Have you ever been in a conversation and realized that it’s almost like the other person isn’t there? That the person is kind of like an avatar for a position and is seeking to simply defend their position even if it means denying basic facts and the nature of reality?
The first time I had this experience was over lunch with a friend and she began to challenge my beliefs about the morality of gay sex. I asked her if we only looked at biology, is there something more natural about heterosexual vs homosexual sex? She said no. I pressed the point for about five minutes and she assured me that there is nothing about the male/female sexual organs, the existence of sperm and eggs, or the process of procreation, that would suggest males and females were uniquely designed for intercourse with one another.
I started to feel the room spin. I asked if we could stop the conversation. If we can’t agree on these kinds of basic facts about biology it seemed hopeless to think we could make progress in moving closer to each other’s view of the world.
Since that conversation and many more like it I’ve begun to see the spiritual wisdom in Paul word’s:
“They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie” -2 Thessalonians 2:10-11
God’s preferred consequence for someone who refuses to love the truth is to hand them over to a lie.
Ugh!
Part of me does not want to believe this but at the same time, it makes so much sense of what I’ve experienced.
Everyone, whether a believer or non-believer, must choose to “love the truth”.
This is a prerequisite in order to avoid being given over to a powerful delusion.
Knowing that there are those who love the truth and those who are under the spell of a delusion can help us know how to have conversations with people.
One place I’ve enjoyed seeing this play out is listening to secular podcasters. Joe Rogan and a number of others have created a brand around being open to correction. The practice that Rogan has of having long-form, open-ended conversations where claims can be fact-checked in real-time has built for him the largest podcast audience in the world.
But Rogan is certainly the exception. Many will deny basic facts in order to persist in believing a lie.
The difference between these two perspectives is something like this:
Perspective 1: I choose what I believe based on what I wish were true.
Perspective 2: I choose to believe what is objectively true regardless of my wishes.
The only way to avoid being swept into a delusion and becoming an avatar of some system of belief is not only to agree with perspective 2 but to LOVE perspective 2.
You must go beyond begrudgingly believing the truth. You must “love the truth”.
Ever since understanding this basic difference I’ve learned to make common cause with fellow truth lovers despite what they currently believe is true. Their openness to correction and their good faith in every conversation makes them a joy to spend time with. Many of my closest friends disagree with me on basic things including the existence of God but what they all have in common is they have demonstrated over and over that they love the truth.
As long as someone loves the truth there’s always hope they will find it.
Thank you for putting this out. I was challenged with something similar to this when I heard a pastor claim that there is a new "sect " or outlook of believers that he called new age referring to those who subscribe to things such as the secret.