re: Anti-intellectualism...a dubious trait we share?

[prisonchaplain]

Anti-intellectualism is a persistent strain in conservative Christianity. 120 years ago Fundamentalists opposed academic literary criticism of the Bible, Darwin's Evolution, and the general skepticism about the miraculous and supernatural aspects of Scripture. In early Pentecostalism, the same opposition formed against so-called fundamentalist intellectuals, who argued that healings, miracles, and "demonstration gifts" of the Holy Spirit ended with the death of the Apostles. And, in several recent strings, I've seen admonitions here not to rely on proofs, on history, science, etc.--but just to pray for confirmation from the Spirit.

IMHO, all truth comes from God, ultimately. Proper wisdom will ultimately lead to God, not away. My own school used the phrase "Knowledge on Fire" to describe the proper complementary relationship between the Spirit and study.

My bottom line question: The world may not always respect us, but, in general, shouldn't Christians be smart?

[will227457]

anti intellectualism

speak for ur self, lol....we should all try to be educated temporaly and spiritually

[mightynancy]

I agree with you, PC. Anti-intellectualism is not only alive among Christians, it's alive in general (at least where I live!).

I also agree that all truth is of God, whether that truth is one that can only be felt in the spirit, or if it's one that can only be seen via a microscope.

I don't think a person will gain a testimony of Christ solely through intellectual proof, but intellectual proof can certainly strengthen a testimony that is growing.

[sixpacktr]

I don't think it is so much a tendency to dislike intellectuals, but that there is a real tendency for them to be 'lifted up in pride' and abandon the Spirit to chase after those things proven by the 5 senses. All truth is good; all truth, I believe, leads to a testimony of Christ. However, there seems to be a tendency to want to tear down others in order to look smarter, which is being 'puffed up' in pride.

We have and have had some unbelievable 'intellectuals' in our church. Nibley, Brown, Talmadge, BH Roberts. They all used their 'smarts' to help us understand things in a much deeper level that perhaps we would have otherwise.

I guess it gets down to this: is it to build up other's testimonies, or is it to tear down?

[LDSVALLEY]

Anti-intellectualism is a persistent strain in conservative Christianity. 120 years ago Fundamentalists opposed academic literary criticism of the Bible, Darwin's Evolution, and the general skepticism about the miraculous and supernatural aspects of Scripture. In early Pentecostalism, the same opposition formed against so-called fundamentalist intellectuals, who argued that healings, miracles, and "demonstration gifts" of the Holy Spirit ended with the death of the Apostles. And, in several recent strings, I've seen admonitions here not to rely on proofs, on history, science, etc.--but just to pray for confirmation from the Spirit.

IMHO, all truth comes from God, ultimately. Proper wisdom will ultimately lead to God, not away. My own school used the phrase "Knowledge on Fire" to describe the proper complementary relationship between the Spirit and study.

My bottom line question: The world may not always respect us, but, in general, shouldn't Christians be smart?

The church teaches we are to spend our lives learning. Both things of the world and of God. We should never stop trying to learn either formal education or on our own. But we should have what we are learning confirmed by the Holy Ghost. Man likes to take bits and pieces and fill in the blanks to make theory. This is not done with ill intent but a desire to learn.

In the 1830's hundreds gathered to see the first train move because the experts said people would die over 30mph because they could not breath. When they were proven wrong they changed the science to explain why. When my Father went to school dinasours were only able to exist in the water not on land, the science proved it.

As man's knowledge evolves so does the science to prove it. Science proved man could never fly, could never go into space etc.

How do we understand and grow if we do not learn? Why would be here if we are not going to learn? However we must guard against putting the learnings of man over those of God.

I don't see the basics of relativity making those of God redundant simply that our understanding of timelines or mechanics needed adjustment. God does not change only how we view things does. We must continue to learn of all things we can. That is God's commands to us.

[prisonchaplain]

Six, imho, in most cases intellectuals seek to do neither. Rather, they seek truth. They learn their craft or field extremely well. Part of learning at that academic level is to pick up on a vocabulary which, to most of us is indecipherable. So, the smart people with the big words appear prideful and unspiritual to us. Further, because most are not laboring directly as servants of the church, they seem as loose canons.

IMHO it is very Christian to practice one's gifting with excellence, and to pursue truth with abandon, trusting that it will ultimately lead to God--and does not need our help to steer it that way.

[sixpacktr]

I agree with you PC. In MOST cases, I believe that there is simply a seeking of truth. In the same way, those that believe that they are more spiritual than others can be lifted up in pride (the Pharisees come to mind, but they are by no means a rarity).

In the Book of Mormon, the prophet Nephi stated it this way:

28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

29 But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God.

(2 Nephi 9:28 - 29)

So I believe that humility must be part of our learning. If we hearken unto the counsels of God (which means the scriptures and his servants here on the earth) it is good to be learned because that humility is there.

And that makes all the difference, I believe.

[bmy-]

Anti-intellectualism makes me do that. Of course.. the same people who seem to support this odd.. 'movement' are the ones who love to spread propaganda, etc. It's frustrating. I need to find me a Darwin fish for my car

Knowledge is knowledge. The things we learn that are true also hold true for God.

[Moksha]

Denying the intellect seems to me to be denying eternal progression.

[Jamie123]

Anti-intellectualism is a persistent strain in conservative Christianity. 120 years ago Fundamentalists opposed academic literary criticism of the Bible, Darwin's Evolution, and the general skepticism about the miraculous and supernatural aspects of Scripture. In early Pentecostalism, the same opposition formed against so-called fundamentalist intellectuals, who argued that healings, miracles, and "demonstration gifts" of the Holy Spirit ended with the death of the Apostles. And, in several recent strings, I've seen admonitions here not to rely on proofs, on history, science, etc.--but just to pray for confirmation from the Spirit.

IMHO, all truth comes from God, ultimately. Proper wisdom will ultimately lead to God, not away. My own school used the phrase "Knowledge on Fire" to describe the proper complementary relationship between the Spirit and study.

My bottom line question: The world may not always respect us, but, in general, shouldn't Christians be smart?

A quote from George Carey (former Archbishop of Canterbury):

May I encourage you to read and to study to the best of your ability. You don't have to have a PhD in theology to be a convincing witness. All you need is an experience of God's love, a smile on your face and reasons in your mind. Charles Spurgeon....was one day handed a sermon by a student. He was appalled by its lack of knowledge of the faith.

The young man whined: 'But God doesn't need my intelligence!'

'No,' agreed Spurgeon. 'But He could do without your appalling ignorance!'

Knowledge of God is a mix of heart and head. But may I also encourage you to pray for people to be raised up who can debate these truths on the television and radio, in the newspapers and on the Internet.

(my emphasis) Edited October 7, 2009 by Jamie123

[Hemidakota]

Anti-intellectualism is a persistent strain in conservative Christianity. 120 years ago Fundamentalists opposed academic literary criticism of the Bible, Darwin's Evolution, and the general skepticism about the miraculous and supernatural aspects of Scripture. In early Pentecostalism, the same opposition formed against so-called fundamentalist intellectuals, who argued that healings, miracles, and "demonstration gifts" of the Holy Spirit ended with the death of the Apostles. And, in several recent strings, I've seen admonitions here not to rely on proofs, on history, science, etc.--but just to pray for confirmation from the Spirit.

IMHO, all truth comes from God, ultimately. Proper wisdom will ultimately lead to God, not away. My own school used the phrase "Knowledge on Fire" to describe the proper complementary relationship between the Spirit and study.

My bottom line question: The world may not always respect us, but, in general, shouldn't Christians be smart?

I was quite surprised to learn from Hugh [Nibley] his five PhDs and still maintaining a large family and a home life.

PC, most who assumed only life exists at a mortal physical sense, are the same who presume, our universe is infinite, believe in the big bang, and our species is nothing more than spontaneous at best without a creator. It is no more than someone demonstrating my knowledge is better than yours and some I have found do display animosity towards those who believe in GOD and offer a different perspective. A classic example was the offering another view of what Astro-physicist would call a Blackhole. Years ago, when I offered another view of a Blackhole is nothing more than a conduit matter exchanger between to points I was laughed at…well, as seen later on with a notable Physicist, Stephen Hawkins, I suspect was the first to offer another view when it was revealed by x-ray telescopes, Blackholes were not only consuming matter but there is a matter excretion also seen from the same source. Well, I guess I do have the last laugh but it seems our science could be propelled further if we just work together instead of our culture or theological indifferences.

What is the real surprise, is the demonstration of past prophets and followers who written what was shown in visions – unknown science of their days - in revealing startling facts for us today in this latter portion of our earth exsistment. Yet, we will credit those today of something of the past, which was already revealed. One that will surprise us today is the commutation of fifteen mega-galaxies that encircles the center of the universe. Even our own system, the Milky Way is one of those mega-galaxies that was shown to Abraham in a vision.

I have great expectation in the millennium period, there is going to be a total rewrite of many academic areas with correction.

[rameumptom]

PC, there was a great talk given during the Priesthood Session on General Conference by President Uchtdorf, where he discusses two great issues: work and learning. You can watch it here.

The Book of Mormon teaches this about learning:

2 Ne. 9: 28-29, 42

28 O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

29 But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God.

We can't allow our knowledge to replace God. Knowledge is good, but we need to remember that most knowledge is based on theory and/or perspective. We need to have the Holy Spirit guide us as best as possible toward greater truth as we study and learn from the scriptures and from worldly knowledge.

I do agree that many Christians, and that includes many Mormons, tend to dumb things down. People like predictable and safe. They will gladly ignore or reject evidence so that their current world view does not get shattered. Just look at how many people continued following James Baker or Jimmy Swaggert after their scandals? Just look at how many Christians insist that the earth was created in only 6-24 hour periods, when the Bible does not require that interpretation?

God is attempting to reveal truths to us, both spiritual and temporal, but we reject it because we fear it would destroy our closely held beliefs. Well, Jesus came to destroy the closely held beliefs of the people. So did Moses, Noah, Isaiah, and Lehi.

That is the difficult thing about continuing revelation and truth. It requires us to change and adapt and grow. We cannot be saved in ignorance. We must accept the truths God offers us, if we wish to receive all he offers.

D&C 84 tells us that those who receive the servants of God, receive Christ. And those who receive Christ, receive the Father and His fullness, wherefore all that the Father has is theirs. I believe this applies not only to dead and living prophets and apostles, but also to all those who seek to unveil truth and light to this earth.

Edited October 7, 2009 by rameumptom

[prisonchaplain]

It's been a good string folks, but I may be able to close it. I just spoke with Palerider, and he's pretty sure that anti-intellectualism is George W. Bush's fault.

[DigitalShadow]

It's been a good string folks, but I may be able to close it. I just spoke with Palerider, and he's pretty sure that anti-intellectualism is George W. Bush's fault.

Actually I think it's the other way around. George W. Bush is the fault of anti-intellectualism :)

[prisonchaplain]

So, Digital, since Jesus Christ is Bush's favorite philosopher, just what are you saying??? :-)

[Traveler]

I hope this thread continues for a while. To be honest I am very discouraged with the attitude in our society towards intelligence. I find it odd that labels like “nerd” are given as degrading. There is a saying the many dumb blonds are really smart burnets. And of all things our educational system has been so “dumbed down” it is pathetic. In many social circles of students getting good grades is a social foo-paw.

But in religious circles – to draw down against intelligence is in my mind a flat out rejection of G-d – Because G-d is the most intelligent of us all. The scriptures are very clear that to reject another person (who we have seen) is as bad and as worse as rejecting the same in G-d (who we have not seen). But this get deeper. Very few Christians are capable of reading ancient text and therefore rely completely on intelligent scholars to tell them what the ancients really meant in scripture. The “Bible” does not say anything in English.

But the worse part of all this – is if someone were to point out the rhetorical flaw of a doctrine – heresy is assumed and the discussion for the most part is over. Let me give an example. When someone says, “G-d’s mercy is sufficient”. Then they say ,”All we need to do is …”. It does not matter – what we do is not included in what is incased in G-d’s mercy. So if we need to do anything then – G-d mercy is NOT sufficient. And when simple logic fails the response is – “Well we will have to agree that we disagree.” To me this says that it looks like there is a difference of opinion and the person willing to agree to disagree has abandoned any divine appeal to logic and reason and has given themselves over to the dark side of ignorance. A mentality of “I want to believe what I want to believe – and truth cannot touch me.”

To me a true disciple of Christ need NEVER to reject any truth but rather has an obligation to seek and accept truth. How can the gospel of Christ and the truth of G-d come to someone and be accepted by someone that does not have enough faith in truth to consider changing their life based on the truth of the gospel and the truth of G-d. If a believer is not willing to accept the truth that someone else possesses – why should that someone have any obligation to accept any truth from that believer? In other words if a Christian is not willing to hear of something true – why should anyone (with a brain in their head) be willing to consider what that Christian thinks is truth?

The Traveler

[Moksha]

I have been alarmed when I see people referring to someone as an intellectual as a put down. Even more alarming when it is used as a means of discrediting someone's ideas. Sort of like announcing that my burning sensation trumps your reasoning.

[bmy-]

I have been alarmed when I see people referring to someone as an intellectual as a put down. Even more alarming when it is used as a means of discrediting someone's ideas. Sort of like announcing that my burning sensation trumps your reasoning.

You so-called intellectual

[sixpacktr]

I don't think that within the church we exclude intellectuals. Most members I've ever met have been very curious about all sorts of things. I think where the rub comes is in the 'use' of knowledge to create a sense of superiority, or of actually 'putting down' the burning in the bosom, or spiritual witness, in place of having an intellectual testimony of what is or isn't true, or what the 'real' story is.

We are commanded to get learning, as much as we can and in all areas that we can. The Glory of God is Intellegence, as we all know. But SOME use that gift as a way of poo-poohing those that are content with saying 'I know, because the Spirit told me it was true', thinking them as being too naive, etc.

I think you see where I am going with this. Humility and spiritual eyes should 'color' all of our learning. We should always remember that no one of us is smarter that God, and that there is order in the Kingdom (that we are subject to our leaders in the church, and need to heed their counsel).

So I don't see an 'anti-intellectual' spirit in the church.

[dazed-and-confused]

as i recall, way back when, all (or almost all) of the worlds scientists were priests and holy men...yes, i mean WAY back. seems pretty intelectual to me...and lets not forget that just because technology was lesser back then, doesn't mean intellects and spirit was as well.

i am christian and LDS, and i believe that christians do not have a monopoly on truth.

please dont confused that with salvation.

i have found undenial spiritual truth in other religions, as i know many others have as well.

[prisonchaplain]

I'm wondering if LDS are quick to see pride in experts. The stress upon receiving spiritual confirmation can seem to be at odds with the academic approach. The use of field-specific vocabulary, the willingness to challenge commonly held ideas, and our own intimidation--can these not lead to us sometimes transfering our own sense of ignorance or unequal footing on to the intellectual, by accusing him/her of arrogance.

[rameumptom]

I hope this thread continues for a while. To be honest I am very discouraged with the attitude in our society towards intelligence. I find it odd that labels like “nerd” are given as degrading. There is a saying the many dumb blonds are really smart burnets. And of all things our educational system has been so “dumbed down” it is pathetic. In many social circles of students getting good grades is a social foo-paw.

The Traveler

Of course, if we wish to have an intelligent discussion, we should start with proper grammar and spelling. I think you wish to use the term "blonde" as referencing women. Burnets should be "brunette." And a "foo-paw" is probably supposed to be a "faux pax."

However, the gist of your statement is probably correct. I find that the old saying: "given a million monkeys on a million typewriters/computers over a million years, they would eventually type out the entire works of Shakespeare" has been proven wrong by the Internet....

Sadly, our intellectual discourse these days is done by so few. Often it is attempted by those who think they are intelligent and knowledgeable, when most of us would do well to learn from the wisdom of Socrates and Sgt Shultz: I know nothing.

For me, intelligence is measured not by how much you currently know, but by how much you continue to seek truth and light. A closed book has limits to what it can teach. And if there are errors within it, they can never be fixed. Catholic priests threatened Galileo with torture and excommunication, simply because his telescope taught him something that their closed canon could not. Muslim warriors burned the library in Alexandria, with its million books, because their view was that if the information was important, it was already in the Quran, and if it wasn't in the Quran, then it was unnecessary and blasphemous. Hitler youth burned books that disagreed with his policies and views. And there are those in our society today who would love to censor thought and ideas.

In the realm of philosophy and religion, people are not going to agree. And that is fine. But the open exchange of ideas needs to be considered a sacred trust, so that tyranny does not step in and take over the thinking once done by the people themselves.

[Jamie123]

Of course, if we wish to have an intelligent discussion, we should start with proper grammar and spelling. I think you wish to use the term "blonde" as referencing women. Burnets should be "brunette." And a "foo-paw" is probably supposed to be a "faux pax."

Or even "faux pas". (Pity - I like "foo-paw" better! )

[rameumptom]

I'm wondering if LDS are quick to see pride in experts. The stress upon receiving spiritual confirmation can seem to be at odds with the academic approach. The use of field-specific vocabulary, the willingness to challenge commonly held ideas, and our own intimidation--can these not lead to us sometimes transfering our own sense of ignorance or unequal footing on to the intellectual, by accusing him/her of arrogance.

It is always a risk. But I see it on both sides. Rigorous and careful debate is not a problem. Rejecting a person's statements out of hand, simply because they disagree with you, is evidence of pride.

My son (a Sophomore) is having discussions with a Senior on Joseph Smith and the BoM. The kid insists that Joseph Smith was a fraud. When my son mentioned that Joseph only had a 3rd grade education and wrote the book in 63 days, the kid scoffed and said that anyone could do that. I smiled and told my son to have the kid prove his point by writing a quality 530 page book in the same amount of time. Given that JK Rowling took 1-2 years on each of her Harry Potter books, and she had computers and assistants to help her on most of them, I'd say that a 2 month book would be rather difficult to accomplish for someone with a 3rd grade skill level.

I also told him that if he wants, I'd prepare several quotes from scholars, including William F. Albright, on their thoughts regarding the BoM. While I'm not saying that a person who does not believe in the BoM is wrong, I am saying that quickly scoffing at a book one has never read, with such trite reasons, IS an example of pride.

A person who insists the earth is flat, but refuses to closely examine the evidence suggesting otherwise, is a proud a person. This is the type of learned person the BoM warns us about. Or, as Paul would say, "having itching ears....ever learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth."

[rameumptom]

Professor Daniel Peterson, BYU teacher and expert in Arabic languages, is always put down at RfM and other anti-Mormon sites as being an idiot. Of course, this is by those who think they know better than a person who spends his time studying ancient Middle Eastern documents. I think this is the kind of "intellectual" we warn about. Those who think they are smart, when they really are only gratifying their own pride.

I'm not saying they need to agree with Dr Peterson. But they shouldn't talk down about him and his experience as they do. Give him due respect, and then explain why you disagree.