A More Dangerous Enemy

     Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed- in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.

     If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in particular situations. The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect, but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem. It is a particular form of the impact of historical circumstances on human beings, a psychological concomitant of certain external conditions. Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or of a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. It would even seem that this is virtually a sociological-psychological law. The power of the one needs the stupidity of the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence, and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with a person, but with slogans, catchwords and the like that have taken possession of him. ... Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil....

     Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what ‘the people’ really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly. The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity.

     But these thoughts about stupidity also offer consolation in that they utterly forbid us to consider the majority of people to be stupid in every circumstance. It really will depend on whether those in power expect more from people’s stupidity than from their inner independence and wisdom.

-Dietrich Bonhoeffer, from ‘After Ten Years’ in Letters and Papers from Prison

Emphasis added.  Taken from a circular letter, addressing many topics, written to three friends and co-workers in the conspiracy against Hitler, on the tenth anniversary of Hitler’s accession to the chancellorship of Germany… Bonhoeffer was hanged by Adolf Hitler in 1945.

Toxic?

     Toxic Intellectualism: just for the few following the conversation.

Dr. Kristen Du Mez is an engaging speaker and prolific author, a believer, a wife and mother, and a thoughtful academic.  We're looking at  Jesus and John Wayne,  A Modern Church History of Toxic Masculinity, and others.

Dr. Du Mez has said, “ ... the ideals of Christian manhood were drawn from popular culture, not from deep biblical exegesis.  The fear was real in the hearts of followers, and it was actively stoked by religious leaders, by evangelical men in almost every case to consolidate their own power.”

Now note the two positions she offers regarding ideals about manhood:

1.       The ideals came from popular culture, not from biblical content. 

2.       The ideals were fear-driven and a deliberate play for power by leaders and evangelical men.

The first (1.) is partially true and somewhat defensible.  The secular world did and does influence the church.  It has always done so, and we must understand the conflict.

The second (2.) claims a simplistic motivation imbedded in the millions of evangelicals and the popular voices among them; fear-induced self-advancement, self-benefit, self over others. 

While Dr. Du Mez’s historical narrative is somewhat correct, her attributions of motive, often implying a measure of malicious or wicked intent, are each individually troubling. 

Thinking:  A centerpiece in our thinking is in how we interpret the actions of others.  When control is out of our hands, we assign responsibility (or blame) and all to often, a motive.  

Attribution theory explains how we interpret the behavior of others.  We want to understand and be equipped to respond.  On that path, we tend to ascribe a single mindset to groups of people based on the category in which we have placed them.  In doing so, we attribute a simplistic motivation which, while it may have some minimal relevance, is always incomplete and inaccurate.

For example:  Bob hired his friend Charles to work with him on a project.  At a meeting with others, Charles is harshly critical of changes proposed.  Bob thinks Charles is unreasonable and begins to regret having hired him.  David, who was in the meeting, is thankful Charles had the courage to speak up, because the proposal had troubled him as well.

Two people in the same situation, and they attribute different motivations for Charles’ behavior, unreasonable vs. courageous.  They’re both wrong in this example.  Charles wasn’t concerned what others thought, he was just offering his objective thoughts on the proposal, just doing his job the way he saw it. 

Charles’ behavior was the result of years of experience.  Was he unreasonable?  Was he courageous?  Or was he just working through the issues?  Was there a motive?  Of course, but it will be spread across those preceding years of learning.

Expand the venue:  Majorities in both parties are concerned with the increasing divide between the parties.  Each blames the other.  Each believes the other party is less moral than their own, less reasonable, and lacking in basic principles.  Each believes the other is pursuing unethical goals and is deliberately avoiding essential truths.  Each has attributed deliberate immoral motivation to the other party and its participants.

Du Mez describes every word and choice by Billy Graham (more than one hundred references) as politically formed and delivered, and she offers no acknowledgement of any good done or intended by him.  She doesn’t mention the careful message he offered and the openness he offered to others.  She mentions the scandals associated with religious leaders and the unreasonable support they were afforded by some conservatives.  She doesn’t mention the hundreds of evangelists, pastors, and teachers who, across those same years, spent their lives drawing others to God.  We’ve known them, and we’ve seen the personal sacrifices they made, the good that was done, the truths that they spoke, and the lives that were changed.  We’re aware of the millions that were pulled back from a worldly selfishness and refocused on God’s calling.  To reduce all of that to some flawed motivation supporting a cultural trend is an interesting illustration of toxic intellectualism.

Interim Conclusion:  Let’s go back to Dr. Du Mez and her various attributions of motive; is she accurate?  When she assigns a motive to a category of individuals, her chance of getting it right is 0.00%.

In her epilogue to Jesus and John Wayne, we arrive at the purpose for her narrative.

“... understanding the catalyzing role militant Christian masculinity has played over the past half century is critical to understanding American evangelicalism today, and the nation’s fractured political landscape.  Appreciating how this ideology developed over time is also essential for those who wish to dismantle it. What was once done might also be undone.”

Agreed, with this one caveat; Dr. Du Mez describes white evangelicals as having collectively abandoned true faith in favor of a preferentially corrupted version of God’s call, while in fact, there have been millions across those years who honestly and sincerely gave their lives to God.  We’ve known so many who were magnificent examples of grace and mercy, of sacrifice and love, of willingness to serve for the good of others.  Leaders and followers, pastors and teachers, mothers and fathers who, however imperfectly, labored to find His truth in their day.  They learned, they changed, and they changed the lives of others.  They brought us forward in our understanding of God’s good heart and purpose for us all. 

The author’s thoughtful purpose is clear from beginning to end, to clarify our view of Our Father and his ways.  Dr. Du Mez, in her analysis, hopes to serve well, just like the many whose motives she attributes so inaccurately.

A perhaps more helpful conclusion to such a discussion might be found in Paul Johnson’s A History of Christianity.  

“Of course human freedoms are imperfect and delusory.  Here again, Christianity is an exercise in the impossible, but it is nevertheless valuable in stretching man’s potentialities.  It lays down tremendous objectives, but it insists that success is not the final measure of achievement. ... We must bear this in mind when we consider the future of Christianity in the light of its past.  During the past half-century there has been a rapid and uninterrupted secularization of the West, which has all but demolished the Augustinian idea of Christianity as a powerful, physical and institutional presence in the world.  Of St Augustine’s city of God on earth, little now remains, except crumbling walls and fallen towers, effete establishments and patriarchies of antiquarian rather than intrinsic interest.  But of course Christianity does not depend on a single matrix: hence its durability.  The Augustinian idea of public, all-embracing Christianity, once so compelling, has served its purpose and retreats – perhaps, one day, to re-emerge in different forms.  Instead, the temporal focus shifts to the Erasmian concept of the private Christian intelligence, and to the Pelagian stress on the power of the Christian individual to effect virtuous change. New societies are arising for Christianity to penetrate, and the decline of western predominance offers it an opportunity to escape from beneath its Europeanized carapace and assume fresh identities.”

He ends with , “...our history over the last two millennia has reflected the effort to rise above our human frailties.  And to that extent, the chronicle of Christianity is an edifying one.

We’ll want to remember as we continue our cultural analysis that we’re looking at imperfect people just like us, folks who hope to get it right and to leave a meaningful legacy in the lives of those they know and love.  

Since the beginning ...

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

We've learned a bit since those words were given to us.

It all began 13.8 billion years ago.  The first visible light appeared across the expanding universe about 375 thousand years after the 'Big Bang'.  Discovered in the 1960's and identified as the 'cosmic microwave background', it has subsequently been verified by multiple disciplines.  Then, 400 million years later, the first stars were formed. 

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.  11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. 

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/images/bubbles-with-titanium-trigger-titanic-explosions.html

In the nuclear fusion at their core, those first stars created the heavier elements we know today.  They lived quickly, and in supernovae, they began distributing the basic elements that make up the universe today.  

The creation/destruction cycle of star formation led to billions of stars in each of trillions of galaxies across the visible universe.  After 9.1 billion years, our sun was born in the outer arm of one typical galaxy.  

Over hundreds of millions of years, our solar system evolved planets with settled orbits.  The earth spawned a moon, formed an atmosphere, and changed from a molten ball to a watery world.  The first single-cell organisms appeared around 3.5 billion years ago.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”  27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”  29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day. 

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2021/hubble-gazes-at-a-galactic-menagerie
Each of these galaxies has hundreds of billions of stars and planets.  We are apparently not the centerpiece.

After around three billion years and several mass-extinction events in which most of the life on earth was wiped out, mammals became the dominant life forms.  Humans appeared around two million years ago, and literate civilization has existed for only a few thousand years.

Within that context of what we now know, what might our Father have been telling us in those earliest revelations He offered?

Among the trillions of known galaxies, here we are in the suburbs of the Milky Way, circling one of its hundreds of billions of stars, and we've been here for perhaps 0.3 seconds since those first 'six days' of creation.  

When you consider it all, you have to wonder, what is mankind in His view?  And, are we following His plan or our own?

In Psalm 8, David had the same question.  I think he understood it better.

One concluding thought:  The narrative provided in Genesis 1 & 2 should perhaps be understood as an explanation in terms the hearers could grasp.  It relies on what was observable to them and required of them.  God was revealing to them what they needed to know about Him, what they needed to know about themselves, and about living in the world He had given them.  I think He expects us to be similarly informed today, and we're left with the question, are we following the path He offered us?

"Where you stand depends on where you sit."

 

Standing up for what is right requires clarity and a full perspective.  If you can't see it, if it doesn't affect you or those you love, you're likely to sit on the sideline, perhaps unaware of what to others is brutality and injustice.

"Where you stand depends on where you sit."  This summary of Miles' law refers to the perspective of those within an organization and how their perception depends on their place in it.  That 'place' imposes limits on what they experience, who they get to know, and what they understand.  The principle applies to the rest of us as well in the broader matters of life.

• For those of us who are not routinely subjected to discrimination, the death of George Floyd or Elijah McClain or Ahmaud Arbery were just passing incidents of no significance.  
• For those with sufficient reliable income, the abusive labor practices of some large retailers are inconsequential.  
• For the typical middle-class family, quality education and healthcare are readily available, and the struggle others might face is rarely considered.  Poverty is a distant irrelevance.
• Unless your family is fleeing from violence and crime, from war, brutality and abuse ... refugees are easily dismissed.
• The reality faced by millions is unfortunately invisible to many of us.

At the root of these difficulties in perspective we find a heart problem.  When one neither knows nor cares about such things, the result is a narrow life centered around self and comfort.  Walking blindly by on the other side of the street is the unconscious norm, even for people who have been raised in church.  

Where you stand depends on where you sit.  

Some will take a stand for truth, for justice, for compassion.  Some will take a stand against immigrants or against countries that send us their "criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc."  Some will stand up for the poor and disenfranchised, and some will declare that individual effort is all that's needed for success.  Each reveals where they have lived and how their experience has shaped their perspective, their ideology.

So how might we avoid wrong thinking and perhaps see more clearly?  How might we encourage those we love to consider a broader view?  Is there a simple path we might explore?

When Jesus began his teaching, he faced a similar dilemma.  Many who heard him were themselves in the upper echelons and were perhaps more concerned with maintaining the status quo than in hearing what God had to say.   The ideological conflict continued predictably until the day when they brutally crucified him ... and continues to this day.

Those who willingly received His message were shown a different path.  If they followed it, however imperfectly, they found themselves changed; at once, forever, and continuously.  

Raised by a loving Father, they began to understand life and their choices.  They began to truly see others.  Love grew beyond simple attachment and blossomed to include compassion, empathy, willing sacrifice, and covenant commitment.  The cost was absolute as was the benefit.  The love He taught them by his example and instruction changed the course of history.  

The organized church has struggled through the years against cultural influence.  Fellowships found themselves complicit in wars, slavery and genocide, the Inquisition, murderous racism, and brutal legalistic oppression.  Following the same trend, religious leaders today have joined with secular forces resulting in a stunning decline in reputation and legitimacy.  

That's not the path our Father offered.  That's not the good news Jesus brought.  The example we've been offered by the organized church misses the magnificent heart of God and the grace He extends to us through each moment of our lives.  As we walk with Him, the one who loves us and lifts us up, we learn and mature through the years, the centerpiece of it all, the life He gives.

Wonderfully, His path continues there in front of us all.  Even through the darkest nights, we needn't fear.  He is with us, always.  

An Odd Dilemma

This is the kind of life-struggle our Father describes for us, one where the truth is difficult to find and hold.

The credibility and integrity of many are in question today. They feed us strange theories and gossip, confidence in false claims and supposed divine prophesies.

And, it looks like they believe everything they tell us. Now we wonder what else in their words and actions might be similarly unsupported by factual truth. If they're bent enough to believe these things, are they wise enough to lead?

Even when proven wrong, few have acknowledged their responsibility in leading so many astray.

Their false claims and accusations have been struck down in court for lack of evidence and by reports from multiple state and federal agencies, faked evidence disproven by investigation, false prophesies uncovered by the passage of time, yet so many continue to believe it all. Truth and trust are upended.

We're left with the question; how much of what I'm living by is based on truth? An objective answer will likely be troubling.

Here's the odd dilemma. As I listen to the rationale of people who I trust, they appear to genuinely believe that which I've carefully examined and honestly set aside as untrue. How can that possibly happen? How can we be so precisely divided? This is what He was describing for us. He told us that our struggle is not a physical contest, it is with those who rule and shape the world, those who bring today's untruth and against the spiritual  forces behind it.

It has happened before.  Got a plan?

10In conclusion, be strong in the Lord [draw your strength from Him and be empowered through your union with Him] and in the power of His [boundless] might. 11Put on the full armor of God [for His standards are like the splendid armor of a heavily-armed soldier], so that you may be able to [successfully] stand up against all the schemes and the strategies and the deceits of the devil. 12For our struggle is not against flesh and blood [contending only with physical opponents], but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this [present] darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly (supernatural) places. 13Therefore, put on the complete armor of God, so that you will be able to [successfully] resist and stand your ground in the evil day [of danger], and having done everything [that the crisis demands], to stand firm [in your place, fully prepared, immovable, victorious]. 14So stand firm and hold your ground, HAVING [b]TIGHTENED THE WIDE BAND OF TRUTH (personal integrity, moral courage) AROUND YOUR WAIST and HAVING PUT ON THE BREASTPLATE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS (an upright heart), 15and having [c]strapped on YOUR FEET THE GOSPEL OF PEACE IN PREPARATION [to face the enemy with firm-footed stability and the readiness produced by the good news]. 16Above all, lift up the [protective] [d]shield of faith with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17And take THE HELMET OF SALVATION, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God.

18With all prayer and petition pray [with specific requests] at all times [on every occasion and in every season] in the Spirit, and with this in view, stay alert with all perseverance and petition [interceding in prayer] for all [e]God’s people. 19And pray for me, that words may be given to me when I open my mouth, to proclaim boldly the mystery of the good news [of salvation], 20for which I am an ambassador in chains. And pray that in proclaiming it I may speak boldly and courageously, as I should.

It has never been simple or easy, I guess, but we're encouraged to gear up and go.

Long ago and far away

   before church had a name or a place ... 

     We are knit together by shared belief and faith, by shared principle, and by the bond of a common hope. We gather together, lifting up our prayers to God, as in our agreement we might engage with Him, and God delights in this strong interchange.  We pray, too, for the rulers, for their ministers and for all in authority, for the welfare of the world, for the prevalence of peace, for the delay of the final conclusion.  We gather to read His words . . . and with those, we strengthen our faith, we animate our hope, we make our confidence more steadfast; and under His instruction we build lives worth living. 

There is no buying and selling of any sort in the things of God. Though we have our treasure-chest, it is not made up of purchase-money like some religion that has a price for recognition or favor returned. 

On the day, if one likes, each puts in a small donation; but only by choice, and only as each is able: for there is no compulsion; all is voluntary. These gifts are . . . not spent on feasts, and drinking-bouts, and eating-houses, but to support and bury poor people, to supply the wants of boys and girls destitute of means and parents, and of old persons confined now to the house; such, too, as have suffered shipwreck ... But it is mainly the deeds of a love so noble that lead many to put a brand upon us ...

They say of believers, "See how they love one another," while they themselves are driven by hatred. "See how they are ready even to die for one another," they say, while they themselves would sooner kill.

     ~ from Tertullian, Justin Martyr, and others speaking of Christians in the first and second centuries. The church was not yet defined or organized, but Christians were emerging across the empire.

They were strangers and sojourners, we're told, passing their days graciously and unselfishly here on earth but as citizens of heaven.  They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time, they far surpass the laws by their lives.  The real thing, just fascinating.

___________________________________________________

Do Christians and the church today impress the world similarly?