Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 471



On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

This is vol­ume 471, appar­ent­ly the small­est num­ber with the prop­er­ty that its first 4 mul­ti­ples con­tain the dig­it 4.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. A Con­cise The­ol­o­gy of Fail­ure (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “The gospel fuels risk-tak­ing because we under­stand that what­ev­er we fail at is noth­ing com­pared to the fail­ure that was com­plete­ly and total­ly wiped out by the death and res­ur­rec­tion of Jesus. If our worst fail­ure has no pow­er over us, then no oth­er fail­ure has that kind of pow­er, either.”
  2. The Orwellian Evo­lu­tion of Banned Books Week (John Byron Kuh­n­er, First Things): “I go past the ‘banned books’ dis­plays of 1984 and To Kill a Mock­ing­bird and Beloved and The Col­or Pur­ple and have to laugh: These are the oppo­site of banned books. These are required books, books that have been assigned read­ing for Amer­i­can stu­dents for gen­er­a­tions. They have enjoyed most-favored-title sta­tus in the indus­try from the moment of pub­li­ca­tion. They are pro­mot­ed books—relentlessly pro­mot­ed. Indeed, call­ing them banned is just the lat­est morph of a mar­ket­ing pro­gram that hasn’t stopped want­i­ng you to read these books for—in some instances—six or sev­en decades now.”
  3. The Auton­o­my Trap (James R. Wood, Plough): “I come from a stock of rela­tion­ship-quit­ters. Dur­ing my child­hood, pret­ty much every­one in my life had divorced at least once, extend­ed fam­i­ly con­nec­tions were strained, long-term friends were nonex­is­tent, and moves were fre­quent. Over time I came to adopt a con­cep­tion of free­dom that had destroyed the lives of many around me, and which would threat­en to destroy my own as well: the pop­u­lar idea of free­dom as uncon­strained choice. Since this is impos­si­ble, the default was a more achiev­able ver­sion: the abil­i­ty to drop com­mit­ments and rela­tion­ships at any point when they become too com­pli­cat­ed. Free­dom as the license to leave when things get tough.”
  4. Some of Christianity’s Biggest Skep­tics Are Becom­ing Vocal Con­verts (Nathan Guy, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “…intel­lec­tu­al con­ver­sion sto­ries are not new. My own doc­tor­al super­vi­sor at Cambridge—Janet Mar­tin Soskice—converted in col­lege pre­cise­ly because of Christianity’s intel­lec­tu­al sat­is­fac­tion. Philoso­pher Edward Fes­er returned to the Catholi­cism of his youth for the same rea­son. But this trend seems to have increased expo­nen­tial­ly in recent years, with a grow­ing num­ber of sec­u­lar intel­lec­tu­als mak­ing sim­i­lar dec­la­ra­tions.…. It seems many of the bright philoso­phers grad­u­at­ing from emi­nent pro­grams and tak­ing posi­tions in promi­nent uni­ver­si­ties were—shockingly—theists. And many of them were Chris­tians, bring­ing their intel­lec­tu­al pow­ers to bear on the apolo­getic front. These schol­ars were slow­ly mak­ing inroads among the intel­li­gentsia, and their influ­ence was trick­ling down into the pub­lic square.”
    • The author is a phi­los­o­phy prof at Hard­ing Uni­ver­si­ty. Unlocked.
  5. In a First Among Chris­tians, Young Men Are More Reli­gious Than Young Women (Ruth Gra­ham, NYT): “For the first time in mod­ern Amer­i­can his­to­ry, young men are now more reli­gious than their female peers. They attend ser­vices more often and are more like­ly to iden­ti­fy as reli­gious.”
    • Unlocked, rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent
  6. Legal­iz­ing Sports Gam­bling Was a Huge Mis­take (Charles Fain Lehman, The Atlantic): “The rise of sports gam­bling has caused a wave of finan­cial and famil­ial mis­ery, one that falls dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly on the most eco­nom­i­cal­ly pre­car­i­ous house­holds. Six years into the exper­i­ment, the evi­dence is con­vinc­ing: Legal­iz­ing sports gam­bling was a huge mis­take.… Look­ing specif­i­cal­ly at online sports gam­bling, they find that legal­iza­tion increas­es the risk that a house­hold goes bank­rupt by 25 to 30 per­cent, and increas­es debt delin­quen­cy. These prob­lems seem to con­cen­trate among young men liv­ing in low-income counties—further evi­dence that those most hurt by sports gam­bling are the least well-off.”
    • Unlocked.
  7. Con­fes­sion of a Church Snob (Susy Flo­ry, Sub­stack): “My deci­sion to try this lit­tle church, the kind I’d passed by with­out a thought as I was on my way to my—I’ll be honest—what I viewed as my supe­ri­or big church, was direct­ly influ­enced by FF Bruce [a famous Bib­li­cal schol­ar] who wrote in his mem­oir that even though he didn’t agree with all of the prac­tices and beliefs of the Ply­mouth Brethren, no mat­ter where he was in the world he looked up the clos­est lit­tle Ply­mouth Brethren out­post and qui­et­ly showed up to serve, whether it was giv­ing, teach­ing, or putting away fold­ing chairs.”
  8. Mind-Blow­ing Game Invent­ed by Russ­ian Soci­ol­o­gy Stu­dent (YouTube, one minute): the sig­nif­i­cance of the game Were­wolf (and social deduc­tion games in gen­er­al) — rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Leave a Reply