Five years ago today we released the Open Letter to Beth Moore. Here’s what happened & here’s why Beth HAS to be vague
By Elizabeth Prata
1. What happened
Five years ago today (L-R top row) Michelle Lesley, Amy Spreeman, Susan Heck, (L-R bottom row) Martha Peace, DebbieLynne Kespert, and myself here at The End Time, in tandem on our individual platforms, released an Open Letter to Beth Moore asking her 5 simple questions about her stance on homosexuality. Though Beth constantly remarks on cultural and social issues on her various platforms, to our knowledge we had never seen her take a stance on the sin of homosexuality. We felt it was important to get clarity on this from her, especially since she had (and still has) an enormous global platform with millions of followers.
Michelle Lesley posted a retrospective on her page today, saying,
As you’ll read below, the letter asked Moore to respond to five questions about homosexuality. To this day, as far as I know, she has obfuscated, finessed, straw-manned, slandered, and played the victim, but the one thing she has not done is to clearly and directly answer them. The ensuing brouhaha over the letter, however, spoke much louder than simply answering the questions. I’m re-posting this today to remind and warn all of us that this is how false teachers operate, and that we need to keep our eyes open and be good Bereans.
At Michelle’s site she kept a timeline of events and screen shots of Beth’s vague reactions. Check it out, it says a lot about a false teacher who would not answer a simple question about a sin that God abhors.
Here are the five questions. In the original letter, there was a preamble and a closing, but here is the main point of our letter to Beth Moore:
1. Do you believe homosexuality is inherently sinful?
2. Do you believe that the practice of the homosexual lifestyle is compatible with holy Christian living?
3. Do you believe a person who dies as a practicing homosexual but professes to be a Christian will inherit eternal life?
4. Do you believe same sex attraction is, in and of itself, an inherently sinful, unnatural, and disordered desire that must be mortified?
5. Why have you been so silent on this subject in light of your desire to “teach the word of God?”
Seems simple enough to answer, right? But not for a false teacher. She can’t be pinned down. I am going to explain one reason why the event was instructive. Beth Moore (as a false teacher) is highly skilled in equivocating. Her use of non-specific language is masterful.
2. Why couldn’t she just answer?!
Outside of the faith, there are situations where specific language is a must. Science, Maths, technology, and judicial situations are four that I can think of. When a lawyer asks a question he poses it in a certain way in order to elicit a specific and clear response from a witness. You can’t be unclear in court. Judges issue decrees that must be clear. He wouldn’t issue a finding without naming the crime. Unthinkable.
But criminals, politicians, and false teachers speak in non-specifics all the time. How often have you seen a Mafia movie where the Boss says something like ,”Take care of that problem” and it really means, ‘Whack that guy and bury him in cement shoes’? Vague language serves some people very well.
“Firstly, … people typically equivocate when posed a question to which all possible replies have potentially negative consequences, but where nonetheless a reply is still expected.” The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction.
Back to faith situations using vague language- In the 1400s medieval Crusader and autobiographer Margery Kempe was sufficiently vague and slippery, using masterful unclarity to get out of her heresy trial when confronted by the Archbishop of York. And this was court, where specific language is a must! But Kempe never was pinned down.
“Kempe’s sophisticated use of evasive, vague, hedged, and recontextualized speech and situational pragmatics proved more than a match for the Archbishop and his clerks.” From “Margery Kempe’s Strategic Vague Language” in the book The Medieval Life of Language by Mark Amsler.”
We saw it again, recorded in trial documents when in the 1600s Anne Hutchinson was at trial before the Puritan Divines. Hutchinson’s skill at verbal slipperyness even caused the Governor prosecuting her for heresy to say, “Yes, you are a woman of most note, and of best abilities.” She would not be pinned down.
Vague language is most useful to a heretic.
So the problem trying to pin down a skilled equivocator like Beth Moore is not new. When Beth Moore refused to answer, she issued cryptic, vague tweets and messages on her platforms, designed to cover her in a smokescreen where she could disappear like a magician on stage.
But in the end she couldn’t.
Eventually, she had to answer, because this time, the situation wasn’t going away. When she did reply, it was a non-answer that said nothing. Yes, ‘she is a woman of most note, and of best abilities.’
As GK Chesterton has said of neo-paganism, they express “incomparable exercises in the English language“. (From “Heretics”).
Vagueness is important to the politician, false teacher, or any other person needing not to be clear. Here’s why. Let’s use a politician for an example. In speeches, the politician will choose high-emotion words, commonly understood by the hearer, who attaches his or her own personal meaning to it.
Like, ‘liberty’. Now, we all understand the word liberty. But do we? Liberty means something different to a person in jail or to the battered wife, which is different to an unhappy housewife who has career ambitions, which is different to a patriotic citizen in Middle America. We know the word, but we attach different meanings to it. The more vague one can be while seeming to be specific, the more the speaker can connect with more people, and importantly, not alienate a diverse base. The quote below about using pragmatic language can apply to false teachers because they are also like politicians: [insertion is mine, underline is mine]
“Another aspect of this issue is the diversity of the audience in the case of televised politics. In their public performances politicians [and false teachers] do not want to address only one target group but as many as possible. But this means that they have to convey different messages to different people at the same time. Producing coherent statements in such situations is only possible by using various forms of indirect vagueness because different groups of the audience may have dissimilar (and even contradictory) wants.” (Source- International Pragmatics Association, Political Language and Textual Vagueness by Helmut Gruber).
False teachers have a diverse base and have to work to keep the base united, unlike Christians who have one base- Christ. We want the brilliance and clarity of God’s word to shine. Vagueness is why Beth Moore says all the time in her lessons, things like “Is everybody with me? Everybody know what I’m talkin’ about?” She isn’t checking for understanding, which can’t be done with a virtual audience in a video or in a massive auditorium of thousands of listeners. What she’s doing is forcing a unity among diversity.
The true teacher and the false teacher thus have different goals and use different language to achieve those goals. Read Chesterton’s quote below with the faith in mind. Can we construct a faith with unreliable instruments?
“And this kind of vagueness … is an absolutely final blow to anything in the nature of a science. Men can construct a science with very few instruments, or with very plain instruments; but no one on earth could construct a science with unreliable instruments. A man might work out the whole of mathematics with a handful of pebbles, but not with a handful of clay which was always falling apart into new fragments, and falling together into new combinations. A man might measure heaven and earth with a reed, but not with a growing reed.” GK Chesterton
3. What does the Bible say?
I’ve covered the fact of the false teachers’ use of vague language, and the necessity of their use of vagueness, but now let’s turn to see what the Bible has to say.
The one who has ears to hear, let him hear. Matthew 11:15. And Matthew 13:9, 43; Revelation 2:7, 11. 17, 29, 3:6, 13, 22; Revelation 13:9. We see that phrase in God’s word so often. We all have ears, physically. We don’t all have the ability to hear through them if we’re deaf. Spiritually, those who are not in Christ do not have the ability to spiritually hear His word.
Chesterton, “A man cannot pay that kind of reverence to truth solid as marble; they can only be reverent towards a beautiful lie.”
If you are in Christ, we DO have ears to hear- Him. But we need to listen carefully to one and all who claim to be speaking God’s words from God’s Bible. Are we listening carefully to not only the words with our ears, but with our souls, by the Spirit?
“Jesus’ simple request is that we use our God-given faculties (eyes to see, ears to hear) to tune in to His words (John 10:27 –28; Mark 4:24; Revelation 3:20). “For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out into the open” (Mark 4:22).” (Source GotQuestions)
Whenever you hear a teacher professing Christianity equivocate, evade, or use vague language, especially when a specific question has been asked, your ears should hear what is being said and what is not being said.
We are ambassadors for Jesus and we have a duty to convey the King’s message as carefully as we can. So we use precise language in our teaching, evangelizing, writing, and preaching. When teachers or preachers don’t, then you know there is a problem. When they use cryptic, evasive, non-specific language, let him who has an ear, hear.
If we train ourselves in discernment we will hear and thus detect the source. (Hebrews 5:14).
