Scenario One
Butch was nearly yelling!
Butch and James were sitting in a coffee shop, sipping coffee, and talking about various aspects of theology and Bible interpretation. Both had the same basic background of church and fellowship, and each man was the senior pastor of a local church.
Everything was fine. They were having a nice discussion until James said something that Butch disagreed with. Soon Butch's voice had raised in volume, and he was sounding more like a preacher addressing a large group of people without a microphone than a man sitting in a coffee shop less than four feet away from his companion. Butch has perfected the "Art of a Loud Opinion."
In fact, others sitting nearby stopped what they were doing and looked over at Butch and James to see what the commotion was all about.
James had spent a decade or more in college and seminary culminating in a doctoral degree. Butch had a couple years of undergraduate college but dropped out of school to "go into ministry."
James is not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, but arguing loudly over a non-fundamental theological issue in a public place is not what he considers "the Gospel." So, rather than engage in Butch's level of attention-getting, loud debate, James simply smiled and appeared to acquiesce to Butch's position. Then, James changed the subject, and soon they were talking in a normal tone about something less volatile for Butch. But . . . Butch felt completely vindicated. James had backed down. Thus, James lost. Butch had won.
Scenario Two
James was lecturing in a public forum on a topic that he had written about for his Master's thesis. Butch and six men from his church came to listen to James's lecture.
At the end of the lecture, James opened the meeting to a question-and-answer time. After a few minutes of people asking James specific questions and James supplying the "inside" information (after all, this was his field), Butch rose to his feet and asked a question.
James knew that Butch was not asking the question for the sake of gaining information or knowledge. But, James graciously attempted to answered Butch's question anyway.
Before James was finished with his answer, Butch loudly interrupted and began to disagree with James.
Now, there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with a brother . . . but, Butch was not just disagreeing: Butch lacked a thorough knowledge of the topic. And what he lacked in knowledge, he appeared to make up in volume. Oh, he had read a book or two on the topic, and he had read various scriptures that he "collapsed" into a framework that made him comfortable enough to be able to quote a few verses, but in reality Butch really had not researched nor thought through this issue.
Soon, Butch's voice became louder and louder and James's explanations were drowned out by Butch's booming voice. Truly, Butch had mastered the "Art of a Loud Opinion."
Knowing that this was going absolutely nowhere and not wanting to engage in what would surely be nothing more than a shouting match, James gracefully bowed out of the "discussion," and went on to the next person. This, of course, left the impression in Butch's mind (and in the minds of his followers) that he had once again set James straight on yet another topic.
When Butch left the meeting that night, he was as puffed up as a peacock for having "beaten" James in this debate. Butch's six men would have followed him to the ends of the earth because he once again "proved" that he was right. No one, it seemed, could withstand Butch's deep spiritual, intellectual, and biblical understanding.
Scenario Three
Dr. Young, one of James's former professors of philosophical theology and New Testament Greek was in town to speak at the church that James pastored. James had selected a handful of people from his congregation that were deep thinkers and serious researchers to attend Dr. Young's lecture. James was very excited to have his favorite professor come to his church and lecture.
Butch found out about the lecture, called James, and invited himself. James gracefully extended the olive branch to Butch, and told him that he was welcome to attend Dr. Young's lecture. Butch arrived, with his six "merry men."
Dr. Young lectured on two points of the philosophical theory of meliorism:
(1) within the practical context of evangelism in the church, meliorism has clearly failed in light of the constant and increasing wars and inhumanity of man against his fellows; in essence, preach Christ for the rectification, and . . .
(2) theologically and Scripturally, in spite of the seeming inconsistencies of omni-benevolence and omnipotence, the resultant concept of meliorism, i.e., finite godism, in some so-called Christian quarters is flawed at its ontological base.
Butch--who didn't understand more than 10% of what he was hearing--would from time to time look at his men and roll his eyes and shake his head in both disgust and disapproval of Dr. Young's words. Butch's men hadn't a clue of what Dr. Young was lecturing about nor what "Pastor" Butch disagreed with, but they were content to believe that "Pastor" Butch was "on top of the issues." Certainly none of them wanted to "debate" Butch . . . after all, he'd never lost a debate yet.
After about 20 minutes of the question-and-answer period, Butch raised his hand, and when called on he did not ask Dr. Young a question; rather, straightaway, he said that he disagreed with Dr. Young on a particular point.
He touted his position, described how Dr. Young was wrong, and waited for his response. Dr. Young explained to Butch that what he just brought up had nothing whatsoever to do with the lecture he had just presented.
Butch rose to his feet and in that well-fed Art of a Loud Opinion argued with Dr. Young. At first Dr. Young, being a guest in James's church simply attempted to be diplomatic and gently explain once again that Butch's topic was not at issue in his lecture; and, furthermore, even though he had not lectured on it, he was willing to explain to Butch where Butch was wrong on this point should he desire. Butch's voice became very loud and he was nearly yelling his response to Dr. Young.
At this point, Dr. Young looked at James who was sitting very close by. James nodded to Dr. Young as if to say, "Sik'em Prof!" While James was not a debater nor desirous of a heated verbal exchange, Dr. Young had no such misgivings.
With James's nodded approval, Dr. Young proceeded to tear into Butch, and point for point he exposed Butch's concepts as the errors they were.
Interestingly, neither Butch nor his six stooges understood that Butch had just been soundly thrashed.
Scenario Four
After Dr. Young's lecture, Butch approached him and said he thought that all of James's education had done him no good.
When Dr. Young asked why he thought this, Butch responded by saying that he had engaged James in debates on several occasions and each time, he soundly defeated James. In fact, James had even dropped the discussion because he was beaten.
Dr. Young said, "Maybe you did not beat him at all. Maybe James just has more wisdom than I do. He knows you won't listen or learn, and I was hoping you would."
To this Butch thought for a moment and then said, "Naw, I beat him. I know more than he does." His pack of six stood behind him and nodded their heads in agreement with their leader.
Scenario Five
Butch and his six empty-headed companions approached James, and Butch said, "Your professor sure got a whopping today!" His goofy group of mud-dobbers smiled and chuckled in slavish approval of "Pastor" Butch's remarks.
James asked Butch if he thought that anything that Dr. Young had said was good, correct, or new to him. Butch responded in a very loud and obnoxious voice, while pushing his index finger into James's chest:
Nope. He didn't tell me nothing I didn't already know, and any new stuff I heard from him was wrong.
The six simpletons all nodded and grinned in agreement.
Nothing More to do but Have Lunch
James then said,
Well, then, if that's what you really believe, then we have no basis upon which to continue this discussion.
Butch responded,
I think that I done demonstrated for everyone here that I had him on the ropes more than once.
The six sycophants were nodding and grinning.
James then gently put his arm around Butch's shoulder and said, "Well, then, let's go to lunch."
"A man's wisdom gives him patience;
it is to his glory to overlook an offense" --Prov. 19:11
Mastering the Art of a Loud Opinion Part 2: The MALO
For the purposes of brevity, from this point on, when I refer to a person who has "Mastered the Art of a Loud Opinion," I will refer to that person as a MALO. (* Please see footnote at the bottom of the page about the term MALO.)
In fact, maybe this phrase will catch on, and in years to come we will hear someone say something like, "Oh, don't listen to him; he's a MALO."
In Part One of Mastering the Art of a Loud Opinion, "Butch" was certainly a MALO.
WHAT A MALO IS NOT
MALO is not simply about being loud and obnoxious. Although, most who have mastered this art can be--if they deem it necessary--both loud and obnoxious.
We have all met Loud and Obnoxious People (LOPs) that no one (at least very few) listen to. I am not talking about LOPs. "Oh, don't listen to him; he's a LOP."
LOPs are not generally too much of a problem. Most often, others see through the LOP's gaudy and odious exterior for what it is. Which, oddly enough, can range from an acute sense of inferiority to delusions of grandeur. However, most people are repelled by the simply loud-and-obnoxious person, i.e., LOPs.
What I am talking about is far more insidious and dangerous. I am talking about MALOs.
Pride only breeds quarrels, but wisdom is found
in those who take advice" (Prov. 13:10).
WHAT A MALO IS
MALOs actually have the ability to persuade people to their way of thinking. It matters little if the MALO is actually correct or not; it matters even less that he has an education and the research to back his claims; what is most important is the way that he persuades, not the content of his argument. (However, this is not not to imply that all MALOs are ignorant, uneducated people. Some of them have college/seminary educations.) The point is that for his followers, the issue is not one of content but one of style.
I first became interested in MALOs in 1980. And, I have been watching and trying to understand them for years. I have met a couple dozen MALOs and have become friends with some of them. It has been an interesting study to get close to them and see what makes them tick. Also, I am amazed that so many people will follow a MALO, as though he were a prophet sent by God.
Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you; rebuke a wise man and he will love you. Instruct a wise man and he will be wiser still; teach a righteous man and he will add to his learning (Prov. 9:8-9).
MALOs HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME
I don't think that MALOs are anything new to the human condition. LOPs and MALOs have been around for years. I think Shakespeare may have met a MALO or two in his day.
Shakespeare's Macbeth, who now controls the throne of Scotland by murder, violence, and tyranny, and is at this point looking forward to his own impending defeat and death, says:
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I read too much into Macbeth's words I'm sure, but the last couple of lines are particularly interesting to me when I consider MALOs: "Full of sound and fury - Signifying nothing." Never has there been a more apt description of a MALO.
People who are MALOs (and not just LOPs) have "mastered" the art of a loud opinion more likely instinctively than by learned processes. They do not set out to read a book or take a class on "How to Win Slavish Followers and Influence People." They are not just loud and obnoxious; they are very often convincing. And, this is what makes them so dangerous. Oh, I do not mean dangerous in the "eternal-state-of-your-soul" kind of way. Many MALOs have the gospel of Christ and salvation through his grace correct. These people are dangerous on other levels.
Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates correction is stupid.
--Prov. 12:1
Many pastors who are MALOs have a church full of saved people but non-thinking people. A MALO who is a pastor will use all of the argumentation tactics at his disposal--which are quite often very powerful to the average person in the pew--to always be right and win every argument.
MALOs have discovered that as they project themselves on others by both vocal volume, and, in some cases, physical gestures, and forceful rhetoric, they can intimidate people. However, when their arguments--which sound convincing at the time--are broken down and studied, they actually say very little. But, insignificant sound and fury notwithstanding, people will often kowtow to MALOs. These "subjugated" people now show servile deference to the MALO. Those who do not fawn, those who will not be subjugated are branded as "outsiders," "sinners," "idiots," "unspiritual," and the list goes on.
I realize that I have painted the MALOs in such a poor light that some might think to themselves, "Then why would anyone be a follower of a MALO?" Actually, I have three responses to this:
1. Some who are reading this CT right now may be MALOs and not even realize it.
2. Some reading this CT may be followers of MALOs and not even realize it. After all, MALOs appear to be right . . and people want to follow those who are right.
3. Many MALOs have likable personalities, and people want to be around such people and be liked by such people.
Concerning number 3: Typically, MALOs have likable personalities. They are often gregarious and project an aura of self-confidence and certitude (of course they would). We are all attracted to self-confidence and certitude. I mean, after all, no one aspires to self-doubt and ambiguity. Doubts and personal-misgivings are not attractive qualities. We all like to be "sure" of ourselves; we like it when we are certain about things, and we admire those traits in others. However, there is nothing wrong about self-confidence and certitude . . . as long as they are not ends in themselves.
No Iron Relationship
The MALO typically only knows two kinds of people:
(1) those who follow him and accept almost without question everything he says or teaches,
and . . .
(2) those who do not.
Many MALOs have few (if any) truly reciprocal relationships. Even though the wisest man who ever lived (except Jesus Christ himself) said, "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another" (Prov. 27:17), the MALO sees most everyone else as tin, and he alone is iron.
If he does have an "iron relationship" with another person, it is hollow because to be considered iron by a MALO means that the person so considered agrees with the MALO in nearly every thought and detail. So, there is no real "sharpening" going on.
My Way or the Highway
In addition, I am constantly amazed at the things some people feel compelled to argue about. There are many things in the Christian faith that are simply issues of personal opinion and conscience. And, there are also many things in the Christian faith that are matters of procedure. These non-essential things are played out by people in ways that are conducive and appropriate for their own personalities. Yet, often, a MALO will think that his way, conviction, and model is GOD'S way, GOD'S conviction, and GOD'S model.
Over the years, I have been sharpened many times by many people, some young some old, some educated some uneducated. A professor of mine once said, "Truth is truth, whether it comes from a 60-year-old Doctor of Theology, or a six-year-old child." Listen, listen, and learn.
To be sharpened by others, we must listen, understand, digest, and ruminate on their words. If all we do is "master the art of a loud opinion," we will not learn. We will be more interested in being right than in learning what's right. We will be more geared toward winning a "debate" than gaining knowledge. Our theological discussions will be based more upon intensity of sound rather than interest of soundness, or the ferociousness of babel than fidelity to the Bible.
The Height of Ignorance and Arrogance
I believe that it is the height of ignorance and arrogance to control a discussion on differing viewpoints by volume. Often included in this volume is the liberal projection of the MALO's opinion.
I have been in "debates" with Christian brothers who were MALOs, and I have ceased from the debate not because I was out matched on knowledge or ability to form an argument, but because of three things:
(1) The person--maybe even unknowingly--believed that loud equals right, and I was not going to get into a loud and obnoxious debate with him, and . . .
(2) The person did not want to understand; he just wanted to be right.
(3) Try as I might to get a word in, the person simply over-talked me. This is one of the most annoying tactics of the MALO. When this happens, I know the "discussion" is over.
A VERY BIG WEAPON--PEER PRESSURE
One of the biggest weapons in the arsenal of the MALO is smug, condescending, criticism. Psychologists have said, and I believe that the Bible confirms, that humans do not like to be alone (except for a few rare exceptions). And, even worse than simply being alone is to be an outcast who is shunned and exposed to ridicule.
Humans were created "to belong." The human psyche is extremely vulnerable to humiliation. All of us want to be treated with dignity and respect, and all of us want to be accepted. When we were kids in school, this was called "peer pressure."
Whether you were popular or unpopular, you learned the power of peer pressure. Peer pressure can make otherwise rational people do some irrational and stupid things. The need to belong is so great that some people have actually committed murder to be able to belong to certain groups.
And, quite sadly, many Christians have sacrificed their right (1) to speak their minds, (2) to disagree, and even (3) to think for themselves . . . all so that they can "belong" to a group (typically a church or a denomination) that they wish to be a part of. Even though they may not think this consciously, MALO-followers find worth and dignity in being able to say, "So-and-So Leader is a friend of mine." Nearly all else pales in comparison.
A Feeble Attempt to Close
This Part Two of the MALO issue has already gone on far too long. I have actually removed over 1,000 words in this edited form. I think a book is being "birthed." But, let me attempt to bring some closure to this CT.
MALOs are real and, sadly, abundant. It appears to me that education seems to be an antidote to the MALO syndrome. I have met many people in the Christian faith who have ranged in education from high school drop outs to multiple doctoral-degree holders. And, while there are educated MALOs, it has been my experience that by-and-large the vast number of MALOs do not have graduate or doctoral degrees. And, I have watched a few MALOs undergo extensive, positive change in personality when they have taken a few years of graduate education. However, most MALOs do not want to do higher levels of academic studies because of their insecurities. They talk and act as though they are either too busy for such schooling or that they are above such needs . . . when in reality they are simply afraid to expose their true lack of knowledge.
I believe that most MALOs are really insecure people who are desperately attempting to hold on to whatever self-esteem that they have.
They seem to be constantly attempting to impress others, and when one is not impressed, that one is dismissed, primarily, I believe, because as long as that unimpressed person is around, the MALO has to face the truth that he is less than he projects himself to be; and, worse, the MALO's followers may "discover" the truth as well. Thus, the unimpressed person represents a breach in the wall of the MALO's world.
You will remember MALO Butch in part one . . . think of how fearful he would be if James (the other character in part one) were to become friends with Butch's band of followers. MALOs must either (1) not have the unimpressed around, or (2) they must undercut the unimpressed person by speaking ill of him. In either case, one must feel sorry for the MALO.
Last . . . I think we all have some MALO in each of us.
Some people allow their MALO-ness to control their lives; others have "flare ups" on occasions.
Where do you stand?
*Disclaimers, Due Caution, and Apologies: Please understand that by my use of the acronym "MALO," I mean no disrespect for . . .
(1) the family name of Malo . . . which I didn't know existed until I looked on the Internet. I found there that "Malo" is an honorable family name.
(2) the town, Saint-Malo in France: which appears to be a beautiful and magnificent city.
(3) the small town of Malo, Washington . . . way up near the Canadian border.
(4) or, the 1,000 other honorable items, people, and places with the name of Malo that I saw on the Internet.
To keep the distinction between the name Malo and my acronym MALO, I use the letters all in uppercase . . . It is an acronym: My MALO is not the same in anyway with the name Malo.
Send comments about this, or any, Coffee Talk to Rick Walston at: CES - @ - ColumbiaSeminary.edu
(Please note that you will need to take out the spaces and hyphens before and after the @ sign . . . this is placed this way to avoid spam emails.)
Try as I might to get a word in, the person simply over-talked me. This is one of the most annoying tactics of the MALO. When this happens, I know the "discussion" is over.