Friday, March 03, 2006

When Fundamentalists Make Phil's Point for Him

If you think Phil Johnson was way off base when he argued that fundamentalists are more obsessed with the movement than the principles, just read the comments here for some excellent illustrations of that very point.

I am appalled but not surprised at how quickly the debate became about whether Johnson and MacArthur are fundamentalists rather than about whether Johnson's ideas are valid. Folks, let's please not fall prey to this classic tactic (common not just among fundamentalists, but among all those who don't want to interact with ideas) of ignoring the message of a presentation and attacking instead the person who articulated it. Kudos to the site owner for recognizing this and challenging it.


bob topartzer said...

If you compare last yrs. pt.1 and pt.2 you see Phil has learned something more about fundamentalism. Most students at Central BTS, DBTS, and CBTS, know quite a bit more about fundy history than Phil. Phil needs to take such a course in fundy hist.
Why worry about what he thinks? He doesn't have enough experience or knowledge to make discerning truth staments on the subject. All he had was a platform at a popular conference.

david said...

ah, yes, my heart is warmed to read such comments. warmed in the sense of, well bob, i see you read Ben's post as well as you listen to Phil, which is obviously not at all. i'd encourage you to notice that Ben is urging you not to discredit men instead of interacting with their ideas, and that your comment is exactly what he is calling problematic.

let's try something more constructive. how about you show how Phil's "discerning truth staments" are illegitimate or off-target, which ones were accurate, and what we can do to correctly assess Fundamentalism.

Ben said...

Problem: We see roaches on the floor.

Solution: Let's turn off the lights.