My column, “Can Christianity Today and Chuck Colson Handle the Truth About MLK?” really struck home with some soft evangelicals. I threw a brick down a dark alley and hit someone who needed to be hit. I answered my critic thusly:
You really hit bottom when you suggested that fundamental Baptists, as a group, have “pride (and lust from the pride) has created a culture of sexual abuse, anxiety disorders, and a bunch of bible-beating no-knowers because they can’t understand what they are reading because pastors like you are filling their heads with nonsense and man-made doctrines.” You suggested I was a Bible beater or Bible thumper. Here, I must confess that I have, well, it’s difficult to admit but I have thumped my Bible a few times. Not often and not really hard, but I’m guilty. But what does that have to do with truth? Note that you did not offer any examples of “nonsense” or “man-made doctrines.”
You suggested that fundamental Baptists have a systemic problem of sexual abuse, etc., but surely you can’t be that uneducated, unfair, and unreasonable. But, then, maybe so. There is no question that we have our share of adulterers, pedophiles, thieves, and arrogant nuts in our group, but do you want to go tit for tat? I can do so if you want. I have publicly “called out” some of those offending preachers who were friends of mine! Have you ever done that with some of your New Evangelical friends who went astray?
New Evangelicals who only read Christianity Today border on heresy or at least a loosey goosey doctrine (and lifestyle), and they have their share of preachers with zipper trouble. I could start with the former head of the NAE and go on and on. If you were honest, you would admit that all groups have similar problems. Most of the problems would be solved if those men trusted Christ as Savior. They often preach a salvation to others that they have not themselves experienced. It is a tragedy that men, who call others to drink from the water of life, have never drunk themselves and have, instead, muddied the well.
You said that you have “gotten off [my] list a few times.” How many times? Once, twice, thrice, how many? I think maybe you are a little disingenuous if not dishonest. You mentioned that I should have a way for people to get off my list, and you are right. I have that option for my large Preachers List, but I thought that media sources such as yours would want to know the opinions of fundamental journalists like myself. I guess I was wrong. Evidently, you don’t want to hear truth from any source that might challenge your loosey-goosey theological position.
However, your diatribe was somewhat successful in that I will add an option for removal from the mailing list for my columns. There, you see, Fundamentalists can be corrected and move on up to a higher level. But, of course, we will never be able to reach the heights of leading New Evangelicals. But there is a price you will have to pay: You will no longer be privy to my lofty musings, religious ruminating, and soaring flights of purple prose, or my arguments, assumptions, afterthoughts, and appraisals of daily affairs. Too bad.
Moreover, you will not be permitted to read my already-finished columns dealing with Billy Graham (6), Nelson Mandela (4), the church-health care issue (2), Muslim columns (3), higher education series (4), Stupid Statements by Stupid People, Grandmother Sleeps with 900 Men, and my correction of a black liberal columnist for Cox Newspapers (4). I am saddened at your loss. You are really a loser.
As I think about your loss, I realize that you can access those columns by going to my blog! You can do it late at night when no one will ever know how you are playing with fire by reading the works of a Fundamentalist! Just punch in at the top of your computer screen the following: http://donboys.cstnews.com. Those are the magic letters that will open an incredible door of facts, faith, fun, and fellowship for you and no one will know about it! I don’t expect you to change your thinking but you will have some interesting nights of teeth gnashing and grinding.
You had the gall to write, “I tried my best to limit my response in a Godly and loving way but it is hard when you keep sending me such foolishness. I don’t believe it would have mattered if I said it softly and tenderly to you. It is called a harsh rebuke for a reason.” No, a “Godly and loving way” would have been for you to give me credit, as a Christian, for being sincere in writing a column that might help some uninformed people and to also point out error. Then you would have pointed out my mistakes, one by one, so that I would be forced to admit a sloppy job of research. Then you would have challenged me to face the fact of my honest mistakes, repent of those mistakes of carelessness, then print a retraction for libeling innocent men. Then, you and I would be friends for a lifetime. You chose not to do so because you could not do so.
But you did not do the Christian thing and try to help me. You did not point out my “foolishness.” You sent me a “harsh rebuke” because you looked into the mirror and saw a hypocrite who refuses to face the truth and do something about it. You are like many New Evangelicals who are guilt-ridden for repudiating their Fundamentalist background, education, and parents, while delighting in pointing out the warts, blemishes, and scars on fundamentalism.
You closed by asking if I am “really helping the Kingdom of God? Do you really think this strengthens people to ‘love’?” The issue goes back to, “Did I tell the truth?” If I did, then Christianity Today and Chuck Colson looking at the issue honestly would be forced to admit their error regarding King and admit the truth of my position. You see, the historical record is important. What people, especially Christians, believe is important. To permit people to believe that King was a dedicated Christian worthy of emulation would be dishonest, and could be detrimental and disastrous.
Sir Winston Churchill said, “Once in a while a man will stumble over the truth. But most will quickly jump up, brush himself off and hurry on as though he had seen nothing.” You didn’t even brush yourself off.
[Boys new eBook, Martin Luther King Jr.: Judged by His Character, Not His Color! Is now available for $3.99 at Amazon.com.]
Fact, Fraud or Faith?
by Don Boys, Ph.D.
Only an uninformed fanatic says that evolution or creation can be proved scientifically. Christians believe in creationism because we believe in the veracity of the Bible but we also have scientific evidence to support our position. In every debate I’ve had with evolutionary scientists, the arrogant, asinine accusation is made, “Well, evolution is scientific while creationism is religion.” Evolution is about as scientific as a voodoo rooster plucking ceremony in Haiti. Almost.