A common attack leveled against any Christian witness is the old Argumentum ad Hominem attack. The argument ad Hominem is an attack leveled at the man. In logic the argument is a part of what Dr. Irving Copi of the University of Hawaii classifies as an informal fallacy. In this argument's most common form, rather than trying to disprove the truth of what has been stated, it instead turns its attack upon the person making the claim.
Philosophers and logicians recognize people resort to this attack when they know they haven't got a leg on which to stand. Unfortunately the general populace today seem to relish such fallacious arguments, giving them far more weight and credibility than they deserve.
This Argumentum ad Hominem is seen in the common response to any attempted witness - "I despise your 'holier than thou' attitude."
While I recognize some misguided witnesses, who may actually believe that they are better than someone else and who do look down their proverbial noses at anyone who disagrees with their stated position, exist - the truth is none of us who stand in the shadow of the cross can rightfully look down upon another. In fact, what I find is so often the 'holier than thou' accusation is, in those cases where the witness is simply sharing his or her faith and really without any animosity or judgment, is more the shouting of a guilty conscience than it is of a legitimate complaint.
Perhaps the following account will put things in perspective. Many years ago, when Gerald Ford was the president, one of the leading golfers on the professional tour was invited to play in a foursome with him, Jack Nicklaus and Billy Graham. The golfer was especially in awe of playing with President Ford and Billy Graham (he had played frequently with Nicklaus before).
After the round was finished, one of the other pros came up to the golfer and asked, "Hey, what was it like playing with the president and with Billy Graham?"
The pro unleashed a torrent of cursing and in a disgusted manner said, "I don't need Billy Graham stuffing religion down my throat."
With that he turned on his heel and stormed off, heading for the practice tee.
His friend followed the angry pro to the practice tee. The pro took out his driver and started to beat out balls in fury. His neck was crimson and it looked like steam was coming from his ears. His friend said nothing. He sat on a bench and watched.
After a few minutes, the anger of the pro was spent. He settled down. His friend said quietly, "Was Billy a little rough on you out there?" The pro heaved an embarrassed sigh and said, "No, he didn't even mention religion. I just had a bad round."
Dr. R.C. Sproul, commenting on this incident wrote, "Astonishing. Billy Graham had said not a word about God, Jesus or religion, yet the pro had stormed away after the game accusing Billy of trying to ram religion down his throat. How can we explain this? It's really not difficult. Billy Graham didn't have to say a word; he didn't have to give a single sideward glance to make the pro feel uncomfortable.
"Billy Graham is so identified with religion, so associated with the things of God, that his very presence is enough to smother the wicked man who flees when no man pursues. Luther was right. The pagan does tremble at the rustling of a leaf; he feels the hound of heaven breathing down his neck. He feels crowded by holiness, even if it is only made present by an imperfect, partially sanctified human vessel" (Sproul, R.C., "The Holiness of God," Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, IL, 1985 p.67).
Be aware of this phenomenon. The accusation of "holier than thou" is really more of a confession than it is an accusation.
