It can be frustrating to share your faith with your “orthodox” friends and family, only to have them reject your beliefs. Many tenaciously cling to their interpretations in the face of Biblical evidence to the contrary. Why are some people so reluctant to change their theology? It may very well be that cognitive biases are keeping them from objectively processing the information.
Biases help our brains work by streamlining the decision making process.[1] However, cognitive biases can cause us to make faulty instead of informed decisions. Author and educator Kendra Cherry defines cognitive bias as “a type of error in thinking that occurs when people are processing and interpreting information in the world around them.”[2] According to Psychology Today, this type of “repeated pattern of thinking” can lead to “inaccurate or unreasonable conclusions.”[3] There are more than 180 cognitive biases that can “interfere with how we process data, think critically, and perceive reality.”[4]
In today’s politically charged environment, it’s fairly easy to recognize such biases at work in other people. But famed author C.S. Lewis noted that Christians are not exempt from partiality:
Most of us are not really approaching the subject in order to find out what Christianity says: we are approaching it in the hope of finding support from Christianity for the views of our own party.[5]
Indeed, God, who searches the heart, warns us of the deceitfulness of the human mind:
Jeremiah 17:9 (NET) The human mind is more deceitful than anything else. It is incurably bad. Who can understand it?
Like politics, our theology is also susceptible to sabotage by cognitive biases. Unlike politics, it can be harder to recognize our theological biases or to see them as a hindrance to discerning Biblical truth, since our biases often lurk behind our religious traditions. As professor Jackson Wu points out:
Furthermore, the inertia of tradition moves us along. We filter out certain texts and theological conclusions; or perhaps, we will overemphasize ideas beyond what is found in Scripture. In effect, our traditions and “Christian” subcultures create biases and impose significance or meaning into a passage.[6]
In this post, we’ll examine five cognitive biases that can hinder rational exegesis and impede our willingness to objectively consider interpretations that differ from our own.
Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias, perhaps the most prevalent of the cognitive biases, is defined by the Encyclopedia of Human Behavior as “The tendency to selectively search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one’s preconceptions or hypotheses.”[7] Information that challenges the bias is more apt to be ignored or rejected outright. Confirmation bias is prevalent in theological circles where the learned and the layperson alike search the Scriptures for passages that support an already established belief. Often, someone with this bias will feel as if they have done due diligence when in reality, the purpose for their Scriptural search was not to determine the truth, but to confirm their version of it. Journalist Jason Zweig describes this as an internal “yes man” that parrots a person’s position.[8]
Proof texts are the bread and butter of this cognitive bias. Unfortunately, eisegesis occurs instead of exegesis[9] because the Biblical text has been whitewashed with the interpreter’s preconception. When evidence is presented that dispels the interpretation, someone with cognitive bias will choose to cling to their fallacy, often ignoring something as simple as the textual context, instead of admitting the error.
Professor Aaron Chalmers explains how confirmation bias can make it difficult to change one’s Biblical interpretations:
Researchers have shown that the effect of confirmation bias is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. In both instances, people are more likely to be resistant to change. Therefore, we would expect this bias to be a significant factor when it comes to biblical interpretation, which is often dealing with issues that are emotionally significant and—for those who come from a confessional background—frequently involves deeply-held beliefs.[10]
Such deeply held beliefs can cause us to rationalize anything that supports our view. One organization dedicated to promoting critical thinking explains:
If a conclusion supports your existing beliefs, you’ll rationalize anything that supports it. It is difficult for us to set aside our existing beliefs to consider the true merits of an argument. In practice this means that our ideas become impervious to criticism, and are perpetually reinforced…We tend to automatically defend our ideas without ever really questioning them.[11]
Thus, even when presented with Scripture that contradicts their interpretation, the biased believer will tend to reject the data and defend their belief by “digging in deeper.” This phenomenon is known as the backfire effect.
Backfire Effect
When our core beliefs are challenged by contradictory information, it can cause us to double down in an effort to strengthen and protect our position. Even though confronted with concrete evidence that undermines the belief, we nevertheless refuse to change our opinion. This cognitive bias is known as the backfire effect.[12]
One reason people may passionately recommit to their flawed beliefs is fear. For example, fear of being wrong or of having to admit error can powerfully motivate us to resist opposing beliefs even though Biblically substantiated. Other fears can cause us to avoid theological change as we’ll see in the remaining biases.
Sunk Cost Fallacy
Core beliefs develop over time and generally involve some kind of investment. The sunk cost fallacy occurs when someone hangs on to something they’ve invested in simply because it causes too much pain to let go.[13] This fallacy often occurs in the financial world,[14] but it can manifest in the theological realm as well. Sunk cost fallacy may occur in people whose employment is tethered to their theology, or who have invested time, finances, and emotions into their position or ministry. For many, fear of losing their “investment” can make it extremely difficult to walk away. Some may deem it less painful to hold onto an erroneous belief than to lose their reputation by changing their theology. Unfortunately, the adage “Don’t cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it” is often ignored. Some count the cost of walking away from their investment and find it too much to bear.[15]
It’s possible that Saul of Tarsus (Paul) experienced the sunk cost fallacy:
Galatians 1:13-14 (NASB) For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it; 14 and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions. (emphasis added)
Although he was “zealous for God,”[16] his extreme zeal for his ancestral traditions kept him from recognizing that Jesus was the promised Messiah. His bias blinded him to the truth and led to his persecution of Christians. For Paul to walk away from his rising star status would have been extremely difficult if not unthinkable. Thankfully, when Saul (Paul) encountered Christ on the road to Damascus, he changed his views, but it cost him everything he had worked so hard for. Later, the apostle acknowledged the importance of having the correct knowledge in addition to a zeal for God.[17] Towards the end of his life, Paul rightly concluded that the price of changing his belief about Jesus was worth it:
Philippians 3:8 (NASB) More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ
Regrettably, not everyone makes this choice as religious tradition in the blindly loyal, at least temporarily, trumps truth.
In-Group Bias
In-Group Bias, also known as the tribal effect, is the tendency to view ourselves as impartial. In reality, however, we show partiality to those who belong to the same group as we do.[18] In the theological realm, this can be seen as giving greater weight to the opinions of those with whom we identify or who belong to the same denomination or movement. Family, friends, pastors, ministry leaders and scholars are seen as trustworthy and therefore “right” because they belong to our “circle.” We don’t realize, however, that biases are just as prevalent among academicians and learned clergy as they are among the laity. Just because someone should be impartial in their study of Scripture doesn’t mean they are.
Fear of being rejected by the group can serve as a strong motivator to maintain the group’s theology, even if it’s wrong. We see this demonstrated by the parents of a man who had been born blind. When Jesus healed him, they feigned ignorance for fear of being kicked out of the synagogue:
John 9:20-22 (NASB) His parents answered them and said, “We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; 21 but how he now sees, we do not know; or who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him; he is of age, he will speak for himself.” His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone confessed Him to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.
Similarly, when certain Jewish rulers came to accept Jesus as the Messiah, they kept silent out of fear of rejection:
John 12:42-43 (NASB) Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue; 43 for they loved the approval of men rather than the approval of God.
A need for the group’s approval creates a strong cognitive bias, and few, if any, are immune to its destructive allure. We must resist, nevertheless, for it is better to be rejected by man than to be rejected by God.
Illusory Truth Effect
The illusory truth effect is “the tendency of people to identify a statement as true simply because they have heard it before, irrespective of its actual truthfulness.”[19] Familiarity with the way a particular Scripture is interpreted can hinder one from accepting an opposing view as truth. In other words, if a belief or tradition has been repeated, especially from an authoritative source such as a pastor, esteemed ministry leader, or even a family member, one is more apt to accept the interpretation because it is familiar. Theologian J.I. Packer addresses the power tradition has to mold our Biblical beliefs:
We do not start out our Christian lives by working out our faith for ourselves: it is mediated to us by Christian tradition, in the form of sermons, books and established patterns of church life and fellowship. We read our Bibles in the light of what we have learned from these sources; we approach Scripture with minds already formed by the mass of accepted opinions and viewpoints with which we have come into contact, in both the Church and the world...It is easy to be unaware that it has happened; it is hard even to begin to realize how profoundly tradition in this sense has molded us. (emphasis added) [20]
Tradition’s familiarity is seen as proof of its veracity. Indeed, orthodoxy, according to Phillips Brooks, is blind to its own imperfection:
Orthodoxy is, in the Church, very much what prejudice is in the single mind. It is the premature conceit of certainty. It is the treatment of the imperfect as if it were the perfect.[21]
Some may view the sacred halls of “orthodoxy” as a safe sanctuary, and fear what might happen if they step outside of its boundaries. Any challenge to tradition may be perceived as a possible deception from the enemy. Most don’t realize, however, that today’s “orthodoxy” evolved. Even Biblical scholars will attest to this. In other words, today’s orthodoxy was yesterday’s heresy. It’s important, therefore, that we seek to follow the orthodoxy of Jesus and his teachings. As we’ve already seen in Saul of Tarsus (Paul), tradition can be a stumbling block to the truth. We must never be afraid to examine our traditions in light of Scripture. God’s word can withstand scrutiny. The question is, can our doctrines?
What Can We Do?
What can we do to combat cognitive biases? To start, we must acknowledge that we are all susceptible. Packer notes:
We may never assume the complete rightness of our own established ways of thought and practice and excuse ourselves from the testing and reforming them by Scripture.[22]
It’s imperative, therefore, that we prayerfully examine our beliefs and remove any “log” from our eye lest it hinders us from addressing the faulty vision of others.[23]
In addition, for those who hold to a non-Trinitarian view of God, we must pray for God to grant wisdom and revelation to our “orthodox” friends and family, especially concerning His identity and that of His Son. This is what Paul prayed for:
Ephesians 1:16-17 (NASB) do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers; 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him.
Furthermore, it may be helpful to share information with others about cognitive biases in a humble and non-accusatory way. Also, an admission of how the Lord has uncovered our own biases may be impactful.
Lastly, ask God for the courage to continue to share your beliefs as permitted and trust God to do His part. If Paul can have the scales removed from his eyes to see who Jesus is, we can, too.[24]
[1] “Bias,” Psychology Today, accessed 5-28-20, https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/basics/bias
[2] Kendra Cherry, “What is Cognitive Bias?, 5-5-20, accessed 5-28-29, https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-cognitive-bias-2794963
[3] “Bias,” Psychology Today, accessed 5-28-20, https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/basics/bias
[4] Jess Desjardins, “24 Cognitive Biases That Are Warping Your Perception of Reality,” Visual Capitalist, 12-13-18, accessed 5-28-20, https://www.visualcapitalist.com/24-cognitive-biases-warping-reality/
[5] C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, (New York: Harper Collins, 1952), p.87.
[6] Jackson Wu, How Cognitive Biases Produce Theological Syncreticism, 9-26-18, accessed 5-28-30, https://www.patheos.com/blogs/jacksonwu/2018/09/26/how-cognitive-biases-produce-theological-syncretism/
[7] Wilke, A, and R Mata. “Cognitive Bias.” Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, edited by V. S. Ramachandran, 2nd ed., vol. 1, Academic Press, 2012, pp. 531-535.
[8] Jason Zweig, How to Ignore the Yes-Man in Your Head,” Wall Street Journal, 11-19-09.
[9] “Biblical exegesis is a systematic process by which a person arrives at a reasonable and coherent sense of the meaning and message of a biblical passage.” https://www.theopedia.com/exegesis “Eisegesis is the act imposing meaning onto a text and is often described in terms of reading ‘into’ the text rather than ‘out of’ it. Therefore it is the opposite of exegesis.” https://www.theopedia.com/eisegesis
[10] Aaron Chalmers, “The Influence of Cognitive Biases on Biblical Interpretation” (Bulletin for Biblical Research, 26.4), p. 470-471.
[11] School of Thought, as quoted in “24 Cognitive Biases That Are Warping Your Perception of Reality, ” Visual Capitalist, 12-03-18, accessed 5-29-20, https://www.visualcapitalist.com/24-cognitive-biases-warping-reality/
[12] “What is the Backfire Effect?” 12-13-19, accessed 5-28-20, https://www.scienceabc.com/humans/what-is-the-backfire-effect-confirmation-bias-psychology.html
[13] School of Thought, as quoted in “24 Cognitive Biases That Are Warping Your Perception of Reality, ” Visual Capitalist, 12-03-18, accessed 5-29-20, https://www.visualcapitalist.com/24-cognitive-biases-warping-reality/
[14] Sunk Cost Fallacy, Behavioral Economics, https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/sunk-cost-fallacy/
[15] Luke 14:27-33.
[16] Acts 22:3.
[17] Romans 10:2.
[18] School of Thought, as quoted in “24 Cognitive Biases That Are Warping Your Perception of Reality, ” Visual Capitalist, 12-03-18, accessed 5-29-20, https://www.visualcapitalist.com/24-cognitive-biases-warping-reality/
[19] Aaron Chalmers, “The Influence of Cognitive Biases on Biblical Interpretation” Bulletin for Biblical Research, 26.4, p.476.
[20] J.I. Packer, “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God, (Grand Rapids, MI; William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1958), p. 69-70.
[21] Phillips Brooks, Life and Letters of Phillips Brooks, v. III, (Alexander V. G. Allen, New York: E. P. Dutton, 1901), p. 74.
[22] J.I. Packer, “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God, (Grand Rapids, MI; William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1958), p. 69-70.
[23] Matthew 7:1-5.
[24] Acts 9:18.
