On Anti-Intellectualism
Oct 10th, 2006 by Hugh
Anti-intellectualism is the accepted bigotry of evangelicalism. I cringe whenever I hear Christians disparage reason and careful thought, as if “boasting in Christ” meant something like “Go ye and be ignorant and naïve;” as if 1 Corinthians 2 established engagement of the intellect as a vice.
Justin Taylor gratified me with his recent post on Anti-Intellectualism, offering a battery of quotes worth filing away. His post concluded with a link to a great piece by “Timmy,” a student at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:
Growing up, it was impressed upon me that being ignorant was virtuous because people would be amazed that God could use somebody so dumb. The preachers would call themselves “bottom-shelf” preachers, putting all the “cookies” where everybody can get them. Theology and doctrinal study was replaced with books on leadership skills and strategies for marketing your church. Pastoral studies were replaced by conference rooms and the church was not known for being the “pillar and buttress of truth” but the house that pragmatism built.
…what became of this antipathy to biblical scholarship and study produced a disdain towards institutional education so much that preachers who had a growing church bragged that they didn’t have any formal education. They bragged that their sermons were not “elitist” talk but the “folkish” lingo found at the mechanic shop.
The end result of this parasitic and problematic predisposition is staggering. I think it would be fair to say that a real reason why so much of the church is biblically illiterate and theologically inept is due to the example of ecclesiastical leadership and the atmosphere fostered by them. They say that to have knowledge would only “puff” one up, so it is better to remain ignorant and assume that makes one humble.
Timmy is spot-on with his analysis, but in one important sense, he did not go far enough. The fruit that anti-intellectualism produces is indeed Biblical illiteracy and theological ineptitude, but that is merely the effect within the church. The effect beyond the church is that Christ himself is made to look bad.
As ambassadors for Christ, it is the church’s job is to represent her sovereign well. My church’s tag line fits well here — we are to be about “spreading God’s fame” — not spreading God’s shame. With that in mind, we would do well to bring our “A” game to the marketplace of ideas and show the fallen world just what God can do with a renewed mind.
I recently ran across a blog called Gods4Suckers.net. After reading through a bit, it seems that the site’s goal is for atheists to challenge Christians to think about how their religion makes no sense — especially what’s generally spouted off by the common evangelical.
I wonder Koukl or other apologists ever grace forums and blogs like these.
So now we know where “Hezbloggah Dave” learned his tricks.
I’ll reserve judgment until I can look some more at the GifS site, but this post about the death of one of the GifS guys makes me wonder: did this guy ever hear the Gospel in a way he could understand it? Sure, he disparaged all things Christian and/or Theist, but did he ever encounter somebody who could tell him (in person, not on a blog or something):
“Look, chief, it’s about Christ — it’s not about George W. Bush or Pat Robertson or (name your distraction). You may not like those people or what they say. Dismiss those people if you like. But you just can’t dismiss Jesus Christ so easily…”
… and then go on to make a case as to why.
(Gross generalization coming) The Evangelical church far too readily “writes off” people who have good, hard questions. Francis Schaeffer was famous for his “honest answers to honest questions” approach — we need to recover that.
It’s almost to the point where we’re becoming “Fundamentalist Pharisees,” and the intellectuals and skeptics are assigned the roles of “sinners and tax collectors.” Jesus showed mercy and grace and love to the sinners and tax collectors — we need to do likewise.
We need to show mercy and grace and love to the people who have good, hard questions and objections and challenges and alternatives — and the best way to show them mercy and grace and love is to answer them.
But it’s all for naught if we fail to exhibit the kind of personal character that makes our answers compelling.