I don’t watch Duck Dynasty (I don’t hunt and couldn’t grow one of those beards in a million years) and I don’t read GQ (I have no style whatsoever), but when the two collided this week even I took notice! I read the article in GQ and to my naïve surprise was accosted by words you don’t hear in church. The article seems to mock the Robertsons in more than one way the least of which is their fundamental religious convictions. As noted, I'm not a reader of GQ but my impression is that this snide disrespect for the evangelical world is pretty typical of this periodical and this particular author. That's their right, just my observation. What I'm wondering is why would Phil Robertson grant an interview to these people in the first place? He skipped out on a Barbara Walters interview to go duck hunting, but decides to talk to GQ? Is anyone surprised this blew up in his face?
Two bits of wisdom from the Proverbs came to mind:
- Proverbs 9:7 - Whoever corrects a mocker invites insults; whoever rebukes the wicked incurs abuse.
- Proverbs 23:9 - Do not speak to fools, for they will scorn your prudent words.
This is a classic case of backfire, and one that should have been anticipated. Expressing convictions and correcting sin seem like the right thing to do, but in some contexts the results will be predictably disastrous. I'm confident God can take this mess and make something out of it, but I also sense that the evil forces in the world are working diligently to use this interview to further push Christianity to the realm of irrelevance and inconsequence.
If anything is learned from this experience it may be that being a positive Christian witness means more than just quoting Scripture to anyone who will listen. I sincerely appreciate the Robertsons' faithfulness and am confident that many have been brought closer to the Lord through their lives and testimony, but as far as this one goes I say next time someone calls for an interview Phil may need to bow out.