I've seen a lot of references to the Billy Graham rule on a social media feed of mine recently. As usual, that means I'm frustrated with the stupidity of a lot of people. The Billy Graham rule is a principle, codified by evangelist Billy Graham, that prohibits being alone with a member of the opposite gender other than one's spouse, or by extension other family members. There are many flaws and errors contained within both the conclusion and the premises used to argue for it. Time to tear this erroneous nonsense apart using logic and Scripture!
Where does the Bible condemn men and women, whether separately married or unmarried, being alone with each other? It does not. And conscience and social beliefs do not--cannot--reveal moral truths; only God can do that. This is basic moral epistemology, and the Bible also affirms this (Deuteronomy 4:2, 1 John 3:4, Romans 7:7). If God did not reveal something to be an objective moral obligation, then it is nothing but an unbiblical invention of legalistic humans, legalism being the construction of extra-Biblical rules, a thing prohibited by the Bible itself. It has no moral authority because it conforms to no moral obligation grounded in God's nature. Such is the Billy Graham rule. Also, it is worth noting that Jesus himself met with and conversed with women alone. He did this in John 4 with the Samaritan woman at the well and in John 20 with Mary Magdalene after his resurrection. All Biblical information aside, there is simply nothing sexual about being alone with the opposite gender. No situation is inherently sexual except one where someone is performing a sexual act.
Every time I hear of married people who allegedly practice this paranoid rule, I want to ask them questions. Why the hell would they marry people they don't trust to not have affairs? Do they really think it is morally wrong to be alone with a person who has a somewhat different anatomy than them? Do they really have such a small amount of self-control or no rational ability to see that being alone with the opposite gender is not a sexual thing? Spouses who encourage the Billy Graham rule may likely just be responding to a poorly-planned relationship choice by invoking a controlling attitude. And I call bullshit! If I marry, I will not marry someone I suspect of infidelity, and I will not restrict the natural freedom of my spouse wherever God has revealed something to be amoral or innocent. She is morally free to do whatever she wishes as long as she does not sin, and the same is true of me.
The Billy Graham rule inevitably suffocates two things: male-female friendships and female presence in the workplace. Any sound theologian knows that the Bible never condemns opposite gender friendships, no matter how close [1]. The Apostle Paul himself had a close friendship with a woman (Romans 16:12 [2]). And any sound logician knows that there is nothing romantic or sexual about men and women engaging in deep friendships [3]. Anyone who tells someone else that God prohibits, discourages, or dislikes relational intimacy between men and women slanders God and commits the error Jesus so harshly rebuked the Pharisees for (Matthew 15:3-9)--inventing extra-Biblical obligations and crediting them with objective divine authority. Such things are just the constructs of the weak, the ignorant, the irrational. They are stupid, mistaken beliefs at best, and the result of people thinking others share their faults at worst.
As for the workplace, women will be held back wherever insecure, fallacious, fearful men abide by the Billy Graham rule. This idiotic principle would easily keep women below the glass ceiling. "The glass ceiling" is a phrase that refers to a barrier that prevents women from ascending to top leadership positions in a company alongside men, one that they can see through but never go past. It is a manifestation of sexism in the business world. The Billy Graham rule would certainly stymie the promotion of, mentoring of, and leadership opportunities for women, as the men in power operating according to this rule would refuse to meet with women under the same circumstances they would meet men. This discrimination and sexism totally contradict the equal metaphysical value God imbued all men and women with (Genesis 1:26-27).
Lastly, I want to remind Christians what the Bible prescribes for careless or intentional false accusations, since sometimes proponents of the Billy Graham rule cite possible charges of illicit sexual advances as justification for it. Deuteronomy 19:16-21 says to give such accusers the punishment the falsely accused would have received were the charges accurate. Since adultery and rape deserve death (Deuteronomy 22:22, 25-27), anyone who falsely accuses another person of either out of laziness or malice deserves to die. No one is morally required to avoid innocent activities to not be fallaciously perceived as immoral. On the contrary, it is the responsibility of observers to not be irrational, to not make erroneous judgments, and to not misrepresent the actions of others. People who misperceive the behaviors and words of others are the problem, not me or other innocent people.
The Billy Graham rule, and the false ideology of anyone who thinks it is a moral obligation or a rational principle, is absolutely stupid! It is sexist, legalistic, fallacious, irrational, and immoral to impose this asinine construct on other people. I have never met an egalitarian who told me to live by it. But I have been encouraged to submit to this legalism and irrationality by complementarians. As to be expected, there is a correlation between gender-relation legalism and the theological and philosophical garbage called complementarianism. I speak with my usual ferocity because Christians need to hear the truth of the matter. As in all things, only the truth can set us free (John 8:32). Only it can liberate us from false guilt, lies, illogicality, and concern for the false perceptions of others.
Let us remember that we serve God, not the humans who misrepresent reality. It is God that we should strive to please and not other people. A person can choose to abide by this rule out of legitimate weakness of character, but never is it morally or logically correct to demand that others do the same. This is the very spirit of legalism, which is condemned so thoroughly in both the Old Testament and New Testament.
Logic, people. It is very damn helpful.
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2016/08/opposite-gender-friendships-part-1.html
[2]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/11/persis-pauls-dear-friend.html
[3]. See here:
A. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2016/09/opposite-gender-friendships-part-2.html
B. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/01/an-observation-about-cross-gender.html
No comments:
Post a Comment