Just a couple of thoughts. On the one hand, it's been clear throughout the series of posts that essay is not looking for information or open to reconsidering her position. It is also true that she has been less than completely honest several times. She has her agenda, and her mindset, and as you suppose pays no particular attention to any evidence presented, reasserting the same things repeatedly no matter what previous response has been given. It has been open to question along the way whether it was wise to continue the dialogue or better to cut it off. Paul does say that "rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers" should be silenced (Titus 1:10), and not allowed to mislead or ruin people, and that has been a concern. However, the ideas essay espouses are not unique at all, and are not hidden in a corner. They are widely published and frequently voiced on the internet, not only from essay. Nor do people who hold them often turn from them. Still, there is also some concern in appearing to run away from ideas that may seem threatening, rather than challenging them, and thus lending them more credibility than they deserve. The best response to error should be truth, not diatribe. I would generally rather err on the side of civility, in the hope that truth will prevail, even when dealing with someone who may not seem to have a personal interest in the truth. It is of course possible that personal pride will prolong an exchange far beyond any reasonable expectation of benefit.
|
