The problem with many who claim to be intellectual Christians, those who are not only passionate about God but passionate about serving Him with their mind, is that it seems that many are falling in love with intellect more so than they are falling in love with God. They are busy writing blogs and debating/arguing with anyone who dare disagree with their point of view while they drift farther and farther away from the love of God and closer and closer to the love of their own mind.
Granted, this happens to all of us, myself included. Falling in love with our student ministry and everything that it has to offer while we neglect the root of these ministries. Grooving to the beat of a kick drum acting as if there is no being behind said groove inspiring our creativity. When we deny the true root of our actions, when we deny the loves that we have been called to, love of God and love of neighbor, the things that come out of our mouths start to sound a little ridiculous. When we fall in love with our theories, ideologies, and our own understandings and beliefs about the world around us while denying the one that gives us the ability to think through all of these things we become fools encapsulated in our own futile thinking. When we deny the love of God which in turn denies the love of neighbor, brother, and sister, we lose our place in the world of loving all of those with whom we come into contact.
This past year I had the opportunity to sit under the teachings of one of the country's best theologians for a week. He was incredibly smart, very articulate, and very wrong in how he chose to deal with those in the world that he regularly debated. This professor often debated or spoke out against Richard Dawkins, in fact, most of his arguments for the existence of God were directly related to rebutting the arguments that Dawkins made in his book The God Delusion. At one point in the week however, he made note that during a debate Dawkins was rather foolish and made an "ass" out of himself.
Now I ask, in calling this man an ass, did this professor bring Dawkins any steps closer to redemption? Did this professor exemplify the the kind of attitude toward the lost that he has been called to live by the God that he so passionately defends the existence of? Or, did he merely give in to the system of debate that has been established by the world?
Fast forward to last week. The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America is holding meetings where one of the topics up for discussion is whether or not they will allow practicing homosexuals to be pastors in their churches. During these meetings, a tornado came through the town and broke the steeple of the church where the meetings were being held. I do not know what your view on this is, but, John Piper took the stance that the tornado was a "gentle but firm warning to the ELCA and all of us: Turn from the approval of sin." All of that to say this...
You may disagree with the stance that John Piper took, you may agree with it. But, should you find yourself in disagreement and should you like to express this disagreement please do not cross over the lines laid by intellectualism and resort to name calling. Should you claim to enjoy a nice thought-provoking discussion and should you discuss matters with the foundation that no man has exclusive claim to truth, do not make the claim that you have an understanding of the truth that this man that you disagree with does not have. If you claim to love God, seek to edify your brother in Christ and discuss with him personally your disagreements. But, if you are more in love with intellect stripped of its roots, than by all means simply broadcast to the world that John Piper is an unintelligent ass and be done with the matter.
Who/what do you Love?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey Nathan. Kyle here.
ReplyDeleteGood post. I think you have a great point - Christians should be able to engage intellectually, but they can't afford to lose their sense of compassion in the process. Finding a balance between the two is difficult.
A prime example of this is a fellow called JP Holding, who runs Tektonics, one of the web's best apologetics resources. While his writing is incredibly useful, his attitude is often smug and obnoxious, and it's not hard to see why people are so polarized over him. He seems to have very little compassion or love for his enemies or even those who disagree with him. In contrast, Glenn Miller, who runs Christian-Thinktank, always responds to criticsm with love and cheerfulness. Though they reference each other's work, there's a huge contrast!
Since I've had the priveledge of learning under William Lane Craig for the past nearly two years, I can safely say that he's an incredibly kind and humble man. I'm sorry that his presentation gave you another impression. But I don't think it's necessarily wrong to call someone out for being foolish - Jesus had some very, very harsh words for the most religious people in his day!
Dr. Craig said something illuminating a few weeks ago, essentially stating that he has no expectation of changing the minds of high-profile atheists set in their ways; his ministry is rather to the people *observing* the debate. And if you watch one of his debates you'll quickly notice that while his opponents frequently resort to angry, hateful ranting, he always stays calm and treats his opponents with the utmost kindness, and I think reflects very well on his representation of Christianity. Given some of the things his debate opponents say to him, I know I couldn't stay half as charitable. Regardless, I can safely say that he doesn't stoop to the sort of tactics his opponents often use.
The big issue, I think, is whether we should spend energy trying to convert a lost cause, or onlookers who may be more keen to listening. (Of course, I think we should pray for people like Dawkins and his new atheist buddies.) And whether or not bringing down one's opponents is worth the people you'll alienate (as is the case with Holding and some other Christian thinkers.)
I used to pay a lot of attention to the music and band things at church, neglecting the actual meaning of the words I was singing. After all, it's so much easier to be drawn in by the cool guitar the guys in the band are playing, or whatever. But I realized this was becoming a distraction to following God, so I stick to the traditional style worship service at JFBC since I think there's less to distract me.
In daily life and interaction with others, I think you nailed it. When we discuss our faith with people who are open or hostile towards it, perhaps our strongest witness is how we behave. As the old hymn goes, "They'll know we are Christians by our love."
I have often struggled with the distinction between bettering myself for God's glory and bettering myself for my glory. I think that intention is the heart of morality so in doing the same things (pursuing higher learning, practicing music, building a skill) I can be doing a good thing or a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteI don't like what John Piper had to say. I don't like people calling some things signs and some things omens. It stinks of incense and goat livers.
-Cameron
Do you think he was incorrect in stating he made an ass out of himself period, or incorrect in stating it to you?
ReplyDeleteGreat post, great thinking. I enjoyed reading this.
Brad, I think he was incorrect in stating it period. I feel like that there could have been better ways maybe to say that what Dawkins said didn't make a lot of sense. You know?
ReplyDeleteVery thought provoking
ReplyDelete