. A person or cause gains steam and everyone wants to be associated with him or it. The side is picked by who has the most followers or who is winning or expected to win. If a person, party or movement seems assured of success, folks want to climb on board. We don't want to be part of the losing team. We don't want to have egg on our faces. Like a snowball rolling downhill, the bandwagon gains size and strength as it sucks up what is in its path. Like a magnet, its mass appeal attracts many followers.

Our beliefs, philosophical and theological, may suffer under the adverse effects of the bandwagon syndrome. In "post-Christian America" it will quickly become apparent who has sincerely-held beliefs and who was riding the (old) bandwagon.* If there is no courage of convictions, whatever is popular or whatever is held by the majority will be the standard. Get on board, get out of the way, or get run over. The nature of the bandwagon -- and the nature of human nature -- is that most people get on board.

In Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children’s View, Robert Lopez says that the gay movement "is doing everything it can to make sure that nobody hears" stories like his. The greatest significance of Lopez's story is not whether homosexual marriage is right or wrong, but that pro-homosexual groups do not want his story to be told! This is bully theology, but it is also bandwagon belief. The old bandwagon of Christian theology that homosexuality is sinful is headed uphill and is losing steam (Yes, this was merely a "bandwagon belief" for many people rather than sincere conviction). The new bandwagon of legal homosexual marriage is perched at the top of the hill and ready to make its run for all it's worth. Get on board, get out of the way, or get run over.

One of the simplest, amoral examples of the power of the bandwagon can be seen the multitudes of "turn of the millennium" celebrations that were held on January 1, 2000 -- despite all the nerdy-types and us calendar clowns telling them otherwise. Some folks can cloud this issue with lots of smoke and noise, but there are few things even someone as simple as I can understand. You don't have to be an advanced mathematician or a millenniologist. Our calendar has no "zero" year (though some other calendars do). If you count from 1 to 10, you'll find ten is the last of the first ten numbers, not the first of the second ten numbers. If you count from 1 to 100, one hundred is the last of the first hundred numbers, not the first of the next hundred. If you count from 1 to 1000, one thousand is the last of the first thousand numbers, not the first of the next thousand. Under the Gregorian calendar the new millennium began on Monday, January 1, 2001. Nevertheless the vast majority of Americans celebrated its "occurrence" on Saturday, January 1, 2000. Really, it doesn't matter who is right or wrong to understand the point. Thousands upon thousands did not celebrate the coming of the new millennium because they knew when it started (or even cared). They celebrated it because everyone else was doing it -- the bandwagon effect.

When the majority of denominated Christianity rejects creationism, an historical Adam & Eve, the virgin birth of Christ, the blood atonement, a literal resurrection, and so forth, where will you be found? Will you still be standing on the Word of God, or will you be riding the bandwagon? Let's carefully look inside our minds and hearts and see what we see. Let's look inside the Bible. Are we following God or men? In matters of belief, let's reject the bandwagon and be like the Bereans -- search the scriptures to find out what things are so, what things are good, what things are right.

O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps. Jeremiah 10:23
...do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Galatians 1:10
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. Psalm 118:8

* This does not mean that no one on a bandwagon is sincere. It is just the nature of the bandwagon to pick up most all stragglers and make them riders.

Bully theology

A problem that the internet and interactive blogs amplify and exacerbate is what I have dubbed "bully theology". This is an effort to promote doctrine, make points and correct errors through peer pressure or "bullying" -- Let's all gang up on someone and twist the e-arm until he cries "uncle" rather than approach it with education from the Word of God and the effects of the Holy Spirit. We would do well to remember that “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”

Certain blogs, and particularly certain subjects, tend to draw out the bullies who try to beat their opponent into subjection. Sophistry is the method and the politically correct status quo often the informant. It is troubling when men who profess to be taught in the word of God do not draw upon the word of God to teach, exhort and rebuke. Rather we hear shouts to "drop this" or "shut up." “...give this garbage up and rid yourself of this kind of stupidity...Now just stop it. Put this godless, pseudo-religious, trashy way of thinking behind you and move on with your life.” Such an exhortation might have a place, if we can give biblical principles and/or chapter and verse to exhibit that it is godless, pseudo-religious, and trashy. And if we can, why don't we? 

Bully theology is the theology of Rome and others, and should have no place among Baptists. After the conversion of Constantine, force began to be used against "heretics" -- dissenting Christians. In the 8th century under Charlemagne its use had been solidified to force conversion to "Christianity". By 1300 it was common practice. The Baptist watchword is religious liberty with no brute force or legal means standing between any man and his god.

Forced theology is no better than forced conversions. Might does not make right. The truth shall make you free. "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." -- Romans 14:5b

A man convinced against his will

I have the proverb “a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still” written in the front of my Bible (have written it in all my Bibles for some thirty years or so). It is a reminder that beliefs should be adopted rather than coerced. When I was writing the "Bully Theology" post, I was reminded of a humorous story I've heard J. Vernon McGee tell on the radio. Though he was making a different point, I want to repeat his story.

"A mother sent her little boy to sit in a corner in his room. After awhile she heard a noise in the room, and she called to him, 'Willie, are you sitting down?' He said, 'Yes, I'm sitting down, but I'm standing up on the inside of me!'"