“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (ESV).
Many people have changed their beliefs because they heard someone make a persuasive case for some other point of view. Slow down. Don’t be so quick to change your beliefs. You need to examine their case more closely. If you can’t find anything wrong with their argument, ask others what they think of it. It’s particularly important that you ask someone who shares your current belief to examine this new point of view to see if they can find fault with the case being made. Or, see if you can find any formal debates on the matter. At the end of the day, you may discover that you were wrong and the other view is true, but more times than not, you’ll find that the case being made is not as strong as you first believed.
Thinking to Believe 
May 29, 2024 at 11:58 pm
Good advice, although I don’t have the confidence in debates that you do. For me, debates are PR campaigns for respective positions. The one who can sound intelligent with a professionally packaged delivery will usually carry the day with the fence-sitters, while the respective choirs will insist that their side won. Each debater develops his gotcha points in advance to produce a deer-in-the-headlights moment for his opponent, while the faithful are ready to go bananas at any misstep.
In my estimation, the best debates are written ones. Each side can fully develop their points and can fully research any unanticipated issues raised by an opponent. This adds considerable depth to a discussion and leaves honest readers far better informed than time-crunching verbal debates.
I was once a Trinitarian and a liberal Pentecostal. I know firsthand the value of having an open mind. I promised God with my whole soul that if He revealed the truth to me, I would walk in it. Since then, I’ve seen too many self-proclaimed honest seekers embark on blatant confirmation bias journeys. When a person seeks to have his beliefs validated, he’ll get what he’s looking for but at the expense of truth. Often, the truth will take you where you don’t want to go. Often, the truth will tell you to stay put. Either way, if you’re not willing to embrace truth, you can forget ever finding it.
Anybody engaging in genuine research will attempt to know an opposing position as good as or better than its proponents. You will obtain literature from its top apologists and endeavor to get their very best arguments for every topic. You will also research their rebuttals to the best objections and even seek out clarification from them on inconsistencies you may find. That way, when it comes time to draw a conclusion, you’ll be making an informed decision. In my experience, the vast majority of people are woefully ignorant of the positions they reject. The sincere ones simply haven’t been trained how to conduct research. The others are simply dishonest, even if they happen to stumble onto the truth. Anybody who pronounces something false that hasn’t sufficiently researched a matter is an unprincipled fraud. Principled persons study something before offering an opinion, and a fraud is one who gives the appearance of knowing what he’s talking about when in fact he doesn’t. Truth seekers don’t act like that.
LikeLike
May 30, 2024 at 12:25 pm
I agree that debates are not always won by the merits of the case, but I probably see more merit in debates than you do. Be that as it may, my post is not about debates. It’s about not being too quick to change one’s theological positions. Debates can simply be an aid (one among several) to help someone more fully analyze the competing view, as well as their own. People just need to do more research into the matter to see how people on their side respond to the claims made by the competing view, and in the process they may learn that they don’t fully understand the view they claim to embrace.
Your comments seem to be geared largely to scholars, who have both the time, know-how, and resources to study out matters like you suggest. But for the common Christian, who lacks the time, know-how, and resources, they often make rash decisions about what is true based on inadequate information and emotion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 30, 2024 at 1:25 pm
I don’t think one needs to be a scholar to make a good faith effort to understand an opposing point of view. A layperson certainly won’t be able to explain matter like a scholar would, but he should be intelligent enough to grasp the basic concepts promulgated by the other side in order to fairly assess their claims. The “common Christian” should still be able to effectively argue his opponent’s position to prevent his rejecting a straw man.
And I completely agree with you that folks are way to quick to change an opinion, often on flimsy evidence. I quit emailing a fella who started out Oneness, then went Unitarian, then went back to Oneness, then flipped back to Unitarianism. Just crazy.
LikeLike
June 9, 2024 at 11:39 am
I don’t think one needs to be a scholar to do so either, but there are a lot of limitations that make it very difficult for the average person to investigate matters for themselves. In my experience, many people are simple minded. They aren’t accustomed to thinking, and don’t have much education. They get confused the moment you mention a four syllable word. Others, who are more accustomed to thinking, often lack the time and/or know-how to look into these matters. Let’s say they are reconsidering their belief about how to be saved. How are they supposed to find out which books to read to best represent each view? And if they find them, who has time (or is willing to make the time) to read 4-10 different books on the topic? Not most people I know. And even if you find the right resources and have the time to read them, if you haven’t been trained in theological thinking, it is likely to just overwhelm you. They’ll find themselves agreeing with both positions, which just leaves them confused.
I think back to when I did a deep-dive study into the divorce and remarriage debate. Even with my ability to find the sources, the time I had to dedicate to the topic, and my theological training, I found it difficult to figure out the truth of the matter. Each case was persuasive on first-read. Some issues are fuzzy. It took a lot of work to figure out what I think is the truth on the matter. If I struggled on the matter, how is the average untrained Brother Joe going to be able to do it? How is the person with no training in the original languages, hermeneutics, and Biblical culture going to be able to properly discern the arguments being made? How can they decide whose exegesis of the Greek participle is the correct one? Good scholars debate these kind of things endlessly (often without convincing each other), so why think that the average Christian is going to be able to figure it out on their own?
Imagine that you were tasked with having to figure out the debate between the Minkowskian and Lorentzian interpretations of general relativity? Or what if you were tasked with trying to figure out which of the ten physical interpretations of quantum gravity is most likely true? I’m guessing you are not trained in science more generally, and not in general relativity and quantum mechanics more specifically. It would be very difficult to figure out the right answer to these questions, even with an intellectual mind like yours who would probably enjoy the challenge and have the time to do so.
The difficulties involved in determining which truth claims are true and which are false are enormous. I truly feel for those who are overwhelmed by all of the religious and doctrinal options out there. They don’t know how to assess who is right and who is wrong. This is why most people just put their trust in an authority. They either use a particular person as their authority (such as their pastor, whom they know and trust), or they ascribe authority to the majority opinion (assuming they can trust the numbers). Or, they just go with their gut, which is typically just a reflection of their personal desires. I wish it were not this way, but it is.
LikeLike
June 10, 2024 at 10:54 am
Jason, I can agree in principle with everything you say, especially if we’re talking about quantum mechanics or interpretations of general relativity. And I concur that a layperson is limited due to his lack of training and/or his access to resources. That’s not my point.
Layperson or no, if a person isn’t willing to make a good-faith effort to understand what he takes upon himself to criticize, he has no business criticizing said view. I’ve time and again witnessed people affirm or deny positions when material was readily available to more fully inform them otherwise. I’ve often pointed out to Trinitarians that even the majority of Trinitarians oppose certain positions they take–to no avail. They couldn’t care less because they’re right and that’s all there is to it! I’ve pointed out the logical errors of the Trinity in layman’s terms, but many of them refuse to budge because I’m a “heretic.” Such folks are what the Bible calls willingly ignorant.
Personal bias on all levels stands as the major obstacle to revelation. And limited resources should produce more epistemological humility in others in place of this chest-thumping grandstanding we see in the blogosphere.
LikeLike
June 10, 2024 at 1:09 pm
Likewise, I can agree with everything you just said in principle. I would only point out that I don’t think we have to become an expert on any position that we criticize. No one has the time for that. For example, I am not an expert in critical theory, but I know enough about it to see its flaws and dangers, and call those out. That said, if someone more knowledgeable in critical theory told me that I was misunderstanding something, I should be open to correcting my POV and criticism.
LikeLiked by 1 person