La Vega, Tajuna, Spain (photo from trekearth.com)
In my previous article on apologetics, in the comments section, I stated that I had been dealing with someone this past weekend that is likely a member of a pseudo-Christian cult, who found this site via another blog. This person would not deal with a contextual evaluation of Scripture and related theology. I spent two hours plus preparing apologetics related emails in reply to his strongly worded criticisms of my theological views, for which he simply breezed over without seriously dealing with the material I presented. He moved on to quoting his next Biblical texts out of context or without full context, and then attempted to change the topic and attack my theology on another point. I put his email address on the blocked senders list, and his latest email went into the 'Deleted Items' folder. I guess he would not accept it when I stated that since he would not deal with the scholarly, Biblical and theological material presented, it was not worthwhile emailing anymore. I sent him a blocked sender email, just in case Outlook Express did not do it automatically. I had email dialogue with the owner of the other blog I mentioned, and found out that the person that I had blocked had been in this kind of dialogue with Christians previously with the results being the same.
This person that I blocked on Outlook Express, as far as I know has never commented on this blog, but I do allow anonymous comments, so in reality at times, I am not aware of who comments on this blog. Quite often when I am challenged it is through the email address I provide with this blog and not through the comments. One can speculate why this is so, but I suppose some persons prefer the confidentiality of email. As ministry, and in the spirit of open-mindedness, if I have the time, I will work on dialoguing with a person of any philosophy on a blog or related topic if the person is open-minded. However, if one is simply in defend and attack mode, it is a waste of my time. My mind will not be changed without the significant use of reason, and as many of you have probably experienced in your own life, dealing with someone over a prolonged period who is closed-minded concerning a issue, is a waste of time since the person does not adequately deal with material and/or information provided that may contrast his/her viewpoint. I have changed my mind in the past on issues, and with God’s help remain open-minded.
I reason that God predestines those who shall follow Christ as in Ephesians 1:4-12, and that God makes the choice to regenerate a certain individual and moulds a person through the work of the Holy Spirit to freely believe. Following Christ is not a human choice primarily, but I do not believe persons follow Christ through compulsion. Calvin (1543)(1996: 68). God must persuade an individual through the work of the Holy Spirit to understand what true Biblical religion entails. Accepting this theology, I reason that many persons are closed-minded regarding religion, including some Christians, and others are closed-minded while holding non-religious views. Some persons have a devotion to belief systems that would be quite subjective in manner. This type of devotion is opposed to being tested intellectually. I do not have the knowledge to judge any human heart, but some persons seem so closed-minded in their approach to religion and/or philosophy that it can deduced that no amount of reason and evidence will persuade he/she to believe otherwise. For these persons apologetics seems useless. Without the moulding and persuasive work of the Holy Spirit, if a person wants to hold to a certain religious and/or philosophical perspective, in many cases nothing will change the mind, because seemingly a person wants to believe what he/she believes. For some, nothing contrary to a personal belief system can be seriously considered.
The late Walter Martin wrote that the belief systems of cults are characterized by closed-mindedness. Martin (1985: 26). These groups are not interested in rational cognitive evaluation of facts. Martin (1985: 26). He writes that such systems are in isolation, and never shift to logical consistency, and the mind of the cultist is almost impossible to penetrate because of a commitment to the thought pattern of his/her organization. Martin (1985: 26). I agree with Martin’s reasoning, and deduce that the closed-minded approach is not only taken by cultists, but by many persons who hold to religious and non-religious philosophical views that do not want to be intellectually challenged. If a person is really pursuing the truth, there must be enough of an emotional detachment from views held to at least consider perspectives that may be contrary to a personal belief system.
CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
MARTIN, WALTER (1985) The Kingdom of The Cults, Minneapolis, Bethany House Publishers.
This kind of closed-mindedness is what is generally associated nowadays with the term "fundamentalism".
ReplyDeleteThe standard meaning of "fundamentalism" is simply "a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles."
I suppose that all too often, religious fundamentalism is also accompanied by a disregard for intellectual criticism.
Perhaps what we need today is a movement for "intellectual fundamentalism" -- a willingness to adhere strictly to principles of rational argumentation, in the process of seeking truth. Given the post-modern world in which we live, such a movement seems highly unlikely. It makes me wonder where our world is heading to as people become less capable of rational thinking (in general) even as technology becomes much more advanced.
Thanks, wise Sir Charles.
ReplyDeleteCultism and fundamentalism are two ways of approaching a religion and/or philosophy where one can be closed-minded. In a cult or fundamentalist movement one may follow a strict set of intellectual thought that prohibits contrary thought, to the extent where a person is not intellectually willing to seriously consider concepts contrary to world-view. I do reason that there are some fundamentalists that are open-minded and hold certain views very strongly. Those in cults are likely predominantly closed-minded.
Enjoy the rain, Chucky. I just came back from a walk and sprint and it is refreshing.
there really people who consider themselves as 'self-righteous" with no space for other's point of view. I cannot understand how some people are having pleasures in arguing and atacking other beliefs where in fact people, regardless of beliefs, can have a healthy dialogue.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you did. It is such a waste of time arguing with people with closed minds.
I always do the same, I always tell "war freaks" and "scammers" on my email: WELCOME TO MY BLOCKED LIST! haha
I agree Army, healthy dialogue is better than closed-minded interaction that just ends in permanent termination of dialogue. As strongly as I hold to my views, I realize that we all shall die and God can work things out in the end. I am not interested in arguing on and on in any context, but dialogue with open-minded persons, even when there is disagreement, is much better than dealing with closed-minded individuals.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the 'blocking' support, and I suppose we bloggers need to be loving but tough with those who simply want to defend their own views, attack others, and stay closed-minded.
Even Jesus said that, at a certain point, you just got to turn your heels and kick up dust as you leave town!
ReplyDeleteMy dad has to deal with that kind of stuff all the time on his blog, although it usually has less to do with theology and more to do with politics. Personally, I'm with you. If someone wants to argue just for the sake of arguing, count me out.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Wade. Yes, at some point, enough is enough.
ReplyDeleteCheers, David. I agree that arguing for its own sake is a waste of time.
Hey Russ, Was this guy the one I was telling you about? If so it was good you booted him, I went round and round with Him. Rick b
ReplyDeleteYes Rick, it was the man you mentioned. I blocked him just prior to receiving your email. Thanks for your helpful information.
ReplyDeleteYes i to wonder where we are heading to.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Casdok.
ReplyDeleteFortunately there are nice persons such as yourself and my other commenters that one can dialogue with in a respectful manner, even if persons do not agree on each and every point.:)
People are people with differing views, ideas, and opinions. Arguing can be very futile as opposed to open and meaningful discussion. In the end...
ReplyDelete"Live and let Live"
-SayLaVe-
C'est la vie (looked it up), is from French, meaning 'that’s life'.:)
ReplyDeleteGod will works things out in the end, but I am praying to be useful in the meantime.
I did another run outside, and this time in the cool night air and not the rain. It is refreshing.
Hi Russ. Sounds like your getting some flak mate. Well good on you. One of my favourite verses is Ecc 12:12 I love reading about various views and find it very stimulating and challenging. I once knew a guy who was 99 and his mind was still active everyday reading the Bible and whatever he could lay his hands on.
ReplyDeleteGive me something to get my teeth into and then lets have some rational thinking about it.
Russell.
Thanks, Russell. I appreciate the encouragement. I looked up Ecclesiastes 12:12 and I agree there are endless books to read and more learning for me, even when it is hard work. It is good to deal with people in intellectual agreement, or at least open-minded folks. I agree that rational thinking is so vital. Please have an excellent weekend!
ReplyDelete