In yesterday’s post I focused on the common practice of second-hand naysaying. I also mentioned something that serves as a the naysayer’s source book: the “anti-book”. This book (an example here) is a scrapbook of sorts that claims to be authoritative on all matters relating to the one(s) who have been issued “nay” status. It is seen as “the One Book to rule them all” and is used to surgically dissect current candidates for heresy.
Part 2 : Dealing with the “Anti-Book”
Here’s a rule of thumb when encountering such a book: if you haven’t heard of or read anything by half of the authors you’re reading about, STOP READING, PUT DOWN THE BOOK, and most certainly do not distribute the book to others with an encouragement to read it.
Reading this type of book can lead to the type of heresy hunting that causes us to reject biblical ideas because those we accuse of being heretics have adopted them. For an (unfortunately real-life) example: Rick Warren uses the word “reconciliation”, therefore reconciliation is part of the heretic agenda, and therefore we shouldn’t speak of it.
Some folks are so naively over-protective of their doctrine that they occasionally reject what they actually believe because it is taught by one they consider a heretic. This is usually evidence that the person is spending more time reading anti-books than the Good Book they claim to be protecting.
You Can’t Quote That…
Another attack mode is source assassination. In this practice, the truthfulness of a quote is judged not on its own merit, but on its source. This is done in an effort to expose the sin of association. Regardless of the length or content of the quote – it could be the most biblical statement this side of scripture – if the messenger is on the naysay list, the quote is rejected outright and you get closer to making the naysay list yourself.
The general idea here is to make you mindful of whom you quote, regardless of the content of the quote. You may get away with the quote if you leave it unattributed, but attributed to a certain name, it will be rejected simply on the basis of its source.
I once sent a very conservative friend a great quote about the mission of the church, which he wholeheartedly endorsed and agreed with. He was not pleased to learn shortly thereafter that the words were actually uttered by the newly minted Pope Benedict XVI.
As I remember it, he accused me of trickery, and I confess that he was half right.
Tomorrow: (click here to read)—>Rules of Engagement – what should you do with naysayed materials?
