 |
| Megan Phelps-Roper |
In class this week we've considered how studying philosophy may help us acquire intellectual goods such as liberation from ideological prisons erected by our surrounding (secular, religious) cultures and freedom from a particular kind of dogmatism.
Here's what I'd like you to do. Read this brief story about Megan Phelps-Roper (granddaughter of founder Fred Phelps) and her departure from Westboro Baptist Church:
https://medium.com/reporters-notebook/d63ecca43e35
In your view, how does Megan's story connect, if at all, to what we've been talking about in class? Are you aware of any other similar stories? What do you make of all this?
58 comments:
First, it's interesting to hear the story and to look at someone who has done an almost 180 degree turn on their beliefs. Rather than a God of wrath and hate, she has turned to a God of love, this all through Philosophy. It is due to Philosophy and a Biblical Knowledge that Megan was able to free herself from what she now sees as a lie. But, what of her family that still sees their beliefs as totally true, even when questioned? To Westboro, in this case, the study of Philosophy is DANGEROUS because it has caused Megan to fall from her faith.
I, one who is on the "other side," or on the side of a loving God, see this move and transition as a way in which Megan has found freedom from Dogmatism, freedom from the idea that thinking and questioning a church, a doctrine, a teaching means deliberately attacking God. But, some would argue that Megan is by no means free from Dogmatism because she still has a faith in the God of the Bible. Her views on that God may have changed, but ultimately she wasn't swayed from her core faith, the core foundation that God is Creator and Christ is Lord(at least that is what I gather from her dialogue in the interview and from her attendance to a church). I know of many that would argue the "absolute morality" the Bible teaches is a form of dogmatism. The idea that a governing God sets the rules in a "black and white" fashion and that we can't sway from those rules is dogmatic because logic would never sway us a Christians to say "Murder is okay," "Free love is okay," or "Adultery is good to go." We have a moral code that we live by, something we won't sway from even if an argument arrises that seems to prove such black-and-white principles wrong. Instead, many atheists would argue for moral relativism. Situations, societies, and other social factors all determine what is right and wrong at that point in time. Megan says she is searching for a Right and Wrong(emphasis on the capital R and W). Some may still argue that search is very dogmatic.
I do find it interesting that Megan's goal from the start was to help people. It does show how blind dogmatism and legalism can make someone. However, the Cedarville Community or even the Evangelical Church is in some respect a Westboro to another group. What I mean by that is, what Westboro is to Cedarville, Cedarville is to someone else, and so the cycle continues. Philosophy offers and opening of the mind and a freedom from dogmatism. But true freed from dogmatism isn't possible for a Christian as there are certain Truths and certain principles they must hold fast to. They should ignore the other arguments, but to some extent it seems reasonable to say that I, as a Christian, will take less seriously an argument for the justification of free love than I will argument for the death penalty. This is due to the fact that both, in some capacity, are touched on in the Bible and as a result I would look to the Bible as my ultimate source of Truth.
While is seems Megan is free from Dogmatism, I don't know that I Christian ever fully can be. That's not to say we should want to be, but to say that Philosophy can be dangerous, even for the Christian, if they are searching for Freedom from Dogmatism rather than searching for the truth.
This story is very similar to what we have been talking about in class. We have discussed the idea that people tend to just believe the things that are most convenient to carry on their current lifestyle. Once people really start to dissect and pick apart their beliefs they tend to find flaws or questions arise. In this story, Megan Phelps-Roper, experiences that in her own life. She was once a strong, active participant in the Westboro Baptist Church known for their harsh view towards sin and humanity. When she began to question her beliefs she began to realize they were severely flawed and actually went against the Bible. She even recognized that to begin to question your beliefs or lifestyle is accepting the idea that your life may be drastically changed. She did not just settle. She realized the mistakes in her beliefs or thoughts about who God is and instead of remaining the same, she adjusted her life accordingly. It is awesome to see someone practice philosophy in such a way that they change in accordance with what they discover. It is obviously extremely difficult especially at 27 to give up everything you have ever known or been taught. She gave up her family and her church family. It is inspiring as well as a little scary to think about what may happen in your own life if you think about fundamental beliefs in your own life.
It is interesting that she realizes that her whole life she has been blindly dogmatic. She thought Westboro had all the answers. Eventually she realized that there are a vast number of doctrines that people accept as the truth. She did not just turn away and blindly accept another doctrine, rather she is thinking through the big concepts of God on her own. She consults the Bible and thanks to God and His redeeming power she is trying to change her life. This account shows that philosophy has the potential to completely change people, it will disrupt one’s life, and it will cause people to be shaken from their blind beliefs. One has to be ready for what may happen to their status quo when they begin to practice philosophy in their own lives.
This story is very similar to what we have been talking about in class. We have discussed the idea that people tend to just believe the things that are most convenient to carry on their current lifestyle. Once people really start to dissect and pick apart their beliefs they tend to find flaws or questions arise. In this story, Megan Phelps-Roper, experiences that in her own life. She was once a strong, active participant in the Westboro Baptist Church known for their harsh view towards sin and humanity. When she began to question her beliefs she began to realize they were severely flawed and actually went against the Bible. She even recognized that to begin to question your beliefs or lifestyle is accepting the idea that your life may be drastically changed. She did not just settle. She realized the mistakes in her beliefs or thoughts about who God is and instead of remaining the same, she adjusted her life accordingly. It is awesome to see someone practice philosophy in such a way that they change in accordance with what they discover. It is obviously extremely difficult especially at 27 to give up everything you have ever known or been taught. She gave up her family and her church family. It is inspiring as well as a little scary to think about what may happen in your own life if you think about fundamental beliefs in your own life.
It is interesting that she realizes that her whole life she has been blindly dogmatic. She thought Westboro had all the answers. Eventually she realized that there are a vast number of doctrines that people accept as the truth. She did not just turn away and blindly accept another doctrine, rather she is thinking through the big concepts of God on her own. She consults the Bible and thanks to God and His redeeming power she is trying to change her life. This account shows that philosophy has the potential to completely change people, it will disrupt one’s life, and it will cause people to be shaken from their blind beliefs. One has to be ready for what may happen to their status quo when they begin to practice philosophy in their own lives.
Reading Megan Phelps-Roper's story of leaving her family, church, and the teachings that she grew up with was a powerful story to say the least, but it really reminded me of what we have been talking about in class in regards to arrogant dogmatism.
If Miss Phelps-Roper was actually the definition of an arrogant dogmatist then she would not have come to the knowlege that what she, her family, and her church were doing was actually wrong and the opposite of what they were trying to accomplish. I would agree that she was dogmatic in her beliefs in the sense that she was actively doing what she thought was right, but apparently she was willing to see what was going on around her and how that might affect her and her circumstances. If she had been fully and arrogantly dogmatic, she would have never left her church and family in pursuit of right and wrong.
I have a personal story that ties in with the discussion of dogmatism. One of my friends and his family strongly believed that women should not have careers. They were okay if women helped out the family by working, but they weren't supposed to go to college and go out into the professional world and work. They were so stuck with that perspective that even their daughters were totally passionate about getting involved in law enforcement, but they told me that they would never pursue those dreams because it went against what they had been taught.
This is something that bothers me. The idea of dogmatism in the context of arrogance, bull-headedness, and unwillingness to consider other's opinions. For me, I totally believe that we should be dogmatic in our beliefs in the sense that we are willing to see the viewpoints of others and to take their views and check them against our beliefs in order to see if there is any truth in their points. We need to be willing to look outside our own little world and embrace the truth of what others have to say in order that we become even more well educated and firm in our beliefs. We need to be open to others so we can learn from them and know how we can reach them where they are at.
Denida Chapman- 11 am
I think that Megan’s story connects because in the article, there was the analogy that your worldview is a wall and each belief is a brick. Megan is starting to take each brick, examine it, and decide whether to put it back in the wall or to take it out. I think that philosophy is like that because you take each claim and break it down to its most basic parts to see if it is a structurally sound argument. I think that philosophy calls each of us to do what Megan did on a regular basis. Like Megan, changing beliefs will change your behavior.
I would agree with Jerry that Megan is still quite dogmatic because she did not question that there is a God who loves. Considering the big change already in her life, I would say that it may take some time for her. I think that it is more important that she is making progress than that she has arrived. I think that very few people are totally free in their thinking and of those who are quite free in their thinking; I believe that it took a while for them to condition their thinking process that way.
I would disagree with Jerry when he said that atheist would argue for moral relativism. I would say that not only atheists, but many professing Christians today would argue for a type of moral relativism, if not full moral relativism. Saying that sin is a black and white issue is very unpopular in many American churches.
I would also disagree with Jerry when he said that it is not possible for a Christian to not to be dogmatic on some core issues. I would say that it is possible to be un-dogmatic and seriously consider an opponent’s arguments without changing your beliefs.
I do have a question for Jerry: what did you mean when you said “That's not to say we should want to be, but to say that Philosophy can be dangerous, even for the Christian, if they are searching for Freedom from Dogmatism rather than searching for the truth”? Could you clarify the difference between freedom from dogmatism and the search for truth? I would think that in your process of being less dogmatic, you would find the truth.
-Annelise
Megan's story is very cool to me especially, since I was born in Topeka and have seen WBC protests all of my life. But it was cool to see how Megan's story illustrates what we have been discussing in class. Megan had been taught that they were the only ones with the truth. Megan started to to think about the things she had been taught when she discussed her belief with a Jewish man. As she began to think deeply about these "truths" she had know, she realized that they didn't line up with the Bible or even with the church's theology.
After Megan and Grace left WBC they spent a few days just thinking and reading about religion and philosophy. They weren't sure what to believe anymore. To this day they still are searching for truth, but clearly philosophy has had a positive impact on their lives.
Joel (11:00)
I enjoyed reading Meghan's story because it illustrates what we have been learning in class. I agree with him when he says that it sends the wrong message when people say that homosexuality is a sin. I feel like it's a slap in the face when a person is told that they have no hope for salvation. We are taught to not trust our feelings, as they are deceiving. I agree with this statement that all of us are guilty of sin and therefore are unable to point a finger in another person's face. I feel like that is being self-righteous and not living the way God intended us to.I believe God calls us to love each other and lift each other up instead of put each down. I believe that God gives each of us second chance every day to be a blessing to someeone else.
I thought this was a great story! I hope Megan chooses to stick with her faith and just revitalize it. This story really illustrates the importance of thinking about why you believe what you believe. It is an invaluable practice, especially as Christians. It is clear that God is working in Megan's life and it is really cool that through her story, maybe some of the hurt done by those protests and signs can be undone. Her vulnerability in discussing this issue is admirable as well. I think this relates well to our discussion in class about knowing what you believe and being open to change if you find that you are wrong.
Nicole S. MWF 9am
Through this article, it is evident that Megan Phelps-Roper was liberated from dogmatic viewpoints. She had rigid views about America, homosexuality, and war. While she was a member of Westboro Baptist Church Megan’s views were imposed on her by her church and her family and she never had the chance to think about what she believed. Westboro Baptist church clearly would think that philosophy is dangerous. Megan said she never thought for herself and when she did she realized her views were different and was kicked out of the congregation. In my opinion though, philosophy is vital to examining one’s faith and beliefs. Without thinking philosophically about such matters one will live by what other people believe, not one’s own beliefs. My home church is more on the conservative and I feel like some people at my church hold “arrogant dogmatic” beliefs. One lady in particular doesn’t listen to anything other than hymns, associate with others that aren’t Christians etc. With this mind set she will not be able to see eye to eye with others that are not similar to her and it could have many negative consequences. Not only can it give Christians a negative name but she won’t be able to expand her knowledge or strengthen her faith if she is so narrow minded.
-Jessie Comeau 9 MWF
Megan’s story is a good illustration of the liberating affect philosophy is claimed to have upon the lives of those who engage in it. Many quotes from the article refer the walls broken down by Megan’s open mind that previously clouded her vision of God and His relationship with the world. In reference to the new found innocence and naiveté that now characterizes Megan the author said, “But how else would it be? How else could it be, given the boundaries that have always marked the hours of her life?” Commenting on these disappearance of these confines herself Megan added, “I’m trying to figure out which ones were good and smart, and which ones shouldn’t be there anymore…I don’t feel confident at all in my beliefs about God… I don’t believe anymore that WBC has a monopoly on truth.” Through critically thinking about and testing the beliefs she grew up with, Megan overcame her dogmatic attitude concerning her former brand of “truth.”
While I agree with the previous comments that claim, as Christians, we do to some degree hold to the core values of our faith with what someone may refer to as a dogmatic attitude. However, this fact does not give Christians the liberty to become unmovable in all arenas of their preferred doctrinal beliefs. While one may rightfully say that the typical Cedarville student has not had to overcome and leave beliefs as radical as Megan were, many do adopt an attitude similar to the ones she previously held when it comes to someone challenging one of their non-essential conclusions. Like Megan was held captive to the thought that WBC held the complete and accurate truth, many Christians, perhaps unintentionally, act as if their church or denomination has an air-tight interpretation of scripture. I have personally run into this situation and been confronted with the reality that some of my opinions about the finer details of faith were incorrect. We could all benefit from learning to approach opposing viewpoints a little more like Megan did, with a receptive and humble attitude.
-Kaitlynn H. 9:00
I think this story connects rather well with what we have been talking about in class lately. Megan Phelps-Roper is examining her beliefs that she had previously been dogmatic about. She adhered to the stance Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) took on many issues and dogmatically proclaimed those views. She had been letting WBC do her philosophy for her and she began to realize the holes in the churches reasoning. The church was doing philosophy and wrote their conclusions in brief on sign to be held by its members. This seems to fly in the face of the premise that philosophy frees from arrogant dogmatism. One could argue, however, that philosophy in this case was not done well.
Megan decided to do her own philosophy and it led her on a path away from all that she had ever known, WBC and her family. I also thought the brick analogy was interesting. Megan began looking at the bricks, what she thought was a solid wall of truth, in her life to see, "…if there’s something worth keeping or whether it’s not as solid as you thought it was." The thing that I think is being overlooked is the need for a foundation for that wall to be built up on. I think some dogmatism is needed to even approach philosophy. It is the foundation on which you even see philosophy as a way to attempt to answer the difficult questions of life. The foundation is where you think the answers lie for these fundamental questions. Then you can move on to doing philosophy as it stems from those foundational beliefs.
I agree with Jerry Bailey when he say he doesn't think her core beliefs really changed. She still believes that is a God that saves and redeems, but she has let go of some things which she had earlier held on to tightly.
Annelise, I don't quite understand your statement of, "I would say that it is possible to be un-dogmatic and seriously consider an opponent’s arguments without changing your beliefs." Are you saying you can't be dogmatic on your beliefs and seriously consider and someone else's argument?
- Tim Hull (9:00)
The story of Megan Phelps is not a new one. Throughout history people have twisted the truth God have given us through the Bible. Philosophy is just a fancy title to seeking truth. It is never wrong to question why you believe the way you do. It is your God given nature to do so. People who are afraid to question, limit themselves to a life of not knowing the truth. What is that truth? God! Such a powerful word. It is not "God who hates" but people. Jerry Bailey is correct to state the Bible is the ultimate source of truth but "the truth is God!" We so often miss that point. We are all fallable, make mistakes and just plain get it wrong sometimes, but just as the article states... Thank God for second chances!
Connie D. M-W-F 9am
I think I would agree with everybody in saying that this story certainly gives a good example of what we discussed in class. Megan’s former beliefs were extremely dogmatic, certainly in the realm of arrogant dogmatism, though she didn’t perceive it to be that way. The whole foundation of WBC is built on dangerously dogmatic and arrogant foundations, being that they believe their church’s interpretation of Scripture is THE way one must understand God’s Word, and digression from this is sinful. Certainly, that statement should be enough to put us on guard. The problem here is obviously not with holding fast to Scriptural teaching but holding WBC’s interpretation, and theirs only. It’s sad that there are people who will so blindly accept a teaching like that, and one that has such non-Scriptural applications too. If Megan had done her own philosophy she would have seen that the internal framework of her church’s doctrine was inconsistent with its own teaching: proclaiming to teach the Bible, they blatantly ignored Jesus’ words.
To add my 2 cents to the conversation going on here, I would say that a certain amount of dogmatism is, in essence, necessary to the Christian faith. But, of course, that would depend on how you define dogmatism. For example, if someone brings an argument to us that Jesus Christ did not resurrect from the dead, I believe we cannot enter this argument with the mindset that “if the evidence for their side is good, I will go with it and forsake Christ’s resurrection.” We should by all means take their argument seriously and address it as best we can, but I believe it is unfaithful to leave open the possibility of our leaving the faith when addressing an argument. I think we must hold to our core convictions, while addressing arguments against them intelligently and respectfully.
After reading this story I don't believe that it was philosophy that change Megan mind but God himself.Just as God had change my mind. I can recall the first week in maintenance a christian coworker had approach me and tried to talk to me about God. I got so mad that I told her to get out of my face before I filled a harassment suit against her, this was in 2000. In 2004 I got saved and when I went back to the same time as this christian she notice that there was something different about me,it took her a few day but she figured it out that I had been saved. I think the same thing happen to Megan.I believe that God save those who he wants and at a given time in there life. It has nothing to do with philosophy. I was told in a dream over several mouths that I was going to die and that I needed to get my affairs in order and to get right with God.I was a happy non-christian before I was saved, and now I know that I'm going to heaven when I die but there is still a lot I don't know about God and why he does what he does. When Megan talked to the Jews guy about Judaism it was as if God had spoken to her. It wasn't philosophy it was God, and to think anything else takes away from who God is, and the power he has to change a person.The more you know who God is, the more you want to know him.I will say that Megan's search has lead her to do some philosophy that is to question what the church was doing and to look at how they were doing it. As i said in class on Wednesday I had a guy at work who moved to the Jehovah witness church. We could not move him from that line of thought, as long as a person is in a religion they will never be moved if God doesn't help. No philosophy or theology can do what God can, and that is to change a person heart, their spirit, their mind.Philosophy can move people to change their minds but it's going to take God first to seek then out first and not the other way. Megan got saved that day she left, and it wasn't philosophy that gave her the power to do that but himself. I think God for saving people like Megan, and I pray that she will take her direction from God and not from a person standing behind a pulpit.
I think this article definitely pertains to the discussions we have had in class. The very essence of it connects strongly to the ideas that philosophy can liberate us from some of our ideological beliefs that imprison us, as well as free us from certain dogmatic beliefs we may hold. Megan Phelps-Roper experienced this first hand. Upon questioning her beliefs, examining them “brick by brick,” Megan found that not all of her beliefs were well-founded. In fact, she found that some of her beliefs directly contradicted other beliefs she held. As she examined each part of her faith, she kept an open mind, and her beliefs changed according to the evidence she found. Megan’s statement concerning the process she was going through speaks almost directly to what we have been discussing: “to have a fortress of faith built around you, and to have to dismantle it yourself, brick by brick, examining each one and deciding whether there’s something worth keeping or whether it’s not as solid as you thought it was.” This is a tough process, and the many tears shed by Megan are evidence of this. Yet, in spite of the pain, Megan stands by her decision to examine her faith. She realizes that she did not build this “fortress of faith,” but allowed others to build it for. She allowed others to do her philosophy, and when she began doing her own, she discovered that not everything was as solid as she had believed. Thus, philosophy did free liberate her from some of her ideological beliefs.
Though I understand that Jerry was not necessarily arguing that Megan is not free from dogmatism, I would still have to disagree with the argument posed. Dogmatism does not simply meaning holding to ones beliefs; it means arrogantly asserting ones opinions as fact. It is perfectly plausible that through examining her core faith, she could still arrive at the conclusion that God is real, but her previous beliefs concerning Him are not true. However, as stated by Megan herself, “I don’t feel confident at all in my beliefs about God.” She is still in the process of examining her beliefs, thus it is too early to assert that she is still dogmatic in her beliefs. It would, in fact, be a dogmatic statement to say that because she still believes in God, she is dogmatic.
Megan’s story greatly connects with what we have been talking about in class. It reminds me of when Socrates questioned those in power about the definition of justice. The Jewish man, that questioned her beliefs about homosexuals and God, was her Socrates who caused her to think about what she was doing and not just depending on the tradition she had been raised in. His comment caused Megan to really look into what God says in his word and realized how crazy it was to believe that only her church had everything interpreted correctly. Her story shows that it is good to question what you have been taught and that it is possible to do so without abandoning belief in God. Megan still believes in God, but she realizes now more of the love of God that she has been missing. She wants to do good and thought that she was in her past but through questioning what she was doing, she realized that she really was not doing good. I think it is very good for Megan to try to figure out what God wants her to do. I hope that she does not completely reject everything she has learned in her past as completely flawed. Most of it was very flawed, but in her interview she said a couple of things that are contrary to the Word of God. For one she said that she had been taught that your feelings are always wrong. I do not believe that feelings are always wrong, but it is sometimes very dangerous to follow your feelings alone. So I believe that it is good that she is questioning to figure out what is true but I hope that she does not go to the complete opposite extreme in her faith.
-Hannah H. (9:00)
Megan seems to fit very much into what we have discussed in class especially in the way in which she was dogmatic in her beliefs and not opening up to the outside world and outside thinking for 27 years. I think this is a great thing especially if you were so infused to something that wasn’t true. Praise the Lord that she found some truth but why do I have any right to say what is true? Is Jesus the Truth as he says he is? Without a doubt in my mind even though I sway. It is good to question but we must hold true to the Bible and make it the root of the questioning because if the Bible is not Gods word and if it is not complete, and not true then there should be no religion at all. We have discussed that some people think it is dangerous to study Philosophy but if you are in fact saved and have true belief, you will not be plucked from Gods hand and you will stick to your faith until the end. So questioning shouldn’t take your salvation because you must have it first.
Anna P. (11:00)
I found this article to be interesting, in the fact that Megan turned her life around. Before she was a spiteful woman who believed anything her church told her, but now she has learned to question her beliefs. She is looking for answers to questions that she didn't even know she had. She is considering many different arguments. Look at each one and if there is something plausible then take it with a grain of salt.
Philosophy is one of the many influences in life that changes us. Whether we accept it or agree with it or like it, the study of Philosophy changes perspective. This is clearly seen in the story of Megan Phelps-Roper.
It's stated in the article about Megan's current transition that she began to really change her thinking when she studied Philosophy; "She was looking through books on philosophy and religion, and it struck her that people had devoted their entire lives to studying these questions of how to live and what is right and wrong. “The idea that only WBC had the right answer seemed crazy,” she says. “It just seemed impossible.”
In Megan's study of Philosophy, she discovered that strictly believing that her religion lead beliefs were right could not be true. She opened her mind to the idea that the Philosophy of WBC was not universal truth. And after further study, she made the choice to step away from WBC.
Yes, the study of Philosophy opened Megan's mind to other opinions that lead her astray from the faith she was raised with. Her study of Philosophy pointed her to a different direction than what she was instructed in. However, most would say that the study of Philosophy freed her from the dangerous, small-minded community of WBC.
Megan is now able to pursue and profess her own Philosophies in freedom and peace.
(9AM)
I can't believe how drastically her beliefs were willingly about to change; I know that her beliefs were forced onto her all of her life, but for her to take a "step of faith" is admirable. I admire her openness and willing heart to learn and follow the truth, but it was a bold move as well. After researching other religions and philosophy, she found it impossible for her church to have all the ultimate answers to life's hard questions which seemed impossible to her. it's evident that philosophy has the ability to change people and lead them towards the proper search for truth.
This is exactly the sort of process that we have been talking about in class and specifically something that we addressed at length in my discussion group on Friday. Her story displays that desire to find truth and to conform our lives to fit that truth as we draw closer and closer to it. It also fits into what we spoke of the first week of class. It is extremely apparent by how Megan and her sister Grace were treated by their congregation and even by their family upon leaving the church that what the sisters saw as pursuing truth was seen as something extremely dangerous by their congregants and it did indeed prove to be “dangerous” as the sisters ended up leaving the faith of their family and friends to embark on this journey of discovery. The sisters didn’t even know what truth in fact was, but they recognized that the dogmatism they had been fed their entire lives could not be the truth, at least not all of it. Something that stood out to me that Megan Phelps-Roper said is that she couldn’t say for sure what truth was and was constantly purifying and purging her beliefs with careful scrutiny to discovery what aspects of her life she could hold onto and continue to believe in and what beliefs had to be thrown away. I love this because even after she makes the initial decision that she has been taught wrongly for the most part, she still recognizes that some of her past may contain truth and is devoted to discovering that truth and learning how to apply it.
Ian F. (9:00 MWF)
One of the things we have been talking about in class is why bother with philosophy. I believe that Megan’s story connects a lot to why we should bother with philosophy. Our philosophy on various things, such as what is good and bad or right and wrong, affects how we live and treat others. This is evident in Megan’s story. At one point she thought it was right that all homosexuals were going to hell and to let the world know that. This led her to be very active in protesting against homosexuals. However, now her philosophy on what is right and wrong have changed, and so has the way she treats people who are gay. Philosophy is worth the time to be bothered with because it affects us.
Also, we discussed in class about how doing philosophy can be beneficial to us in that it can free us from arrogant dogmatism. Megan’s story definitely displayed this. She stated that is was crazy to believe that just her church had the right answer. Once she began to question why she thought the way she did, she began to realize that there were holes in her thinking. Eventually, that led to her leaving Westboro Baptist Church. This would have never happened if she refused to consider the objections to her way of thinking.
I would say most Christians would respect Megan for leaving her church and their doctrines. However, this makes me wonder what beliefs should Christians remain dogmatic on? Not necessarily arrogantly dogmatic, but keep to that belief even when it seems that our belief does not have fallible support. We support Megan’s decision to leave the church and the doctrine it preaches because she came to a side that supports what we believe. If Westboro Baptist Church has doctrines that should not be upheld, is it quite possible that the church we attend does too? We should not just accept doctrines that the Church teaches because the church said so.
-Madison Pross (9:00)
I think this article connects very much with what we've been talking about in class. Westboro Baptist Church could be seen as some of the most dogmatic people out there: not only do they deny listening to reason but they also try to force their beliefs on others. It is very admirable for Megan to step up and actually pursue the truth of her beliefs. It would have been very easy for her to never really question what was happening around her, and to simply believe everything because her family did. She instead decided to question her beliefs and listen to reason, as we all should. Blind faith is not smart and should be questioned.
Laramie H. (11:00)
Praise God for His work in Megan Phelps-Roper's life! It appears from the associated article that she has finally woken up to the fact that her former church and family do not bear divine inspiration and flawless interpretation of God's Holy Word. The real triumph here, though, is not that Megan has realized that Westboro Baptist Church is bigoted in its beliefs and hypocritical in its judgements on others, but that Megan herself has taken a courageous step of faith by removing herself from everything she has ever known, the world in which she has developed the very fabric of her being, and begun to critically reexamine what has always been held up to her as the absolute Truth. She admits that although she is no longer confident in what she believes about God (can you blame her!!), she at least believes that "WBC no longer holds a monopoly on truth."
I believe Megan Phelps-Roper's story proves the liberating influence of engaging in philosophical study, in freeing us from certain ideological constraints. It seems almost impossible to approach philosophy without some dogmatic beliefs about God, humanity, and the world. Especially if we have always been taught a certain mindset, it may be difficult and seem irrational for us to step away from a worldview that has dictated every area of our existence. In Megan's case, she is at point of separating the good from the bad. She has realized that many of her experiences were not the sum total of truth, and not leading her to the Truth. It starts with a tremendous amount of humility to be able to admit that our very brief life, the experiences and ideologies that have shaped our existence to this point, are not necessarily leading us to the Truth at all. Maybe we have been led astray. Maybe engaging in philosophical examination will allow us to critically take a step back, and like Megan, learn to separate the good from the bad as a foundation for the discovery of the essence of life.
Adam R. Olson (11:00)
It's beautiful that God has the power to change an instrument of destruction into an instrument for good. I think the story of Megan Phelps-Roper is a similar one to that of Paul. Paul was justified in his treatment of Christians, he felt like God was telling him he should put down this cult before the Jewish culture was skewed. Megan did the same thing, she was taught that God thought and acted a certain way so she wanted to do what she believed with all of her heart was right. She participated in protests and social media to portray what she had been taught since birth. She told the word exactly what she had been spoon fed. But someone woke her up. Thus, the instrument that caused pain transformed into something greater. This comes right alongside what we have been discussing in class, Megan was a dogmatist. She held to her opinion despite what others said, she was unwilling to change. Then something clicked. This shows me at least, there is hope for every dogmatist. No matter who you are, your strongly held views can change. As a Christian, I hope she finds that other versions of Christianity are more truthful to Christ than that of Westboro Baptist Church. That said, Philosophy is all about examining ones presuppositions and life as a whole to piece together what it's all about. I think this is essential. The author said that Megan had a sort of innocence to her as she searches for truth. I would agree, until you start to think for yourself, you are just a child. Based on that, there are some adults who die without growing up philosophically. The un-examined life isn't worth living, Socrates said. I would agree, but I would like to take that one step further. The un-examined life isn't lived much at all. When people just blindly accept "truths" they walk in the shadows of those who presented them. There is no life, just a shadow, or copy of someone who may have examined there life at one time. It's essential to dive into our own lives, to see what is really worth keeping.
-Matt Jackson
This was an interesting and incredible story to read. First off all changing ones beliefs almost entirely is a HUGE step. To turn away from everything you have ever been taught and believe is hard enough and on top of that the entire church and her family are shunning her as well is a harsh reality to grasp. This is a major faith and growth step in Megan's walk with Christ.
Where Philosophy helped turn Megan was when she began to question the things that the church was founded upon. She said, "Westboro teaches that one cannot trust his or her feelings. They're unreliable... All that's trustworth is the Bible. And if you have a feeling or thought that's against the church's interpretations of the Bible, then it's a feeling or a thought against God himself." This belief began to nag at Megan. She had to think deeply about the meaning and implications of this. She couldn't just keep being so dogmatic. She needed to open up and listen to what the majority of Christians are saying and believing. If what Westboro says is true then they are the only church in America that has interpreted the scriptures right and are the only ones that are truly saved. Megan knew this was absurd and began to seek philosophy directly. This is relatable to what we are discussing and have discussed because of the simple reason that philosophy is meant to allow us to not just take information and absorb it like fact, but rather to question why it is true or why we are being taught such things. If we just believe what we hear or are taught and never study deeper into things we are in danger of being utterly deceived.
Zack Gatlin (11:00 MWF)
This is the perfect example of having humble dogmatism. Even though Megan was practicing an inaccurate expression of Christ’s message, she, when confronted with the vastness of misunderstood Biblical teachings, did not through Christianity out with the poor interpretations. Instead she tore down the “fortress of faith built around…[her]…, brick by brick” and through examination kept the truth and dismissed Satan’s lies.
Tim Powers I think that you overestimated the amount of free will given to Megan as a young woman within the WBC. You said “If Megan had done her own philosophy”, you are in essence blaming her that she was born into this family. Until she was 18 she was a child in this cult (i.e. she had no rights), and as a young woman she did not have any true status (i.e. some rights but not a lot); she and her sister where indoctrinated from birth that WBC and their beliefs were correct and that everyone else who opposed was wrong. What does anyone else think?
To T. McMillan:
I see what you mean. Clearly, philosophy alone can’t save a person; neither can any sort of science, religion, or evidence. So yeah, I would agree that it was absolutely God who led her to change her mind. But I also think that at times God can and does use philosophy to turn people’s minds and hearts to him, the same way He can use anything. That’s really cool though, how the Lord changed your own mind and made you a different person! That’s a great story to hear, especially that the coworker could notice a difference after the Lord had worked in you.
To Kati:
Good point, thanks for pointing that out! While it is true that doing her own philosophy would have led to her intellectual freedom, it is unreasonable to expect someone as heavily indoctrinated as herself to even consider other ideas as truth.
I believe it shows how destructive dogmatism can be. If she had not explored and learned, she would have been stuck in the same cycle of hatred for who knows how long. For Christians, we do hold onto the Bible as our only source of truth, but is this destructive dogmatism? The normal Christian would say "Of course not!" but how many say that in the church in question here when questioned on their beliefs? There's a question to start a discussion on, so feel free to comment below.
Megan didn’t even know how to think on the small issues of life because she had been taugh, or allowed, to think on her own. She was never to question the church. Her entire existence was the church, not the global Church (aka doing God’s work with God’s family), but Westbrook Baptist. The people in that church are required to accept everything that is told to them, to not question it, because if you question what they are teaching you are questioning God Himself. There is a parallel between what Megan says about Westbrook Baptist and ideas I have held myself. They morphed in to my ideas because of my environment when I was raised, and because of how I interpreted all that I saw. All of that was before Christ was in my life. Moving God’s values and ideas and priorities in, while moving personal beliefs out, is an extremely difficult process. You have to learn how to re-think, or perhaps think for the first time. But it is not a one-time practice, it is ongoing. The more I learn and talk to others, especially those around me, my initial ideas of God’s nature changes, as I learn more about Him and about His world.
I like her quote “I don’t believe anymore that WBC has a monopoly on truth.” You can remove WBC and replace it with just about anything that we hold on to in a dogmatic way.
Denise (11)
Megan Phelps-Roper's story does mirror the discussions we have had in class. Her family has become the poster-child for what dogmatism can turn into. They have demonstrated the almost violent nature toward the world that can be expressed when one chooses to completely isolate themselves ideologically with the rest of society. Megan, through close reflection on what it is scripture says and critical analysis of her church's actions, was able to break away from the dangerous dogmatism surrounding her. Megan's story however is not a singular one as many former members of her church, including multiple members of her family, have broken from their connections to the church. This has to be considered a positive step forward for Megan but she will continue to struggle with the residual effects of dogmatism throughout her life. While she was able to come to the conclusion that her church was incorrectly representing their faith, most of her beliefs to this day have a foundation built within that church. Only through continued reflection on what it is she truly believes can she ever really free herself.
-Nick D. 9:00
Megan's story is certainly interesting. The details of her background and the path she chose is quite intriguing. The article paints her as having always been a competent and self-motivated individual, introducing her church to much of social media, and even being in charge of the management duties of setting the schedule for a time. These qualities helped to define Megan in her search for truth and time of doubting what she had once held dear. Through this type of situation, Megan kept an open mind and tried to critically analyze what was actually true. This rings back to the discussions in class about dogmatism and the corresponding elements of such a point of view. In this particular case, Megan was able to identify an element of this in her life and deal with it appropriately.
-Austin K. (11:00)
To be honest, while most of Megan’s story was exciting and praiseworthy, but there were parts of it that scared me. The way she talked about her beliefs now, with a very uncertain tone, worries me that she will reject ALL of the things that WBC taught her, and turn from Christianity altogether. As horrible as their doctrine is, they still claim Jesus and as she said, claim to be trying to help people, so I wonder-without being God and able to judge people’s salvation-if being a dogmatic Christian is better than being a non-dogmatic unbeliever. I guess I can see where people are coming from when they say that Philosophy is dangerous. And maybe Philosophy is dangerous, but the more I think about it, I’m not sure that necessarily means that we shouldn’t pursue it. Maybe philosophy does bring us dangerously close to falling off the cliff into atheism, but I guess I don’t necessarily think that means it’s bad. I believe that Jesus and his gospel is truth, so if she is true to the search, she will find Jesus at the end of it. I guess that’s where faith comes in. If we trust God, and believe in God, we can faithfully pursue the truth without a net, with full willingness to conform our beliefs to whatever we find as truth, and have faith the God will guide us to himself and his truth. That’s why I was encouraged when Megan said, “I’m trying to figure out which ones [beliefs] were good and smart, and which ones shouldn’t be there anymore.” If she seeks truth and trusts God, He will bring her to himself, the Truth. So, to chime in on the discussion about whether a Christian has to necessarily be at least in part dogmatist, as brought up by the very first post by Jerry and touched on by others, I guess I would say that I don’t think so. I think the Christian can search for truth with full intention of giving up Christianity if proved to be false, but being assured that he/she won’t have to give it up because God will prove himself to be the truth. I hope that makes sense, because it did in my head.
-TJ Pancake MWF 9
Megan Phelps-Roper was raised in a very dogmatic environment. From her church to home life, there were things she was taught that had no leniency when it comes to their validity, or lack of. She was taught to believe one way and one way only when it came to her religious views. This is definitely one way that Megan's story connects to philosophy because Megan was, in a sense, not allowed to do her own philosophical thinking. I am sure many other people were just raised in that church just like Megan and have not really thought about some issues and why they believe the way they do. Many, I am sure, just believe because that is how they were raised. This happens in all religions and even random views or beliefs on non-religious ideas.
In addition to this, philosophy also connects as Megan had to do some philosophical thinking in order to come to the conclusion that the Westboro Baptist Church has an incorrect view on the Bible. Megan had to think about all the beliefs she was raised to believe and discover her stance on the idea, not what she was taught to believe. Megan also had to see why Westboro believed the way they did and where they came from on many of their "hating" views and protest. I have a friend that over the last several years converted from Catholicism to Christianity. Although the change was not as dramatic as Megans, she still had a difficult time when it came to her family and their sadness towards her change. I think that all people, religious or not, need to reevaluate their beliefs and just make sure that they see their belief as true. People need to think philosophically and do their own research so that they know why they believe something and not just that they do. It can really hep build your Christian faith as well.
Kara B. 9:00
I very much enjoyed the article. Megan Phelps-Roper is an inspiration because she has guts that most of us don't. It takes a very good amount of courage to step back from what you believe and consider if it is actually true. I say that most of us don't have the guts she had because I look around to my left and right and find dogmatic Christians who may even "listen" to an argument but they never consider it. This form of "listening" and "addressing an argument" isn't really listening or addressing an argument either. It's fake.
What I want to spur Christians to see is that a faith that cannot be tested isn't faith at all. To not be able to consider an argument because one feels so strongly about their beliefs is cowardice. There is no virtue or faithfulness in dogmatism. I am not advocating for Christians to believe whatever is in style or popular in the moment. I am saying that each and every argument presented against Jesus must be considered. And yes, you can argue against it, passionately even. And if the other person demolishes you, I am not telling you to give up your faith then and there. I am saying, take what they said and consider it further, pose it to other people, read about it, and then if years of consideration leaves you with the conclusion that there is no god, it would be more virtuous and honest for you to believe there is no god than there is one. But, what I believe will happen instead is that you will find a great amount of evidence and argument for god and you will walk away with a faith that has been tested and is true. That's a faith I want to have, not the arrogant, cowardice faith that I see way too much. This is the faith that changes people and nations. We don't need anymore cowards.
In your view, how does Megan's story connect, if at all, to what we've been talking about in class? Are you aware of any other similar stories? What do you make of all this?
Knowing a lot about Westboro Baptist and having followed their story for a while (both literally and figuratively, I love me some Twitter, haha) I think that Megan's story in this article is a perfect example of what happens when someone actually takes time to example philosophy without a Dogmatic approach, which would be exactly what we have been discussion in class.
I have heard of lots of stories like this. While some have been converts from Islam or a Jewish upbringing, I know others who have left the Christian faith they were raised in. While this may not be what we are looking for in terms of happy little success stories, the ultimate reality is that each individuals soul and heart are different and philosophy helped them answer hard questions despite their preconceived notions.
I am generally very jaded when it comes to Christians and philosophy, while I back this idea that we should be going through this humanity and studying it very aggressively, I see a lot of people twist this like the are sometimes guilty of twisting the Bible. This art is useless unless we come at it honestly until of trying to fit it around and mold it into what we want it to be.
I now know how strong dogmatism can be—following something that you don’t actually care to know whether it is true or not is true ignorance. I can think of many instances of this but mainly my high school experience stands out. Most people in my high school had very strong beliefs about many things (for example, like in the article, a general hatred for gays), but many if you asked them wouldn’t give a strong answer to the reason why they held such a presupposition. In the case of Megan Phelps-Roper, she had grown up in a household were they were strong—even extreme—beliefs, but she had no reason to actually believe them and no reason to stop following them. This is another reason why philosophy is important—to question our beliefs until we have reason to believe them. Without philosophy we wouldn’t establish what really mattered to us and we would be wasting precious time.
This is a very interesting article and I am so glad to see that Megan is out to find Truth. I think that what this means for Christianity verses Philosophy is only a story to encourage the search for faith through philosophy. I believe that there is a capital Truth out there and that God has created it. We are able to see through Megan's story that even if raised with some wrong taught relative 'truths' one can still find this 'loving' God. This story only enhances the responsibility that Christians should have in philosophy and rightfully in every area of life.
As about other stories that are similar, if I am not mistaken, C.S. Lewis' story on how He came to Christ is similar in that it was after a lot of study and a good talk with a close friend that He found Christ through logic and philosophy, so to say.
Megan Roper’s story is very strongly connected to what we’ve been talking about in class. What she is doing right now in searching for truth and how she should live her life is very much philosophical. In the article the reporter who interviewed her said this: “ Think of how hard it would be to have a fortress of faith built around you, and to have to dismantle it yourself, brick by brick, examining each one and deciding whether there’s something worth keeping or whether it’s not as solid as you thought it was.” Doing philosophy comes with the risk that we would also have to dismantle a belief brick by brick to examine it and decide whether or not it is worth keeping. The study of philosophy involves a search for truth and an understanding of how to live. One thing that drove Megan away from Westboro Baptist was the way WBC claimed a monopoly on capital T truth. She is quoted as saying “The idea that only WBC had the right answer seemed crazy, it just seemed impossible.” It’s just like what Dr. West said in the video we watched last week. Nobody has the capital T truth, but through philosophy we do our best to try to find it. That is exactly what Megan Roper is doing. She is a good (albeit extreme) example of why we should be willing to closely examine our dearest held beliefs. We might just find that they aren’t quite truthful.
I feel so sorry for Megan that she is now completely cut off from the family she loves, but at the same time I am proud of her for having the willingness to seek truth, and the boldness to follow it. She is a very brave girl. It can’t be easy for her to let go of everything she’s ever known and believed. I hope that her search for truth and new beliefs will lead her closer to Christ and that she is able to find herself in a calling that allows her to “treat people well” as she so wants to do.
Shelby F. 11:00
This story does connect to what we’ve been discussing in class. It shows the importance of not being dogmatic simply for dogmatism’s sake. This is an interesting story, because Megan legitimately believed what her church taught her. She thought she was doing what God wanted her to do. This made me think of others in religions where terrorism is seen as an act of sacrificial worship. Many of those people truly believe that they are worshipping their god by being involved with certain acts of terror. Megan’s story is an example of the importance of philosophy. It was important that she began asking questions about her faith to see if the things she was believing were true. Once she discovered, through deep thought, the loving God He really is, she changed parts of what she believed and was able to love people rather than harshly protest against some of them with false words. This story did challenge me, however, to want to think more deeply about what I’m being taught in church and why.
Anna Z. MWF 9am
"That was never our intention. We thought we were doing good. We thought it was the only way to do good. And that’s what I’ve always wanted.” -Megan Roper
Megan's story seems to be an example of what we discussed in class, on the topic of arrogant dogmatism. For years, Megan insisted that her church had the only right answers when it came to Truth. She flashed signs in peoples' faces and called out sinners in public. In her mind, she was right. There was nothing that could convince her otherwise.
Now that she realizes she was wrong, she is left to completely redetermine her worldview. Before, she was one of the few who knew the truth, now she's one of the many who has no clue.
In Megan;s case, her dogmatism was destroyed and her eyes were opened to the world around her.
While it's a tricky subject (as without some level of faith in what you believe in, you'll believe in nothing), I do not believe dogmatism to be wise.
No one has all the answers. If over time, the evidence adds up, and there's no way ignore the fact that your beliefs are wrong, I think the smartest thing is to investigate for yourself. Question what you believe and try to find evidence to support it.
As in Megan's case, dogmatism can often mean blindly following the wrong way. For this reason, I believe it is important to remain open-minded, ready to investigate and find evidence for yourself.
Emily S. 9:00
I think that this article has a lot to do with what we have been talking about in class. Megan used philosophy to get out of a destructive and negative life style that was both hindering others mentally, emotionally and physically as well as hurting her.
When someone else's well being is hindered because of one's beliefs this can be a very bad thing and if Megan just blindly followed her father she would still be doing the wrong things that her now old church does. When Megan talks about how her goal the whole time was to help people that begs the reader to think of other cases in which people thought they were doing good when they acted cruelly and didn't see it that way because they didn't think about it. If philosophy could help these situations then how could philosophy not be important. Also on the subject of dogmatism one cannot completely escape it but when we are on the lookout for better answers and examining our own lives like in the case of Megan we tend to end up better off in the end though we may not even realize it. One more thing that struck me was how she said that now that she has engaged in rethinking these things she doesn't have any answers to anything anymore. This is true of philosophy in all cases unless we have some firm unproven beliefs. Philosophy can leave us unsatisfied with life and it will probably not lead us to one good choice, but it does lead us away from bad choices. Also to think further on this what if it is good that we are unsatisfied? Maybe we can suffice to say that if the Bible is true God would want us to not come to conclusions in many areas because this causes us to lean on Him and put our full trust and faith in Him. It also lets believers long for heaven when all doubts will be gone and we will be with God.
Kyle Classen (9:00)
I really find it almost unbelievable to think that Megan did not choose to completely abandon her faith after such a life of traumatizing experience. However, throughout the article it can be clearly understood that Megan was able to hold onto her faith through her utilization of philosophy. Megan was able to use philosophy in order to question the order she was previously involved in, and uses philosophy presently as a means of conducting all decisions in her life. Philosophy clearly proves its benefits in Megan's case. However, in the view of the Westboro Baptist church and furthermore, in the view of Megan's parents, we can see that philosophy can be dangerous. Was it not philosophy, the idea of really thinking through and questioning her beliefs, that caused Megan to fall from the faith? Had she not used philosophy, her family would still be together. I believe that Megan has been freed from a very detrimental area of her life, although many would argue that Megan is far from freed. She is still part of the Christian faith and therefore, in some people's eyes is still beholdent to a larger authority. Philosophy ultimately offers freedom from dogmatism, because in its most basic form, it allows us as individuals to choose what we do and don't believe and to understand why that is. However, freedom from dogmatism really depends on a personal view. Many people would agree that Christianity is just as dogmatic as the Westboro church. I know many people who thought that my coming to a Christian college was stifling and regressive in nature. But, I see my Christianity as freeing. My life surrounds around my faith, and I am always comforted by God's place in my life, even at the most difficult of times. Philosophy in fact, is the only thing in my opinion that keeps us free from the tyranny of dogmatic ways. The freedom from a dogmatic lifestyle is opinion based. It all depends on what we hold to be dogmatic. But when we practice philosophy, when we question what we believe and choose how we live, we are ultimately choosing our own freedom, and this is ideally what Megan is aiming to do. In Megan's life, philosophy is the sole institution that has helped her to recreate her identity and understand what she believes to be true.
Johnna Vanstrom
It is very clear that megan's story applies to what we have been talking about. This story convicts me, in a way, because I have been used to going with what my parents and church have taught me all along. I have seen most of it to be true, but this story makes me question myself and wonder if I need to analyze more of my beliefs and be really honest with myself. I need to ask myself if I am being dogmatic about what I stand for or believe. Megan's story reminds me of the Bereans in Acts because they analyzed and questioned the scriptures and the gospel to see if they matched up. I think this is similar to what megan has done.
Isaac M. 11am
Yes, Megan’s story is pretty much exactly what we’ve discussed in class. Yes, there are dozens of similar stories, C.S. Lewis’, Josh McDowell, my parents, my pastor, many friends…sometimes I think it’s almost everyone’s story. That someone challenged what they had previously held to be true, and challenged it in such a way that they could not turn from the evidence/argument presented. Megan’s Jewish friend had questions that hit her beliefs in exactly the right spot, like triggering a chain reaction.
From my current perspective, I do agree with T. McMillan that it was God using all these events to lead her out of Westboro. And I also agree with Ian F’s comment about Megan’s current position on what she believes. “Even after she makes the initial decision that she has been taught wrongly for the most part, she still recognizes that some of her past may contain truth and is devoted to discovering that truth and learning how to apply it”.
However, I also agree with T.J Pancake when he said “the Christian can search for truth with full intention of giving up Christianity if proved to be false”. If we mean what we say about pursuing Truth, then we should be willing to give up Christianity. This goes along with what Anonymous said.
“…take what they said and consider it further, pose it to other people, read about it, and then if years of consideration leaves you with the conclusion that there is no god, it would be more virtuous and honest for you to believe there is no god than there is one.”
If we’re going to investigate truth, than it is IMPERITIVE that we question the CORE BELIEFS. Yes, the core beliefs. Those cannot be laid aside and unquestioned. Core beliefs really should be put under the highest scrutiny, because that is the base, the foundation everything rests on—and if the core beliefs aren’t true, everything built on top of them falls.
Anonymous had another gem.
“What I want to spur Christians to see is that a faith that cannot be tested isn't faith at all.”
Anonymous later commented that, after scrutinizing one’s beliefs, one would “walk away with a faith that has been tested and is true.” Those that don’t go through this testing, these questions, because they don’t like the scary process of not knowing and venturing onto ground that seems unstable, these people are really just being cowards. I believe this is true to a degree, that there are times when refusing to question one’s beliefs is cowardice.
I do think that the story connects to what we've been talking about in class regarding dogmatism. Megan Phelps-Roper began to question the beliefs of her church; she did not choose the path of dogmatically clinging to what she had been taught regardless of evidence and/or strong arguments which seemed contrary. She started to philosophically think about questions which every person must decide for themselves...questions such as "What is right and wrong?" Every person must make and has made choices about this and other ultimate questions whether they are aware of it or not. When Megan Phelps-Roper realized that she had been in that position for most of her life she began to think philosophically and attempting to make decisions for herself instead of believing the dogmatism of her church.
-Andrew S. 11:00
The story of Megan is an incredible example of suppressing the need for Philosophy. In broader terms, WBC also serves as a warning sign for those believers who would desire to abandon Philosophy and a search for what is really true.
It seems to be the case that when a religious sect, whether it be protestant, Mormon, Islam, or WBC, adopts unchallengable and unquestionable belief, then it becomes dangerous to its members. If one cannot challenge a belief within reason to see if it stands, how can one not end up like Megan was before she left WBC?
We as the Church need to make sure we do not unnecessarily stifle good critique of our doctrine and belief. and on the flipside, make sure we do not cause massive discord simply because we question too loudly without evidence or reason. Ideas are the most valuable currency of any believing man, and we need to make sure that currency is not in short supply: in number and in worth.
I think this post reminds me of the fact that as Christians we need to be preaching the gospel to other Christians and evangelizing to them. Megan's switch began when she started to really understand the Bible, instead of what she had been raised in, which was taking the Bible out of context. It shows that she realized that God is the authority and not man. She saw that Westboro was in the wrong and that they were not portraying God as a loving God but as a God of anger and hatred.
In light of our class discussions Megan showed that once you are able to give up your clouded view and see both sides you may start to see truth.
-Alyssa (9.00)
Megan seems to have finally discovered the truth that Christ taught to the Pharisees about not shutting people out because of their sin but instead opening up and welcoming them into the church to be healed. All too often are we filled with pride of our own righteousness only to serve our own devices. Remembering why Jesus came and who killed him is something we can never take too lightly. It seems her previous church was a prime leader in the stigma of dogmatism and only now has she opened her mind to understand other’s point of view, namely Christ’s.
-Ivan Priest
Wow!!! What an amazing and inspirational story. I can sort of relate, though not to anywhere near the same extreme, to Megan's story. I have grown up in a world without the truths that I live with currently. It looks like it was a great thing that Megan was not completely dogmatic about everything she believed to be true. Although she seems to have a sense of dogmaticism with her goal to treat people well. This is an appropriate place to have dogmaticism. I feel that it is hard to know where to use dogmaticism and when you should think with a very open mind. The Bible does talk about being strong with your faith and perhaps that is necessary to not be swayed by lies. It's a difficult matter. Like many things in life, there is a line somewhere. I loved the story and overall message though!
Megan's story is really interesting to me. This article shows her as an informed, truth-seeking girl, and she worked hard to remain unbiased to what the truth may possible have been in certain cases. It reminds me of the things in class we talked about regarding dogmatism, and it is something that prompts a lot of questions on my heart and mind as well. It's easy to believe what you've grown up hearing and to agree with whatever your parents stood firmly on. However, there comes a point when I know my parents are not always right and I certainly cannot rely on them as imperfect humans to bring me to the truth. This time of life is especially important for me in that case, and it helps me to see philosophy in better light of leading me to a more independent lifestyle when it comes to seeking the truth.
Ashtyn B.
Annelise,
I will first address your question in clarifying what I believe is a difference between searching for freedom from dogmatism and searching for the truth.
Unrestrained and absolute freedom from any form of dogmatism involves a life in which all you have are questions without answers. You could never make a truth claim nor claim there even is such a thing as truth because claiming there is truth is dogmatic at even the smallest of levels. A search for the truth claims there is a truth, and that in some respect you do expect to find that truth. So, searching for anything that exists, like truth or even a sibling in the game of "hide and go seek," already assumes that something exist, and holds fast to that belief, thus placing you in a form of dogmatism.
To your argument that Christians can be undogmatic, I would maintain disagreement with such a statement. However, I would be interested in seeing your argument for the undogmatic Christian.
Finally, to say that Christians are morally relative in America isn't something I would disagree with. However, a Christian who truly believe what the Bible says is true would not argue that Rape of a child is okay. Furthermore, the Christian has an absolute moralism in the fact that they hold the belief there is one God who is Just. What is Justice without morals, and isn't God the same Yesterday, Today, and Forever. If He is the same, and if He is Just, then He must have moral guidelines that are absolute, ones with which He judges Creation. We know He is Black and White on Salvation. With Christ you are saved and without you are condemned.
I would like to read more on your views and where you disagree and further disagree with me.
The story of Megan's turn from Westboro baptist is one that I feel certainly does ring with the themes that we have been discussing in class. The concept of the usefulness of philosophy for sorting out the big questions of life is one that we can see exemplified in the change made in Megan's life. The use or critical thinking to engage one's beliefs is a practice that is at the very core of philosophical thought. Whether she knew it or not, Megan was engaging in philosophy, and it was drastically changing her worldview.
- Patrick Flynn
It was great to read Megan's story about her change of heart when she left the Westboro church. I believe it is for this very reason that we must study philosophy; it is possible that we have the wrong perspectives of the Bible or even God. We may not need to make such a dramatic change, but some change may be needed in our lives.
It's important to note that in Megan's struggle to find truth she did not abandon the faith altogether. Many people that argue against practicing philosophy worry that in the struggle to find truth one will completely abandon God and turn to science and reason instead. Megan proves that this does not need to be the case. Instead, we should use philosophy to refine our beliefs and strengthen our relationship with God. Through practicing philosophy we can discover more of what it means to be like Christ, and this will improve our faith as we put it into practice.
Additionally, it is important that we examine our beliefs as much as possible so that we can defend our faith. When talking to the man from Israel, Megan was confronted with questions that she did not know the answer to. This caused her to set out on the search for truth. If instead we search for truth now in our beliefs, we can advocate for Christianity and confront the commonly held belief that Christians/Protestants are ignorant. We will be better able to share God's love with the world.
-Dave D. 1100
Tim Hull: What I was saying earlier was that if we were taking the definition of dogmatic from class, then no you cannot seriously consider another's argument and still be dogmatic about your original beliefs because no matter what evidence they present, you will never re-evaluate your beliefs.
-Annelise
Jerry Bailey: Thank you for responding to my inquiry! Your clarification of what you meant really helped and I think that it makes a lot of sense. In class, we defined dogmatic as seriously consider another's argument because no matter what evidence they present, you will never re-evaluate your beliefs. According to one of our readings, one philosopher said that if God made all the evidence point to the conclusion that there is no God, then it would be wrong not to be an atheist. Being un-dogmatic does not mean that you give up your beliefs easily just because someone posed an argument against it. Instead it means that if there is no good response to those arguments on behalf of your beliefs, then you are obligated to change your beliefs. I think that it is important to know why you believe what you believe and not just be able to cite backup Bible verses, but know the church history behind it. Many traditional Christian beliefs are not based in the Bible at all, but on human tradition or faulty reason. I think it is good to re-evaluate why you believe what you believe every now and then, especially for core beliefs because they are the foundations to the rest of how you live your life and what you think about the world.
-Annelise
This is a relation to Leftow, rather than the discussion of Dogmatism or Bertrand Russell's dialogue on throwing off the tyranny of custom:
It seems to me that the inherent goodness of the progress Megan made by breaking her ties with the church shows the downside of Leftow's marriage analogy. The comparison of commitment to Christianity and commitment to a spouse has some strengths, but if Megan had stuck with her misunderstandings "for better or for worse" the result would be dogmatic refusal to ever make the progress we have seen. Morally and emotionally it seems necessary to condemn fleeting beliefs- ones cast off easily- however, this seems like a reason not to rush into claiming a belief; it is not reason to hold stubbornly to a belief despite evidence against it (or lack of conclusive evidence for it). Of course this raises the question of when one ever could justify commitment. The opposing analogy would be that marriage is good, but we are looking for a soulmate, not just picking a spouse then enjoying the good and optimistically overlooking the bad. If there is an absolute truth and it is Christianity, then properly understood Christianity is our soulmate, but this analogy would suggest that we should not commit to it until we are sure of that status. It is not a matter of emotional commitment on either side, but rather a cold logical conclusion that "this is the one". Of course biblical thought seems much less concerned with the perceived issues of faith based (often emotion led) beliefs. This is a difficult issue to resolve.
Post a Comment