Category: General

Anti-Intellectualism

Apparently my trackbacks aren’t working right now. Otherwise you would see that Tim Challies [graciously included me](http://www.challies.com/archives/001670.php) in the conversation on ignorance. That was very nice of him. He doesn’t know me from a stick of butter… (That was funny ha-ha, not funny ho-ho.)

Mostly, though, Tim’s comments struck a chord with me because I’ve had to struggle with anti-intellectualism as an intellectual problem, *a lot*. (There’s an irony up there somewhere, but I’m not going to dig it out for you.) You see, I’m an intellectual. That is, I like to think. I’m a compulsive thinker. And I’m practically immobilized until I have a unifying theory of the universe which explains everything that I do. This is not a joke. If you were privy to the constant thoughts in my head, you’d be bored out of your gourd. You’d be asleep in five minutes. Continue reading “Anti-Intellectualism”

Ignorance by Analogy

The inimitable Tim Challies has a parody up right now, or what he calls a parable. He describes visiting a doctor who told him his “duoduwhatzit” needed to be removed. Tim, of course, puts his utmost trust in his doctor, because he made a lot of sense, and was easy to understand. However, this doctor has one little quirk – he has no medical training, nor does anyone on his staff. Instead, he expects patients to trust him based on youth, zeal for medicine, and common sense.

The obvious comparison is with Christian ministry, and all those anti-intellectual movements we have in the church, and to a certain extent, Tim is right. There is no inherent benefit to ignorance, and there is a great deal of potential harm to be had by it. But then, why are there anti-intellectual movements in the church?

It is the nature of a parable to work by analogy. That’s why it’s called a parable. Para Bolle means to throw alongside (as opposed to hyperbole, which means to throw beyond). But the problem with all analogies is that the comparison only goes so far. The real meat of the thing is always in disecting exactly how and where the analogy falls away from what it’s being compared to. So, how is medicine different from religion?

You could probably do a much more detailed dissection, but it seems to me that the most interesting difference is that Medicine is based on science, and the science that Medicine is based on is constantly being revolutionized. Continue reading “Ignorance by Analogy”

An Interesting Set of Alternatives

Theologically speaking, and forced to make a choice, between Luther and Zwinglii, I’d side with Luther. But between Luther and Calvin, I’d go with Calvin. But then, forced to choose between Calvin and myself, I choose me.

I guess that makes me an evangelical.

Valerie: *What if you were forced to choose between you and your wife?*
Me: *There is no choice to make.*
Valerie: *Right. So you’d choose me, huh?*

Prayer and Preparation

Having led two youth group meetings so far, I have become aware of two things: I don’t pray enough, and I don’t prepare enough.

I suppose those are sort of obvious maxims. I mean, who actually ever prays or prepares “enough “? Nevertheless, it’s one thing to be aware in the abstract sense that, for the sake of your own working out of salvation, you don’t pray enough, and something else again to realize that you are about to preside over a meeting that will be considered a “success” based on the moving of the Holy Spirit. There’s no way to make that happen. And yet, if He doesn’t show up, if He doesn’t work in the hearts of people He has claimed as His own, the whole exercise is really pointless. At any gathering of His people, what is the church assembled for, if not to meet with the living God? Continue reading “Prayer and Preparation”

Circumcision and Infant Baptism

Via Touchstone, I read an article recently on Women’s ordination that’s gotten me thinking about Baptism, of all things. 

Apparently, supporters of women’s ordination, especially among Catholics,  have recently been appealing to history to prove that ordination for women is well within the bounds of tradition.  William Tighe argues against such a position, and seems to do it quite nicely.  But in the mess of it, he mentions that in the First Century, Judaism was a “proselytizing missionary religion.

Gentiles who converted to Judaism—in the case of men by “proselyte baptism” followed by circumcision, in that of women by “proselyte baptism” alone—were full and coequal members of the People of God: they took new Jewish names and the Talmud recalls that Jews who reproached converts with their pagan origins were subject to severe censure. From the beginning, as the New Testament in general and St. Paul on more than one occasion explicitly witnesses, the Church which Christ founded upon the apostles regarded itself as the “Israel of God” or the “true Israel”.

This set me to all sorts of thinking.  I’d known for a while that Judaism was a missionary religion, witness Jesus’ complaint that the Pharisees “travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, …make him twice as much a son of hell as [them].”  But it had never occurred to me how exactly that might have played out when Christianity came on the scene.  Baptism for conversion was the norm for Christianity directly because it was first established in Judaism.  This implies that early Christians may not have made as much distinction between “Israel” and “the church” as we are accustomed to.  As Tighe goes on to say, “By definition, all baptized members of Christ’s Church are ‘sons of Israel’ and so the question of  ‘ethnicity’ is, and always has been, irrelevant to the argument.”

But if that’s the case, why does Paul make such a big deal out of circumcision?  Continue reading “Circumcision and Infant Baptism”

Pass/Failing a class

Due, I think, to the nature of the MDiv degree at Gordon-Conwell, where nearly every class you take is mandatory, we are allowed to take 4 classes as “pass/fail” courses. Basically this means that you would fulfill your requirement by passing the class, but it would be taken out of the equation when determining your GPA.

Now, I’ve never been one to worry myself about my GPA. Either I liked a class or I didn’t, and my grade reflected that accordingly, and that was that. But lately… how you say – there has been no direct correlation between my interest in the class and my grade in the class. I love all my classes, more or less. I’m finally getting the education I’ve been wanting for 10 years! But these classes, they’re hard. Suddenly the best grade correlation is how much time and effort I dedicate to the class. Eww. Continue reading “Pass/Failing a class”

Request for Help

I have one (1) month in which to write a 7-page church history paper on an individual who lived after 1500 AD.  There are no real requirements, other than that I have to reference at least one biography of the person and read at least one major work by the person.  And I’m stumped.

I really wanted to find somebody in the 20th century to focus on, preferrably within the charismatic tradition (you have to admit that’d be fun to write about), but I’m having some trouble finding somebody that will work.  Because I have only a month, I have to find a person who is well-known enough that I can get all the materials I need from my school’s library.  I just don’t have the time to  John Alexander Dowie was my first choice, and John Wimber was my second.  For Dowie, I couldn’t find anything by, and for Wimber, I couldn’t find anything about.  Can anybody offer a suggestion?

If I find I’m unable to do the 20th century, I’ll have to fall back to somebody “normal,” like John Calvin, or Jonathan Edwards, or even John Wesley.  (Heaven help me find a notable Christian of history with a name like Bill…)