Viewpoint

Dan Korem, Scott and trickery in evangelism

By Rob Goodspeed

Daily Editorial Page Writer

Last Wednesday, Dan Korem came to campus and spoke in the Rackham Amphitheater. The many posters around campus proclaimed him an "Investigator, Journalist, Magician, FBI Profiler, Debunker of Psychic Fraud." Interesting. I fancy myself a journalist and general skeptic and decided to go, not really knowing what I was getting into. Something did seem amiss however: The posters said in tiny, tiny letters that his visit was sponsored by the University chapter of Campus Crusade for Christ, the evangelical Christian group of the "Do you agree with Scott" fame. I just figured they were sponsoring a popular speaker to hand out their literature and recruit. I was wrong.

Before I describe Dan Korem's speech - and its descent from an interesting presentation on frauds and cult leaders to a full-fledged sermon about God's love for us all - let's reminisce for a minute about the Scott campaign of last fall. It first began quietly - a few signs reading "Do you agree with Scott?" could be spotted around campus. Then slowly, the green signs and their message became an avalanche - entire posting boards were covered with "Scott" posters, chalk messages pervaded campus with their insidious question, even helium balloons bearing the same message could be spotted. Many I knew were wondering who Scott was and what he did believe. The uncertainty ended with a series of ads in The Michigan Daily: It was revealed that Scott, the leader of Campus Crusade for Christ, believes, among other things, that God "is eternally existent, all-knowing, glorious and perfectly loving, just and gracious" and he believes in the "personal return of Jesus Christ to this world." The Scott question prefaced a week of good old-fashioned Christian evangelism, complete with members of various Christian groups on campus wearing shirts reading, "I agree with Scott" and a table on the Diag. While undoubtedly clever, the "Scott" campaign contained an inherent trickery. Campus Crusade for Christ members admitted that part of the motivation for the advertising campaign was to try to break through student apathy towards religion and student resistance towards more traditional, forthcoming evangelical efforts.

Korem's visit was similarly misleading. It began as an interesting discussion of his long history as an investigator of frauds. He showed how he could perform seemingly miraculous feats through techniques he had learned as a professional magician. He talked about some of the many self-proclaimed psychics, faith healers and others that he had investigated and debunked, his theories about how people can be easily tricked and how to tell if someone is lying or telling the truth. This was all well and good, but soon things took a turn for the Bryanesque. He described an event where a plane was caught in thunderstorm cloud and the passengers were all screaming for God. He described an account where a little girl claimed Jesus held her while her bedroom burnt.

He then transformed a discussion of how endorphins can allow for temporary faith "healing" to how the most important human value is love. He told the audience that he knew God loved us. He discussed how the Torah has remained unchanging since the time of the Dead Sea scrolls and how in his search for the truth, he had found it in Christianity and God. The last ten minutes of his presentation was an unadulterated evangelical appeal for each of us to welcome Jesus into our lives.

I see nothing wrong with the Campus Crusade for Christ bringing speakers to campus to speak about whatever topics they desire but the advertising for Korem's talk didn't mention the evangelical side to his visit. Like the Scott campaign, there seemed to be an element of deception.

Yet these allegations are almost certainly at least partly hyperbole. Why can't activist groups act within their First Amendment rights to recruit members, or challenge student to consider their religious beliefs? The answer is this: They are absolutely within their rights to exercise evangelism, but dishonest techniques undermine their credibility. If the groups must somehow conceal their true motives through raffles, free concerts, propaganda or ambiguous advertising, they are essentially trying to trick students. It may be argued that these are simply attempts to foil prejudice against Christians, but the antidote to prejudice is the truth.

If you cannot redeem yourself through being forthcoming, perhaps the message is flawed. But that is for another viewpoint entirely.