Tag: apologetically interesting

Christianity For Modern Pagans: Vanity of Human Reason, of Dogmatism, and of the Philosophers

why Chris­tian­i­ty has such a coun­ter­cul­tur­al per­spec­tive on sex

Blog read­ers: Chi Alpha @ Stan­ford is engag­ing in our annu­al sum­mer read­ing project. As we read through an anno­tat­ed trans­la­tion of Pascal’s Pensees called Chris­tian­i­ty For Mod­ern Pagans, I’ll post the thoughts I’m email­ing the stu­dents here (which will large­ly con­sist of excerpts I found insight­ful). They are all tagged sum­mer-read­ing-project-2020. The read­ing sched­ule is online.

This week we’re talk­ing about chap­ters 7–9, the van­i­ty of human rea­son, of dog­ma­tism, and of the philoso­phers.

The thing that stood out most to me is the skep­ti­cism that Pas­cal applies to rea­son. Recall that he is one of the great­est sci­en­tists in his­to­ry and that his pio­neer­ing work laid the foun­da­tion for many fields of study. He knows well what rea­son can achieve, and as a result he also real­izes its lim­i­ta­tions.

…demon­stra­tion is not the only instru­ment for con­vinc­ing us. How few things can be demon­strat­ed! Proofs only con­vince the mind; habit pro­vides the strongest proofs and those that are most believed…. We must resort to habit once the mind has seen where the truth lies, in order to steep and stain our­selves in that belief…, for it is too much trou­ble to have the proofs always present before us…. When we believe only by the strength of our con­vic­tion and the automa­ton is inclined to believe the oppo­site, that is not enough. We must there­fore make both parts of us believe: the mind by rea­sons, which need to be seen only once in a life­time, and the automa­ton by habit.

Pas­cal, Pensee 821 (pages 99–100)

This is bril­liant, although the trans­la­tion feels clum­sy to me. Kreeft’s com­men­tary on this is help­ful:

…once rea­son has con­vinced us to believe, we require the aid of good habits to over­come bad habit­u­al ten­den­cies in the oppo­site direc­tion. There­fore we must act as if we believed, go to church and so forth, thus habit­u­at­ing the automa­ton to obey what rea­son has dis­cov­ered to be true. Habit is not an hon­est sub­sti­tute for rea­son, but it is an hon­est and need­ed ser­vant to rea­son. If we try to fight against irra­tional­i­ty with rea­son alone, we will lose. We need crud­er weapons too.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 821, page 100

This is one rea­son that Chris­t­ian com­mu­ni­ty is often so instru­men­tal in some­one’s con­ver­sion. Rea­son, like a map, can guide peo­ple to Christ but only if they actu­al­ly fol­low the direc­tions. Oth­er parts of their self must be engaged for the jour­ney to take place, and these parts are most com­mon­ly called forth through rela­tion­ships.

It also occurs to me that this may be a good way to explain why Chris­tian­i­ty has such a coun­ter­cul­tur­al per­spec­tive on sex. Sex engages the whole per­son and can either do so in a way that rein­forces the gospel mes­sage or in a way that under­mines it (see Eph­esians 5:31–32 and 1 Cor 6:12–20). Paul lays this out in Romans 1:18–27

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heav­en against all the god­less­ness and wicked­ness of peo­ple, who sup­press the truth by their wicked­ness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the cre­ation of the world God’s invis­i­ble qualities—his eter­nal pow­er and divine nature—have been clear­ly seen, being under­stood from what has been made, so that peo­ple are with­out excuse.

21For although they knew God, they nei­ther glo­ri­fied him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their think­ing became futile and their fool­ish hearts were dark­ened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glo­ry of the immor­tal God for images made to look like a mor­tal human being and birds and ani­mals and rep­tiles.

24There­fore God gave them over in the sin­ful desires of their hearts to sex­u­al impu­ri­ty for the degrad­ing of their bod­ies with one anoth­er. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and wor­shiped and served cre­at­ed things rather than the Creator—who is for­ev­er praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shame­ful lusts. Even their women exchanged nat­ur­al sex­u­al rela­tions for unnat­ur­al ones. 27In the same way the men also aban­doned nat­ur­al rela­tions with women and were inflamed with lust for one anoth­er. Men com­mit­ted shame­ful acts with oth­er men, and received in them­selves the due penal­ty for their error.

Romans 1:18–27 (NIV)

When peo­ple reject the knowl­edge of God, they must build lives to rein­force that rejec­tion of God. Paul says they do it using idols and sex, and he adds that they suf­fer for it. Of course they do. They are liv­ing based on a false con­cep­tion of human nature, which makes it inevitable that there will be need­less pain. Paula recent­ly had a plate shat­ter in the microwave. We had both assumed it was microwave-safe, but because we were wrong the shat­ter­ing was inevitable. The cause of the dam­age was the inter­ac­tion of invis­i­ble things (the microwaves and the mol­e­c­u­lar struc­ture of the plate), but the result­ing dam­age was eas­i­ly observed. Sad­ly, our cul­ture (and many lives with­in it) are shat­ter­ing and the rea­sons are invis­i­ble to many peo­ple.

Oth­er thoughts from these chap­ters that stood out to me:

To rea­son is to rely on rea­son, and to rely on rea­son is an act of faith, not of rea­son. There­fore rea­son pre­sup­pos­es faith… Indeed, how could rea­son itself be val­i­dat­ed? There are only three pos­si­bil­i­ties: (1) by some­thing sub­ra­tional, like ani­mal instinct (which is obvi­ous­ly absurd: How can the infe­ri­or val­i­date the supe­ri­or?); or (2) by some­thing ratio­nal, by a piece of rea­son­ing (which is also absurd: How can the part jus­ti­fy the whole? All rea­son is on tri­al; how dare the one piece of rea­son­ing you use to jus­ti­fy all rea­son­ing be exempt from tri­al?); or (3) by some­thing super­ra­tional, by faith in God (which is the only pos­si­bil­i­ty left).

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 131, pages 110–111

FWIW, I think Kreeft’s inclu­sion of God in the third point is valid but it’s real­ly some­thing he should argue for. I think many skep­tics would counter that some­thing like the pla­ton­ic laws of log­ic could stand in for God in option 3, which is true but does­n’t get them as far away from God as they think. Hav­ing read oth­er things by Kreeft, I believe he has had this argu­ment before and is mere­ly announc­ing check­mate when it is still not obvi­ous to his oppo­nent that the game is over.

You can think skep­ti­cism, but you can’t live it.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 131, page 111

Philoso­phers and the­olo­gians do not prac­tice what they preach any bet­ter than the rest of us–less, if they preach bet­ter than the rest of us.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 142, page 117

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 258

Is 650 a lot? it depends. Pen­nies? No. Mur­ders? Yes. Coro­n­avirus cas­es? Depends on where they spread.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Church­es Emerge as Major Source of Coro­n­avirus Cas­es (Kate Con­ger, Jack Healy and Lucy Tomp­kins, New York Times): “More than 650 coro­n­avirus cas­es have been linked to near­ly 40 church­es and reli­gious events across the Unit­ed States since the begin­ning of the pan­dem­ic, with many of them erupt­ing over the last month as Amer­i­cans resumed their pre-pan­dem­ic activ­i­ties, accord­ing to a New York Times data­base.” 
    • Are Church­es “A Major Source of Coro­n­avirus Cas­es?” (Tim Chal­lies, per­son­al blog): “If I have $3,000,000 in the bank and you give me anoth­er $650, you’d hard­ly be in the posi­tion to claim that you had made a major con­tri­bu­tion to my wealth. Sim­i­lar­ly, adding 650 cas­es to America’s total case­load of 3 mil­lion is no more than a blip that leaves 99.98% attrib­ut­able to oth­er caus­es.”
    • Church­es, Coro­n­avirus, and the New York Times (Ed Stet­zer, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “It is strange (at best) to use words like ‘major’ and ‘erupt­ed’ when describ­ing 650 cas­es. On that point, the head­line is mis­lead­ing. Hav­ing 650 cas­es in my coun­ty might be news, but 650 nation­al­ly out of three mil­lion cas­es is a head­line look­ing for a sto­ry. The real sto­ry is this: church­es are gath­er­ing and remark­ably few infec­tions are tak­ing place.”
  2. Amer­i­ca’s Racial Progress (David French, Nation­al Review): “There are two things that I believe to be true. First, that Amer­i­ca has a long his­to­ry of bru­tal and shame­ful mis­treat­ment of racial minori­ties — with black Amer­i­cans its chief vic­tims. And sec­ond, that Amer­i­ca is a great nation, and that Amer­i­can cit­i­zens (and cit­i­zens of the world) should be grate­ful for its found­ing. Per­haps no nation has done more good for more peo­ple than the Unit­ed States. It was and is a bea­con of lib­er­ty and pros­per­i­ty in a world long awash in tyran­ny and pover­ty.”
  3. A Let­ter on Jus­tice and Open Debate (many sig­na­to­ries, Harpers): “The restric­tion of debate, whether by a repres­sive gov­ern­ment or an intol­er­ant soci­ety, invari­ably hurts those who lack pow­er and makes every­one less capa­ble of demo­c­ra­t­ic par­tic­i­pa­tion. The way to defeat bad ideas is by expo­sure, argu­ment, and per­sua­sion, not by try­ing to silence or wish them away. We refuse any false choice between jus­tice and free­dom, which can­not exist with­out each oth­er.”
    • Promi­nent Artists and Writ­ers Warn of an ‘Intol­er­ant Cli­mate’ (Jen­nifer Schuessler and Eliz­a­beth A. Har­ris, New York Times): “‘We’re not just a bunch of old white guys sit­ting around writ­ing this let­ter,’ Mr. Williams, who is African-Amer­i­can, said. ‘It includes plen­ty of Black thinkers, Mus­lim thinkers, Jew­ish thinkers, peo­ple who are trans and gay, old and young, right wing and left wing.’”
    • end­ing the cha­rade (Fred­die deBoer, per­son­al blog): “Please, think for a minute and con­sid­er: what does it say when a com­plete­ly gener­ic endorse­ment of free speech and open debate is in and of itself imme­di­ate­ly diag­nosed as anti-pro­gres­sive, as anti-left?”(empha­sis in orig­i­nal)
  4. Lazarus Chak­w­era: Malaw­i’s pres­i­dent who ‘argued with God’ (BBC): “In the unmis­tak­able cadence of a preach­er, Malaw­i’s new Pres­i­dent, Lazarus Chak­w­era, appealed for uni­ty in his coun­try short­ly after he was sworn in on Sun­day. The day of the week seemed fit­ting as the for­mer head of the Malawi Assem­blies of God, one of the largest Chris­t­ian denom­i­na­tions in the coun­try, treat­ed the stage like a pul­pit to inspire fer­vour with his words.”
  5. Slate Star Codex and Sil­i­con Valley’s War Against the Media (Gideon Lewis-Kraus, New York­er): “The divi­sion between the Grey and Blue tribes is often ren­dered in the sim­plis­tic terms of a demo­graph­ic encounter between white, nerdi­ly enti­tled men in hood­ies on one side and diverse, effete, artis­tic snobs on the oth­er.” Inter­est­ing through­out. 
  6. Chris­tian­i­ty’s Covert Suc­cess (Mark Too­ley, Prov­i­dence) “I quote an Indi­an pro­fes­sor who says that Chris­tian­i­ty pro­ceeds in two ways, through conversion—which is obvi­ous, that’s how peo­ple tend to think Chris­tian­i­ty precedes—but he then says, through sec­u­lar­iza­tion. And I think he’s absolute­ly right. And I think that the assump­tion of peo­ple in the West that the sec­u­lar is some­how neu­tral, that if you’re sec­u­lar, you’ve some­how escaped the bounds of cul­tur­al con­tin­gency, couldn’t be more wrong.”
  7. On Reli­gion, the Supreme Court Pro­tects the Right to Be Dif­fer­ent (Michael McConnell, New York Times): “The court may be polit­i­cal, but its pol­i­tics is of the mid­dle, and of a par­tic­u­lar kind of mid­dle, one that is com­mit­ted to plu­ral­ism and dif­fer­ence rather than to the advance­ment of par­tic­u­lar moral stances.” The author is a Stan­ford law prof.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Plan­et of Cops (Fred­die de Boer, per­son­al blog): “The woke world is a world of snitch­es, infor­mants, rats. Go to any space con­cerned with social jus­tice and what will you find? End­less sur­veil­lance. Every­body is to be judged. Every­one is under sus­pi­cion. Every­thing you say is to be scoured, picked over, ana­lyzed for any pos­si­ble offense. Everyone’s a detec­tive in the Divi­sion of Prob­lem­at­ics, and they walk the beat 24/7…. I don’t know how peo­ple can simul­ta­ne­ous­ly talk about prison abo­li­tion and restor­ing the idea of for­give­ness to lit­er­al crim­i­nal jus­tice and at the same time turn the entire social world into a kan­ga­roo court sys­tem.” First shared in vol­ume 161.

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.

Christianity For Modern Pagans: Vanity and the Vanity of Human Justice

Pas­cal diag­nosed our mod­ern dys­func­tions 350 years ago.

Blog read­ers: Chi Alpha @ Stan­ford is engag­ing in our annu­al sum­mer read­ing project. As we read through an anno­tat­ed trans­la­tion of Pascal’s Pensees called Chris­tian­i­ty For Mod­ern Pagans, I’ll post the thoughts I’m email­ing the stu­dents here (which will large­ly con­sist of excerpts I found insight­ful). They are all tagged sum­mer-read­ing-project-2020. The read­ing sched­ule is online.

One rea­son I appre­ci­ate read­ing writ­ers from the dis­tant past is that when they make an obser­va­tion rel­e­vant to mod­ern times it is usu­al­ly more pow­er­ful than if it was uttered by one of our con­tem­po­raries.

It reminds me of an excerpt from C. S. Lewis’ intro­duc­tion to a trans­la­tion of Athana­sius’ On The Incar­na­tion of the Word of God:

Every age has its own out­look. It is spe­cial­ly good at see­ing cer­tain truths and spe­cial­ly liable to make cer­tain mis­takes. We all, there­fore, need the books that will cor­rect the char­ac­ter­is­tic mis­takes of our own peri­od. And that means the old books. All con­tem­po­rary writ­ers share to some extent the con­tem­po­rary outlook—even those, like myself, who seem most opposed to it. Noth­ing strikes me more when I read the con­tro­ver­sies of past ages than the fact that both sides were usu­al­ly assum­ing with­out ques­tion a good deal which we should now absolute­ly deny. They thought that they were as com­plete­ly opposed as two sides could be, but in fact they were all the time secret­ly united—united with each oth­er and against ear­li­er and lat­er ages—by a great mass of com­mon assump­tions. We may be sure that the char­ac­ter­is­tic blind­ness of the twen­ti­eth century—the blind­ness about which pos­ter­i­ty will ask, “But how could they have thought that?”—lies where we have nev­er sus­pect­ed it, and con­cerns some­thing about which there is untrou­bled agree­ment between Hitler and Pres­i­dent Roo­sevelt or between Mr. H. G. Wells and Karl Barth. None of us can ful­ly escape this blind­ness, but we shall cer­tain­ly increase it, and weak­en our guard against it, if we read only mod­ern books. Where they are true they will give us truths which we half knew already. Where they are false they will aggra­vate the error with which we are already dan­ger­ous­ly ill. The only pal­lia­tive is to keep the clean sea breeze of the cen­turies blow­ing through our minds, and this can be done only by read­ing old books. Not, of course, that there is any mag­ic about the past. Peo­ple were no clev­er­er then than they are now; they made as many mis­takes as we. But not the same mis­takes. They will not flat­ter us in the errors we are already com­mit­ting; and their own errors, being now open and pal­pa­ble, will not endan­ger us. Two heads are bet­ter than one, not because either is infal­li­ble, but because they are unlike­ly to go wrong in the same direc­tion. To be sure, the books of the future would be just as good a cor­rec­tive as the books of the past, but unfor­tu­nate­ly we can­not get at them.

C. S. Lewis

With that in mind, two of Pas­cal’s obser­va­tions struck me as espe­cial­ly pre­scient:

The mind nat­u­ral­ly believes and the will nat­u­ral­ly loves, so that when there are no true objects for them they nec­es­sar­i­ly become attached to false ones.  

Pas­cal, Pen­sée 661 (page 77)

Hun­dreds of years ago, Pas­cal accu­rate­ly diag­nosed the mod­ern Amer­i­can. Our decep­tive­ly sec­u­lar age is full of reli­gion, and for many peo­ple pol­i­tics is their pre­ferred form of wor­ship. Look back over my Fri­day “Issachar” emails and you will see many exam­ples of the reli­gious dynam­ics in our cul­tur­al debates; in fact, the very first arti­cle I ever shared was Joseph Bot­tum’s The Spir­i­tu­al Shape of Polit­i­cal Ideas and this week I’m like­ly to share David French’s Amer­i­ca Is in the Grips of a Fun­da­men­tal­ist Revival.

As your pas­tor I urge you: don’t par­tic­i­pate in the crazy of what­ev­er group you tend to vote with. You already have a reli­gion, so you are free to treat pol­i­tics as sig­nif­i­cant but not ulti­mate. Back in the 90’s, polit­i­cal sci­en­tist J. Budziszews­ki wrote two arti­cles back-to-back for First Things, The Prob­lem With Lib­er­al­ism and The Prob­lem With Con­ser­v­a­tivism. Read them both, espe­cial­ly read the one that describes your team. You won’t res­onate with every cri­tique in either arti­cle, but you will find much to think about.

Mov­ing on, I also appre­ci­at­ed one of Pas­cal’s com­ments which is rel­e­vant to social media:

We are not sat­is­fied with the life we have in our­selves and our own being. We want to lead an imag­i­nary life in the eyes of oth­ers, and so we try to make an impres­sion. We strive con­stant­ly to embell­ish and pre­serve our imag­i­nary being, and neglect the real one.

Pas­cal, Pen­sée 806 (page 79)

Read­ing this Pen­sée brought to mind Madi­son Fis­cher’s asser­tion that ditch­ing social media was key to her win­ning a medal as a com­pet­i­tive climber.

“I cared so much about what every­one thought of me that it became out­sourced con­fi­dence…. I couldn’t step out of the rep­u­ta­tion I forged online so I lived in a world of enti­tle­ment. Pride in my accom­plish­ments made me con­tent, and con­tent­ed­ness is poi­son to a young ath­lete who has to stay hun­gry if she wants to stay com­pet­i­tive.”

Madi­son Fis­ch­er

She real­ized that she faced a choice: actu­al­ly become a more com­pet­i­tive climber or spend her time try­ing to look like what peo­ple thought a com­pet­i­tive climber should be.

In a sim­i­lar man­ner, we can actu­al­ly strive to be like Jesus or we can instead try to become what oth­er peo­ple think a fol­low­er of Jesus should be. In oth­er words, we can either fol­low Jesus or we can fol­low oth­er peo­ple. We can fol­low Christ or a crowd.

This is about more than social media, but it’s def­i­nite­ly about social media as well. You prob­a­bly know that I am on Face­book and Twit­ter, so clear­ly I’m not about to tell you to delete your accounts. But I do urge you to be aware of the temp­ta­tions they cre­ate. Med­i­tate on Matthew 6:1, “Be care­ful not to prac­tice your right­eous­ness in front of oth­ers to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heav­en.”

Oth­er tid­bits I appre­ci­at­ed:

The athe­ist argues: “If there were a God, how could there be injus­tice?” To which Pas­cal replies: “If there is injus­tice, there must be true jus­tice for it to be rel­a­tive to and a defect of; and this true jus­tice is not found on Earth or in man, there­fore it must exist in Heav­en and God.” Either there or nowhere; and if nowhere, then “every­thing is per­mis­si­ble”. But not every­thing is per­mis­si­ble. There­fore there must be a God.

Kreeft com­ment­ing on Pen­sée 697, page 94

And I par­tic­u­lar­ly like this one. It’s true of babies, and it’s true of adults. Dif­fer­ent tri­fles, same psy­chol­o­gy.

A tri­fle con­soles us because a tri­fle upsets us.

Pas­cal, Pen­sée 43 (page 75)

Christianity For Modern Pagans: Wretchedness and The Paradox of Greatness and Wretchedness

My favorite of Pas­cal’s thoughts.

Blog read­ers: Chi Alpha @ Stan­ford is engag­ing in our annu­al sum­mer read­ing project. As we read through an anno­tat­ed trans­la­tion of Pascal’s Pensees called Chris­tian­i­ty For Mod­ern Pagans, I’ll post the thoughts I’m email­ing the stu­dents here (which will large­ly con­sist of excerpts I found insight­ful). They are all tagged sum­mer-read­ing-project-2020. The read­ing sched­ule is online.

This read­ing includes the line from Pas­cal that has shaped my thought more than any oth­er of his, “There is enough light for those who desire only to see, and enough dark­ness for those of a con­trary dis­po­si­tion” (Pas­cal, Pensee 149, page 69). It’s sim­ple obser­va­tion that explains some­thing we observe every day at Stan­ford: the coex­is­tence of smart peo­ple who think God’s exis­tence is blind­ing­ly obvi­ous along­side smart peo­ple who think that God’s nonex­is­tence is blind­ing­ly obvi­ous.

I think about this obser­va­tion fre­quent­ly, and I have come to believe that such exquis­ite bal­ance is itself evi­dence of a mas­ter plan­ner at work behind the scenes. If a flipped coin land­ed on its edge once, we would be astound­ed. If it land­ed on its edge repeat­ed­ly, we would be sure that the coin was rigged. Pas­cal’s point is that real­i­ty is rigged in such a way that strong cas­es can be made for faith and for doubt. Pay atten­tion the next time there is a sig­nif­i­cant sci­en­tif­ic dis­cov­ery in an area you might expect to clar­i­fy the exis­tence of God, you will see that the­ists and athe­ists alike rejoice in the dis­cov­ery and write about it with great glee. The coin will have land­ed on its edge once again.

Why would God arrange real­i­ty this way? To reveal our heart. As Pas­cal said ear­li­er in the same Pensee:

‘If he had wished to over­come the obsti­na­cy of the most hard­ened, he could have done so by reveal­ing him­self to them so plain­ly that they could not doubt the truth of his essence, as he will appear on the last day with such thun­der and light­ning and such con­vul­sions of nature that the dead will rise up and the blind­est will see him. This is not the way he wished to appear when he came in mild­ness, because so many men had shown them­selves unwor­thy of his clemen­cy, that he wished to deprive them of the good they did not desire. It was there­fore not right that he should appear in a man­ner man­i­fest­ly divine and absolute­ly capa­ble of con­vinc­ing all men, but nei­ther was it right that his com­ing should be so hid­den that he could not be rec­og­nized by those who sin­cere­ly sought him.

Pas­cal, Pensee 149, page 68

As I heard a pas­tor say once, “You get what you want in eter­ni­ty. Do you want God? You go to Heav­en where He dwells. Do you not want God? You will be free of Him for­ev­er and will go to Hell where He is not.”

Oth­er sec­tions that stuck with me:

It is instruc­tive to com­pare Job and Eccle­si­astes. For this is the com­par­i­son between ancient and mod­ern man. Eccle­si­astes, like mod­ern man, has every­thing and yet has noth­ing because it is only “van­i­ty”. Job, like ancient man, has noth­ing but has every­thing because he has God.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 403, page 49

The two most life-chang­ing rev­o­lu­tions in mod­ern times were the sci­en­tif­ic-indus­tri­al rev­o­lu­tion, which taught man to live and think abstract­ly, like an angel; and the sex­u­al rev­o­lu­tion, which taught man to live and think like an ani­mal. The first knows only the head, the sec­ond knows only the hor­mones. Nei­ther knows the heart.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensees 678 & 121, page 53

Man’s great­ness is so obvi­ous that it can even be deduced from his wretched­ness, for what is nature in ani­mals we call wretched­ness in man, thus rec­og­niz­ing that, if his nature is today like that of the ani­mals, he must have fall­en from some bet­ter state which was once his own…. Who would think him­self unhap­py if he had only one mouth and who would not if he had only one eye? It has prob­a­bly nev­er occurred to any­one to be dis­tressed at not hav­ing three eyes, but those who have none are incon­solable.

Pas­cal, Pensee 117, page 59

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 256

FYI, I offer some of my own thoughts on police towards the end.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Rebel Physi­cist Try­ing to Fix Quan­tum Mechan­ics (Bob Hen­der­son, New York Times): “Bassi is a prac­tic­ing Catholic and a believ­er in God, some­thing he says is ‘unusu­al’ but ‘not rare” among his col­leagues at the uni­ver­si­ty. Ein­stein called his own belief that real­i­ty could be under­stood ‘reli­gion,’ and I won­dered if there’s a con­nec­tion between Bassi’s reli­gious faith and that in what has become essen­tial­ly a far-right posi­tion in physics.” I have no opin­ion on the under­ly­ing sci­en­tif­ic con­tro­ver­sy, but Bassi sounds like a fas­ci­nat­ing per­son.
  2. What the Tent­mak­ing Busi­ness Was Real­ly Like for the Apos­tle Paul (Justin Tay­lor, Gospel Coali­tion): “[It] cost the Apos­tle Paul to write his let­ters, includ­ing the secur­ing of mate­ri­als and the hir­ing of a sec­re­tary to make a copy for him­self. After exten­sive research and cal­cu­la­tion, he deter­mined that on the low side it would have cost him at least $2,000 in today’s cur­ren­cy to write 1 Corinthi­ans. (And that doesn’t include the cost of send­ing some­one like Titus on a long jour­ney to deliv­er it.)” Short and fas­ci­nat­ing.
  3. The Tempt­ing of Neil Gor­such (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “We may offi­cial­ly have three branch­es of gov­ern­ment, but Amer­i­cans seem to accept that it’s more like 2.25: A pres­i­den­cy that acts uni­lat­er­al­ly when­ev­er pos­si­ble, a high court that checks the White House and set­tles cul­ture wars, and a Con­gress that occa­sion­al­ly bestirs itself to pass a bud­get.”
  4. Reli­gious Amer­i­cans Have Less Pos­i­tive Atti­tudes Toward Sci­ence, But This Does Not Extend to Oth­er Cul­tures (Jonathon McPhetres, Jonathan Jong & Miron Zuck­er­man, Social Psy­cho­log­i­cal and Per­son­al­i­ty Sci­ence): “It is com­mon­ly claimed that sci­ence and reli­gion are log­i­cal­ly and psy­cho­log­i­cal­ly at odds with one anoth­er. How­ev­er, pre­vi­ous stud­ies have main­ly exam­ined Amer­i­can sam­ples…” Raw data at https://osf.io/t7w6x/ DOI 10.1177/1948550620923239. The authors are pro­fes­sors at MIT, Oxford, and the Uni­ver­si­ty of Rochester.
  5. “He’s the Cho­sen One to Run Amer­i­ca”: Inside the Cult of Trump, His Ral­lies Are Church and He Is the Gospel (Jeff Sharlet, Van­i­ty Fair): “Non­be­liev­ers roll their eyes over what they see as the gob­s­mack­ing hypocrisy of Trump as a tri­bune of fam­i­ly val­ues, the dopi­ness of the rubes who con­sid­er him a moral man. Non­be­liev­ers, in oth­er words, miss the point. They lack gno­sis. Very few believ­ers deny Trump’s sor­did past. Some turn to the old Chris­t­ian ready-made of redemp­tion: Their man was lost, but now he’s found. Oth­ers love him pre­cise­ly because he is a sinner—if a man of such vast, crass, and open appetites can embody the nation (and real­ly, who is more American—vast, crass, and open—than Trump), then you too, stu­dent of porn, mon­ster truck lover, ulti­mate fight­er in your dreams and games, can claim an anoint­ing.” The title filled me with low expec­ta­tions, but the arti­cle has some inter­est­ing reflec­tions on Gnos­ti­cism in mod­ern Amer­i­ca. 
  6. On reli­gious lib­er­ty:
    • The True Extent of Reli­gious Lib­er­ty in Amer­i­ca, Explained (David French, The Dis­patch): “Yes, it is true that in some respects reli­gious lib­er­ty is ‘under siege.’ There are activists and law­mak­ers who want to push back at mul­ti­ple doc­trines and some rad­i­cals even dream of revok­ing tax exemp­tions from reli­gious orga­ni­za­tions that main­tain tra­di­tion­al teach­ings on sex and gen­der. But if the siege is real, then so is the citadel. Peo­ple of faith in the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca enjoy more lib­er­ty and more real polit­i­cal pow­er than any faith com­mu­ni­ty in the devel­oped world.” This is real­ly good.
    • No Longer a Lux­u­ry – Reli­gious Lib­er­ty is a Nation­al Secu­ri­ty Pri­or­i­ty (Chris­tos Makridis, Prov­i­dence): “…increas­es in reli­gious lib­er­ty are asso­ci­at­ed with robust increas­es in human flour­ish­ing even after con­trol­ling for dif­fer­ences in gross domes­tic prod­uct, the labor force, and mea­sures of eco­nom­ic free­dom. For exam­ple, mov­ing a coun­try that ranks in reli­gious lib­er­ty along the lines of Rus­sia to one that ranks clos­er to the Unit­ed States amounts to an 11 per­cent increase in the share of indi­vid­u­als who say that they are thriv­ing.” Chris­tos is an alum­nus of our min­istry. 
    • Torah Is the Air We Breathe (Gil Stu­dent, First Things): “But our spir­i­tu­al­ly impov­er­ished soci­ety views reli­gious prac­tices as mere­ly cul­tur­al expres­sions. It views reli­gious ser­vices as equiv­a­lent to yoga class­es and book club meet­ings. It does not see reli­gion as essen­tial, and there­fore can­not under­stand that Jews don’t serve God as part of our lives; rather, we live to serve God.”
  7. On race, police, and protests
    • Above the Law: The Data Are In on Police, Killing, and Race (Lyman Stone, The Pub­lic Dis­course): “…police killings have made up about one out of every twelve vio­lent deaths of Amer­i­cans between 2010 and 2018. That’s includ­ing Amer­i­can mil­i­tary deaths in Afghanistan, Iraq, and else­where dur­ing that win­dow. Indeed, more Amer­i­cans died at the hands of police offi­cers dur­ing that peri­od (about 14,400) than died while on active mil­i­tary duty (about 9,400). Police vio­lence in Amer­i­ca is extra­or­di­nary in its inten­si­ty. It is dis­pro­por­tion­ate to the actu­al threats fac­ing police offi­cers, and it has risen sig­nif­i­cant­ly in recent years with­out appar­ent jus­ti­fi­ca­tion.”
    • Jew­ish busi­ness­es in Los Ange­les ran­sacked in riots, but only Israeli and Jew­ish media care (Julia Duin, GetRe­li­gion): “The Ore­gon­ian called riot-plagued Port­land ‘a city of ply­wood.’ Since then, images have emerged of a dark­er nar­ra­tive, with riot­ers tar­get­ing Jew­ish busi­ness­es. Israeli news­pa­pers ran with this angle this past Sat­ur­day, but by the end of the day, there was noth­ing about the Jew­ish van­dal­ism to be found on the New York Times web­site. Usu­al­ly the Times is pret­ty up on anti-Semi­tism, but it was eas­i­er to find a piece about Anna Win­tour than any men­tions of van­dal­ized Jews.”
    • How Jesus became white — and why it’s time to can­cel that (Emi­ly McFar­lan Miller, Reli­gion News Ser­vice): “Ander­son said that it has been com­mon for peo­ple to depict Jesus as a mem­ber of their cul­ture or their eth­nic group. ‘If a per­son thinks that’s the only pos­si­ble rep­re­sen­ta­tion of Jesus, then that’s where the prob­lem starts,’ he said.” It’s almost like por­tray­ing God visu­al­ly leads to trou­ble. I wish God had thought to warn against that.
    • Reflec­tions from a Chris­t­ian schol­ar on Social Jus­tice, Crit­i­cal Race The­o­ry, Marx­ism, and Bib­li­cal Ethics (Kel­ly Ham­ren, Face­book): “I have two Eng­lish degrees (B.A. and M.A.) from a Chris­t­ian uni­ver­si­ty and a Ph.D. in lit­er­a­ture and crit­i­cism from a state uni­ver­si­ty. In my field, Marx­ism is one of the most com­mon­ly stud­ied and most influ­en­tial per­spec­tives, and Crit­i­cal Race The­o­ry is also a sig­nif­i­cant force and gain­ing momen­tum.… my stud­ies have con­vinced me that the suf­fer­ings and deaths of mil­lions are not only cor­re­lat­ed with but large­ly caused by the Marx­ist-Lenin­ist agen­da, and I am there­fore deeply opposed to Marx­ism as a frame­work. I hope that, know­ing this, those patient enough to read these notes will acquit me of being a clos­et Marx­ist cov­er­ing a sec­u­lar agen­da with a veneer of Bible vers­es.” The author is an Eng­lish pro­fes­sor at Lib­er­ty Uni­ver­si­ty.
    • Law pro­fes­sor’s response to stu­dent offend­ed by their shirt (Patri­cia Leary, Imgur): “Premise: You are not pay­ing for my opin­ion. Cri­tique: You are not pay­ing me to pre­tend I don’t have one.” Two com­ments: first, this is a few years old. Sec­ond, ini­tial­ly looks made-up but checks out. The author is a pro­fes­sor at Whit­ti­er Law School: Law pro­fes­sor responds to stu­dents who com­plained about her Black Lives Mat­ter shirt (Scott Jaschik, Inside High­er Ed) 
    • The New Truth (Jacob Siegel, Tablet Mag­a­zine): “What we are wit­ness­ing, in the rapid­ly trans­form­ing norms around race, sex, and gen­der, is not an argu­ment at all but a rev­o­lu­tion in moral sen­ti­ment. In all rev­o­lu­tions, the new thing strug­gling to be born makes use of the old sys­tem in order to over­throw it. At present, insti­tu­tions like the uni­ver­si­ty, the press, and the med­ical pro­fes­sion pre­serve the appear­ance of rea­son, empiri­cism, and argu­ment while alter­ing, through edict and coer­cion, the mean­ing of essen­tial terms in the moral lex­i­con, like fair­ness, equal­i­ty, friend­ship, and love.”
    • His­to­ry Shows Free Speech Is The Los­er In Mob Action (Jonathan Tur­ley, per­son­al blog): “What will be left when objec­tion­able pub­lic art and aca­d­e­mics are scrubbed from view? The silence that fol­lows may be com­fort­ing to those who want to remove images or ideas that cause unease. His­to­ry has shown, how­ev­er, that ortho­doxy is nev­er sat­is­fied with silence. It demands speech. Once all the offend­ing stat­ues are down, and all the offend­ing pro­fes­sors are culled, the appetite for col­lec­tive sup­pres­sion will become a demand for col­lec­tive expres­sion.” The author is a law pro­fes­sor at George Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty.
    • Of Stat­ues and Sym­bol­ic Mur­der (Wil­fred M. McClay, First Things): “…a great many of the foot sol­diers in this move­ment are young, white, sub­ur­ban, mid­dle-class and col­lege-edu­cat­ed; and that they are work­ing out their sal­va­tion with fear and trem­bling and a dead­ly earnest­ness. The ‘white priv­i­lege’ of which these young peo­ple com­plain is a pro­jec­tion onto oth­ers of the very con­di­tion that they sus­pect and fear in them­selves. Hence the con­vul­sive rage, com­plete with copi­ous gut­ter pro­fan­i­ty, which we have all seen in videos of them. Peo­ple in the grip of such pow­er­ful psy­cho­log­i­cal forces will go a long way to expi­ate for their exis­ten­tial sins and rid them­selves of their demons. They are eas­i­ly mobi­lized by oth­ers. Accord­ing to Pew esti­mates, only one out of six Black Lives Mat­ter activists is actu­al­ly black.”
      1. Relat­ed to the last sen­tence: George Floyd Pro­test­er Demo­graph­ics: Insights Across 4 Major US Cities (Mobile­Wal­la report) has bar charts based on sur­veilling the cell phones of peo­ple at the protests and infer­ring their demo­graph­ics the way mar­keters do. 
    • A Min­neapo­lis Neigh­bor­hood Vowed to Check Its Priv­i­lege. It’s Already Being Test­ed. (Caitlin Dick­er­son, New York Times): “The impulse many white Pow­der­horn Park res­i­dents have to seek help from com­mu­ni­ty groups rather than from the police is being felt in neigh­bor­hoods across the coun­try. But some are find­ing the com­mit­ment hard to stand by when faced with the com­plex real­i­ties of life. While friends, neigh­bors and even fam­i­ly mem­bers in Pow­der­horn Park agree to avoid call­ing the police at all costs, it has been hard­er to estab­lish where to draw the line.” Read through to the insane final sto­ry. 
    • I don’t often insert my own com­men­tary in these emails, but in this case I’d like to high­light a Bib­li­cal per­spec­tive.
      1. The Bible teach­es that one of the rea­sons that God gives gov­ern­ments author­i­ty is for them to use vio­lence in the pur­suit of jus­tice. Romans 13:4 is key: “the one in author­i­ty is God’s ser­vant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no rea­son. They are God’s ser­vants, agents of wrath to bring pun­ish­ment on the wrong­do­er.”
      2. We have free­dom in how we choose to do that as a soci­ety — the Bible does not require that we use police or that we build pris­ons. Hav­ing said that, if we abol­ish domes­tic law enforce­ment then the only alter­na­tives I see are the mil­i­tary, pri­vate busi­ness­es that offer pro­tec­tion for a fee, sanc­tioned vig­i­lan­tism, or mob jus­tice. These are not appeal­ing options. Some com­bi­na­tion of unbundling police work, reduc­ing crim­i­nal laws while rethink­ing the sanc­tions for vio­lat­ing them, and increas­ing police pay while impos­ing high­er stan­dards for police con­duct seems like a bet­ter path for­ward.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have When Chil­dren Say They’re Trans (Jesse Sin­gal, The Atlantic): “ …to deny the pos­si­bil­i­ty of a con­nec­tion between social influ­ences and gender-identity explo­ration among ado­les­cents would require ignor­ing a lot of what we know about the devel­op­ing teenage brain—which is more sus­cep­ti­ble to peer influ­ence, more impul­sive, and less adept at weigh­ing long-term out­comes and con­se­quences than ful­ly devel­oped adult brains—as well as indi­vid­ual sto­ries like Delta’s.” This is a long and bal­anced piece which has gar­nered out­rage in some online cir­cles. First shared in vol­ume 157.

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.

Christianity For Modern Pagans: Order & Method

Blog read­ers: Chi Alpha @ Stan­ford is engag­ing in our annu­al sum­mer read­ing project. As we read through an anno­tat­ed trans­la­tion of Pas­cal’s Pensees called Chris­tian­i­ty For Mod­ern Pagans, I’ll post the thoughts I’m email­ing the stu­dents here (which will large­ly con­sist of excerpts I found insight­ful). They are all tagged sum­mer-read­ing-project-2020. The read­ing sched­ule is online.

The theme that seems most impor­tant to me from this first week’s read­ings (the pref­ace and the chap­ters Order & Method) is the need to under­stand the heart behind some­one’s skep­ti­cism. We must gen­uine­ly love our skep­ti­cal friends if we are to per­suade them.

Their intel­lec­tu­al ques­tions are real and have to be answered hon­est­ly, but the cries of the heart (Chris­tian­i­ty is intol­er­ant, faith is for igno­rant peo­ple, becom­ing a Chris­t­ian would make me into some­one I would­n’t like, fol­low­ing Jesus would mean aban­don­ing fun) are far more impor­tant.

I find when I speak with unbe­liev­ers on cam­pus their first ques­tions to me are often tests: they want to see how I respond to pure­ly intel­lec­tu­al inquiries before they begin rais­ing the issues that real­ly keep them from faith. And some­times they don’t even know the real rea­sons they won’t con­sid­er Chris­tian­i­ty. A reply I’ve found help­ful is, “I’ll answer your ques­tion as best I can, but I’m curi­ous: if I answer it to your sat­is­fac­tion will you seri­ous­ly con­sid­er becom­ing a Chris­t­ian? If not, what would still hold you back?”

What do you think Stan­ford stu­dents’ biggest heart objec­tions are to Chris­tian­i­ty? I’m curi­ous what you notice as you speak with your friends.

And now a few excerpts from the read­ing I par­tic­u­lar­ly enjoyed:

In the past, the dif­fi­cul­ty in accept­ing Chris­tian­i­ty was its sec­ond point, sal­va­tion. Every­one in pre­mod­ern soci­eties knew sin was real, but many doubt­ed sal­va­tion. Today it is the exact oppo­site: every­body is saved, but there is no sin to be saved from. Thus what orig­i­nal­ly came into the world as “good news” strikes the mod­ern mind as bad news, as guilt-rid­den, moral­is­tic and “judg­men­tal”. (page 26, Kreeft’s com­men­tary on pensee 6)

Page 26 (from Kreeft’s com­men­tary on pensee 6)

If he exalts him­self, I hum­ble him.
If he hum­bles him­self, I exalt him.
And I go on con­tra­dict­ing him
Until he under­stands
That he is a mon­ster that pass­es all under­stand­ing.

Page 37 (Pas­cal speak­ing, pensee 130)

When we want to cor­rect some­one use­ful­ly and show him he is wrong, we must see from what point of view he is approach­ing the mat­ter, for it is usu­al­ly right from that point of view, and we must admit this, but show him the point of view from which it is wrong. This will please him, because he will see that he was not wrong but mere­ly failed to see every aspect of the ques­tion.

Page 39 (Pas­cal speak­ing, pensee 701)

Our reli­gion is wise and fool­ish: wise, because it is the most learned and most strong­ly based on mir­a­cles, prophe­cies, etc., fool­ish, because it is not all this which makes peo­ple belong to it. . . . What makes them believe is the Cross. . . . And so St. Paul, who came with wis­dom and signs, said that he came with nei­ther wis­dom nor signs, for he came to con­vert, but those who come only to con­vince may say they come with wis­dom and signs.

Page 42 (Pas­cal speak­ing, pensee 842)

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 254

The less time­ly stuff is up top this time and there are a lot of mag­ic videos at the bot­tom.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. What Unites Most Grad­u­ates of Selec­tive Col­leges? An Intact Fam­i­ly (Nicholas Zill & Brad Wilcox, Insti­tute for Fam­i­ly Stud­ies): “… even after con­trol­ling for par­ent edu­ca­tion, fam­i­ly income, and stu­dent race and eth­nic­i­ty, being raised by one’s mar­ried birth par­ents pro­vides an addi­tion­al boost to one’s chances of get­ting through Prince­ton.”
  2. What Chris­tians Must Remem­ber about Nuclear Weapons and Arms Con­trol (Peter Feaver & William Inbo­den & Michael Singh, Prov­i­dence): “Before embrac­ing calls for the abo­li­tion of nuclear weapons, thought­ful Chris­tians must con­front two uncom­fort­able facts. First, we live in a fall­en world in which the threats we face are chang­ing, and arguably grow­ing. Sec­ond, the enve­lope of peace and secu­ri­ty in which free soci­eties have thrived for the past eight decades is not self-sustaining—one need only view the recent decline of democ­ra­cies and rise of author­i­tar­i­an threats from Rus­sia and Chi­na. One can detest nuclear weapons and still see their strate­gic val­ue.” The authors are, respec­tive­ly, a pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal sci­ence at Duke, a pro­fes­sor of pub­lic pol­i­cy at UT Austin, and a senior fel­low at a think­tank.
  3. Peer Review (Rod­ney Brooks, per­son­al blog): “I came to real­ize that the editor’s job was real, and it required me to deeply under­stand the top­ic of the paper, and the bias­es of the review­ers, and not to treat the ref­er­ees as hav­ing the right to deter­mine the fate of the paper them­selves. As an edi­tor I had to add judge­ment to the process at many steps along the way, and to strive for the process to improve the papers, but also to let in ideas that were new.” The author is a pro­fes­sor emer­i­tus of robot­ics at MIT.
  4. JK Rowl­ing Writes about Her Rea­sons for Speak­ing out on Sex and Gen­der Issues (JK Rowl­ing, per­son­al blog): “…I refuse to bow down to a move­ment that I believe is doing demon­stra­ble harm in seek­ing to erode ‘woman’ as a polit­i­cal and bio­log­i­cal class and offer­ing cov­er to preda­tors like few before it.”
  5. More on the NY Times tan­gle last week and what it reveals about our soci­ety
    • Amer­i­ca is chang­ing, and so is the media (Ezra Klein, Vox): “The news media likes to pre­tend that it sim­ply holds up a mir­ror to Amer­i­ca as it is. We don’t want to be seen as actors craft­ing the polit­i­cal debate, agents who make deci­sions that shape the bound­aries of the nation­al dis­course. We are, of course. We always have been.”
    • The Still-Vital Case for Lib­er­al­ism in a Rad­i­cal Age (Jonathan Chait, NY Mag­a­zine): “…it is an error to jump from the fact that right-wing author­i­tar­i­an racism is far more impor­tant to the con­clu­sion that left-wing illib­er­al­ism is com­plete­ly unim­por­tant. One can oppose dif­fer­ent evils, even those evils aligned against each oth­er, with­out assign­ing them equal weight.”
    • Why every­one hates the main­stream media (Andrew Pot­ter, Pol­i­cy for Pan­demics): “It’s not a coin­ci­dence that lawyers, jour­nal­ists, and politi­cians are rou­tine­ly ranked as the most dis­liked pro­fes­sions in the world. It’s because the law is not about jus­tice, pol­i­tics is not about democ­ra­cy, and the news is not about infor­ma­tion. But in each case, that is what emerges, by har­ness­ing the sta­tus-con­scious com­pet­i­tive natures of the par­tic­i­pants.” The author is a for­mer jour­nal­ist and edi­tor.
  6. Thoughts on race and racism:
    • George Floyd and Me (Shai Linn, Gospel Coali­tion): “Though I’m deeply griev­ed, I am not with­out hope. Per­son­al­ly, I have lit­tle con­fi­dence in our gov­ern­ment or pol­i­cy­mak­ers to change the sys­temic fac­tors that con­tributed to the George Floyd sit­u­a­tion. But my hope isn’t in the gov­ern­ment. My hope is in the Lord.”
    • Amer­i­can Racism: We’ve Got So Very Far to Go (David French, The Dis­patch): “If polit­i­cal­ly cor­rect pro­gres­sives are often guilty of over-racial­iz­ing Amer­i­can pub­lic dis­course, and they are, polit­i­cal­ly cor­rect con­ser­v­a­tives com­mit the oppo­site sin—and they fil­ter out or angri­ly reject all the infor­ma­tion that con­tra­dicts their the­sis.”
    • This moment cries out for us to con­front race in Amer­i­ca (Con­doleez­za Rice, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Still, we sim­ply must acknowl­edge that soci­ety is not col­or-blind and prob­a­bly nev­er will be. Progress comes when peo­ple treat one anoth­er with respect, as if we were col­or-blind. Unless and until we are hon­est that race is still an anchor around our country’s neck, that shad­ow will nev­er be lift­ed. Our coun­try has a birth defect: Africans and Euro­peans came to this coun­try togeth­er — but one group was in chains.” She is, of course, a fel­low believ­er and also a Stan­ford pro­fes­sor who will soon be the direc­tor of the Hoover Insti­tu­tion. 
    • Our Present Moment: Why Is It So Hard? (Kevin DeY­oung, Gospel Coali­tion): “I’m think­ing more broad­ly about why race in this coun­try is so dif­fi­cult, and in par­tic­u­lar dif­fi­cult even between peo­ple of good will, between peo­ple in your church of a dif­fer­ent col­or. I’m think­ing about peo­ple who agree on so many oth­er things. And you sing the same songs and you real­ly love Jesus togeth­er. And you read the same Bible, and you real­ly are togeth­er for the gospel. So why is it so divi­sive?” Some real­ly good thoughts in here.
  7. On the protests
    • The protests start­ed out look­ing like 1968. They turned into 1964. (Omar Wasow, Wash­ing­ton Post): “For a grow­ing inter­na­tion­al move­ment try­ing to draw atten­tion to the long his­to­ry of racist and bru­tal polic­ing, non­vi­o­lence in the face of police repres­sion is an exceed­ing­ly dif­fi­cult strat­e­gy to sus­tain. Evi­dence from the 1960s, how­ev­er — and per­haps this month, too — sug­gests using such tac­tics to gen­er­ate media cov­er­age of a press­ing social prob­lem can be a pow­er­ful tool for build­ing a coali­tion for social change.”
    • We often accuse the right of dis­tort­ing sci­ence. But the left changed the coro­n­avirus nar­ra­tive overnight (Thomas Chat­ter­ton Williams, The Guardian): “Two weeks ago we shamed peo­ple for being in the street; today we shame them for not being in the street.”
    • Trib­al­ism Comes for Pan­dem­ic Sci­ence (Yuval Levin, The New Atlantis): “These pub­lic health pro­fes­sion­als are sim­ply admit­ting that their views on the health risks of large gath­er­ings depend on the polit­i­cal valence of those gath­er­ings. Rather than com­part­men­tal­ize their pro­fes­sion­al judg­ment from their polit­i­cal pri­or­i­ties — explain­ing the risks of large protests regard­less of their polit­i­cal con­tent and then sep­a­rate­ly and in a dif­fer­ent con­text express­ing what­ev­er views they might have about that con­tent — they open­ly deny not only the pos­si­bil­i­ty but even the desir­abil­i­ty of detached pro­fes­sion­al advice. This kind of atti­tude inevitably makes it much hard­er for the pub­lic to assess sci­en­tif­ic claims about the pan­dem­ic through any­thing oth­er than a polit­i­cal lens.”
    • The Grow­ing CHAZm in Seat­tle (Jon­ah Gold­berg, The Dis­patch): “It took activists less than 24 hours to dis­cov­er that even their make-believe Duchy of Grand Fen­woke relies on the basic build­ing blocks of any poli­ty. If Seattle’s supine and sausage-spined polit­i­cal lead­er­ship allows this exper­i­ment to con­tin­ue, pret­ty soon you can expect the emer­gence of cur­ren­cy, tax­es, even some kind of char­ter or con­sti­tu­tion. It wouldn’t shock me if they end­ed up cre­at­ing rudi­men­ta­ry courts or even a jail.” Gold­berg is an expert at the mean­der­ing rant. 
    • Anar­chy In Seat­tle (Christo­pher Rufo, City Jour­nal): “The Capi­tol Hill Autonomous Zone has set a dan­ger­ous prece­dent: armed left-wing activists have assert­ed their dom­i­nance of the streets and estab­lished an alter­na­tive polit­i­cal author­i­ty over a large sec­tion of a neigh­bor­hood. They have claimed de fac­to police pow­er over thou­sands of res­i­dents and dozens of businesses—completely out­side of the demo­c­ra­t­ic process. In a mat­ter of days, Antifa-affil­i­at­ed para­mil­i­taries have cre­at­ed a hard­ened bor­der, estab­lished a rudi­men­ta­ry form of gov­ern­ment based on prin­ci­ples of inter­sec­tion­al rep­re­sen­ta­tion, and forcibly removed unfriend­ly media from the ter­ri­to­ry.”
    • A Dark Cloud For Democ­ra­cy (Carl True­man, First Things): “…this does not entire­ly explain why Min­neapo­lis and not Hong Kong has grabbed the imag­i­na­tion of British youth. After all, Hong Kong is a much more recent part of the British nar­ra­tive; one can watch the dis­man­tling of Hong Kong’s con­sti­tu­tion online and on the tele­vi­sion; and an extreme­ly good case can be made that the British gov­ern­ment is more respon­si­ble for that mess and its poten­tial ame­lio­ra­tion than for the chaos in the Min­neapo­lis police depart­ment. After all, the British can actu­al­ly do some­thing about it—as Boris Johnson’s pledge on immi­gra­tion to the U.K. from Hong Kong indi­cates. So why Min­neapo­lis, not Hong Kong?”
    • If we want bet­ter polic­ing, we’re going to have to spend more, not less (Megan McAr­dle, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Reform is thus more like­ly to stick if we co-opt the unions rather than try­ing to break them. Instead of ‘defund the police,’ what if we offloaded the non­ju­di­cial parts of their work, like deal­ing with the home­less and the men­tal­ly ill, to social work­ers, and then ‘stuffed their mouths with gold’ to reform the polic­ing part? We could offer a sig­nif­i­cant salary boost in exchange for accept­ing stricter stan­dards and over­sight, which wouldn’t just ease the polit­i­cal obsta­cles, but pos­si­bly attract high­er-qual­i­ty can­di­dates to the police force.”
    • Most Amer­i­cans Want Police Reform But Don’t Back ‘Defund The Police’ (Ariel Edwards-Levy and Kevin Robil­lard, Huff­in­g­ton Post): “A near-uni­ver­sal major­i­ty of Amer­i­cans sup­port at least some changes to polic­ing in the Unit­ed States fol­low­ing the death of George Floyd in the cus­tody of Min­neapo­lis police, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds. There is major­i­ty sup­port for pro­pos­als cir­cu­lat­ing in Con­gress to ban choke­holds and make it eas­i­er to track and charge offi­cers accused of mis­con­duct. But the idea of ‘defund­ing the police’ has lit­tle sup­port from the pub­lic.”
    • Police Bru­tal­i­ty: The Fer­gu­son Effect (Robert Ver­bruggen, Nation­al Review): “There’s a temp­ta­tion in some quar­ters to think this issue is like gay mar­riage or mar­i­jua­na legal­iza­tion, where there’s a turn­ing point in pub­lic opin­ion and a rapid shift in pol­i­cy and then every­one won­ders what the big deal ever was. See, for exam­ple, Tim Alberta’s piece in Politi­co today, which bizarrely claims we may be see­ing the ‘last stand’ of law-and-order Repub­li­cans and draws those two par­al­lels explic­it­ly. But crime isn’t like that. When the streets become unsafe, pub­lic opin­ion shifts back in favor of the folks who stand between the inno­cents and the bad guys.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have The Prob­lem with Dull Knives: What’s the Defense Depart­ment got to do with Code for Amer­i­ca? (Jen­nifer Pahlka, Medi­um): “I have a dis­tinct mem­o­ry of being a kid in the kitchen with my mom, awk­ward­ly and prob­a­bly dan­ger­ous­ly wield­ing a knife, try­ing to cut some tough veg­etable, and defend­ing my actions by say­ing the knife was dull any­way. My mom stopped me and said firm­ly, ‘Jen­ny, a dull knife is much more dan­ger­ous than a sharp knife. You’re strug­gling and using much more force than you should, and that knife is going to end up God Knows Where.’ She was right, of course…. But hav­ing poor tools [for the mil­i­tary] doesn’t make us fight less; it makes us fight bad­ly.” (some empha­sis in the orig­i­nal removed). High­ly rec­om­mend­ed. First shared in vol­ume 155.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 251

Con­cern­ing the ben­e­fits of reli­gion, the virtue of intel­lec­tu­al humil­i­ty, per­spec­tives on the pan­dem­ic, the glob­al strat­e­gy of the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty, and an unset­tling account of gov­ern­men­tal sur­veil­lance.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Reli­gious ser­vices may low­er risk of ‘deaths of despair’ (Chris Sweeney, Har­vard Gazette): “After adjust­ing for numer­ous vari­ables, the study showed that women who attend­ed ser­vices at least once per week had a 68 per­cent low­er risk of death from despair com­pared to those nev­er attend­ing ser­vices. Men who attend­ed ser­vices at least once per week had a 33 per­cent low­er risk of death from despair.” Those are HUGE reduc­tions!
  2. Pan­dem­ic Per­spec­tives
    • Amid the Coro­n­avirus Cri­sis, a Reg­i­men for Reën­try (Atul Gawande, The New York­er): “But, in the face of enor­mous risks, Amer­i­can hos­pi­tals have learned how to avoid becom­ing sites of spread. When the time is right to light­en up on the lock­down and bring peo­ple back to work, there are wider lessons to be learned from places that nev­er locked down in the first place.” This was quite good.
    • What African Nations Are Teach­ing the West About Fight­ing the Coro­n­avirus (Jina Moore, The New York­er): “Much of what Ger­ca­ma encoun­tered at the air­port had been designed to pre­vent Ebo­la. Since 2018, the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Repub­lic of the Con­go, South Sudan’s neigh­bor to the south­west, has been strug­gling with the dis­ease. But local pub­lic-health offi­cials’ quick repur­pos­ing of Ebo­la pro­to­cols and infra­struc­ture impressed Ger­ca­ma, as did the work of rapid-response teams, whom she twice wit­nessed respond to sus­pect­ed coro­n­avirus cas­es dur­ing the week she spent in the coun­try.”
    • A Spec­tac­u­lar­ly Bad Wash­ing­ton Post Sto­ry on Apple and Google’s Expo­sure Noti­fi­ca­tion Project (John Gru­ber, blog): “A Wash­ing­ton Post sto­ry today on Apple and Google’s joint effort on COVID-19 expo­sure noti­fi­ca­tion project, from reporters Reed Alber­got­ti and Drew Har­well, is the worst sto­ry I’ve seen in the Post in mem­o­ry. It’s so atro­cious­ly bad — fac­tu­al­ly wrong and one-sided in opin­ion — that it should be retract­ed.” Ouch. Gru­ber backs it up. 
    • Coro­n­avirus Cri­sis: Ron DeSan­tis Got Flori­da’s COVID-19 Strat­e­gy Right (Rich Lowry, Nation­al Review): “A cou­ple of months ago, the media, almost as one, decid­ed that Gov­er­nor Ron DeSan­tis was a pub­lic men­ace who was going to get Florid­i­ans killed with his lax response to the coro­n­avirus cri­sis…. The con­ven­tion­al wis­dom has begun to change about Flori­da, as the dis­as­ter so wide­ly pre­dict­ed hasn’t mate­ri­al­ized.”
    • As more states reopen, Geor­gia defies pre­dic­tions of coro­n­avirus resur­gence. What’s the les­son for the rest of the coun­try? (Andrew Romano, Yahoo News): “That’s the bal­ance reopen­ing needs to strike if it’s going to work: few­er offi­cial restric­tions in exchange for more indi­vid­ual and com­mu­ni­ty respon­si­bil­i­ty.”
    • A con­trary per­spec­tive: It Sure Seems Like Flori­da And Geor­gia Lied About Their Infec­tion Rates (Luis Pra­da, Cracked): “Flori­da and Geor­gia are petu­lant, enti­tled quar­an­tine pro­test­ers embod­ied as states. Since this all start­ed, both states have been fran­ti­cal­ly search­ing for an excuse to end their quar­an­tines as fast as pos­si­ble and get back to life as usu­al despite a ram­pag­ing virus that’s killing peo­ple.”
    • Mis­sis­sip­pi church destroyed by arson was suing city over safer-at-home order (Ari­an­na Poindex­ter, WLBT TV): “A Mis­sis­sip­pi church at the cen­ter of an arson inves­ti­ga­tion is the same church cur­rent­ly in a bat­tle with city lead­ers over a COVID-19 safer-at-home order. First Pen­te­costal Church in Hol­ly Springs was destroyed by what inves­ti­ga­tors believe is an arson­ist. Inves­ti­ga­tors found graf­fi­ti on pave­ment in the church park­ing lot that reads, ‘Bet you stay home now you hypokrits (sic).’” 
    • Meet the ‘Gang Pas­tor’ Behind Cape Town’s Viral Coro­n­avirus Coop­er­a­tion (Jayson Casper, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “We reg­u­lar­ly stop while we are work­ing to invite peo­ple to fol­low Jesus. I’ve lost track, but maybe 5,000 to 10,000 have told us they’ve repent­ed and are turn­ing to fol­low Jesus. But I don’t call this suc­cess, it is just a small piece in the over­all cause of what we Chris­tians are called to do.”
    • Don­ald Trump Does­n’t Want Author­i­ty (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “Great men and bad men alike seek atten­tion as a means of get­ting pow­er, but our pres­i­dent is inter­est­ed in pow­er only as a means of get­ting atten­tion.”
  3. Uncer­tain­ty (Howard Marks, Oak­tree Cap­i­tal): “The peo­ple who are always sure are no more help­ful than the peo­ple who are nev­er sure. The real expert’s con­fi­dence is rea­son-based and pro­por­tion­al to the weight of the evi­dence.” Shared by an alum­nus’ father.
  4. China’s Plans to Win Con­trol of the Glob­al Order (Tan­ner Greer, Tablet Mag­a­zine): “As Bei­jing sees it, China’s suc­cess depends on dis­cred­it­ing the tenets of lib­er­al cap­i­tal­ism so that notions like indi­vid­ual free­dom and con­sti­tu­tion­al democ­ra­cy come to be seen as the relics of an obso­lete sys­tem.” I found this piece to be very insight­ful.
    • Relat­ed: In China’s Cri­sis, Xi Sees a Cru­cible to Strength­en His Rule (Steven Lee Myers and Chris Buck­ley, New York Times): “Mr. Xi, shaped by his years of adver­si­ty as a young man, has seized on the pan­dem­ic as an oppor­tu­ni­ty in dis­guise — a chance to redeem the par­ty after ear­ly mis­takes let infec­tions slip out of con­trol, and to ral­ly nation­al pride in the face of inter­na­tion­al ire over those mis­takes. And the state pro­pa­gan­da machine is aggres­sive­ly back­ing him up, tout­ing his lead­er­ship in fight­ing the pan­dem­ic.”
    • Relat­ed: Xi’s Regime Recasts Chi­na as the Good Samar­i­tan dur­ing Pan­dem­ic (Alan Dowd, Prov­i­dence): “Add it all up—the PR spin, the pro­pa­gan­da push, the pal­lets of aid, the preening—and in a very real sense, Xi Jinping’s regime is offer­ing a new, twist­ed ver­sion of the Para­ble of the Good Samar­i­tan. In Xi’s retelling, the road­side rob­bers who assault the trav­el­er lat­er return to res­cue him—and some­how expect to be hailed as heroes.”
    • An explo­sive sum­mer of dis­con­tent is brew­ing in Hong Kong (Shibani Mah­tani, Wash­ing­ton Post): “On Tues­day, Hong Kong author­i­ties extend­ed pan­dem­ic-relat­ed rules lim­it­ing pub­lic gath­er­ings to effec­tive­ly ban, for the first time, a June 4 vig­il mark­ing the anniver­sary of Chi­na’s mas­sacre of stu­dent demon­stra­tors in Tianan­men Square in 1989.”
    • Chi­na Push­es for New Hong Kong Secu­ri­ty Law (Kei­th Brad­sh­er and Austin Ramzy, New York Times): “The leg­isla­tive push in Bei­jing marks the most aggres­sive step by the par­ty to exert its influ­ence over the for­mer British colony since it was reclaimed by Chi­na in 1997.”
    • Seri­ous­ly — pray for Hong Kong.
  5. A Mis­sis­sip­pi pas­tor with eight kids and no pro­fes­sion­al music back­ground won ‘The Voice’ — and made show his­to­ry (Emi­ly Yahr, Wash­ing­ton Post): ““‘I’ve lit­er­al­ly nev­er per­formed. I just sing at church,’ Tilgh­man explained, intro­duc­ing him­self as a pas­tor. This sparked an attempt to prove who was the biggest church fan; Leg­end revealed his grand­fa­ther was a pas­tor, and Jonas one-upped him by boast­ing his father was a pas­tor.”
  6. Under the Rain­bow Ban­ner (Darel Paul, First Things): “In June 1999, Pres­i­dent Bill Clin­ton declared the first nation­al Pride Month. Twen­ty years lat­er, June is as teem­ing with rain­bows as Decem­ber is with rein­deer. The Pride flag flies above embassies, state capi­tols, and sta­di­ums. Rain­bow stripes adorn city cross­walks.”
    • In response: Queer Times (Carl True­man, First Things): “The debate over LGBTQ issues is not a debate about sex­u­al behav­ior. I sus­pect it is not real­ly at this point a debate with the L, the G, or the B. It is the T and the Q that are car­ry­ing the day, and we need to under­stand that the debate is about the rad­i­cal abo­li­tion of meta­physics and meta­nar­ra­tives and any notion of cul­tur­al sta­bil­i­ty that might rest there­upon.”
  7. Since I Met Edward Snow­den, I’ve Nev­er Stopped Watch­ing My Back (Bar­ton Gell­man, The Atlantic): “Some­one had tak­en con­trol of my iPad, blast­ing through Apple’s secu­ri­ty restric­tions and acquir­ing the pow­er to rewrite any­thing that the oper­at­ing sys­tem could touch. I dropped the tablet on the seat next to me as if it were con­ta­giou” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. Grip­ping and dis­turb­ing.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Ian McE­wan ‘dubi­ous’ about schools study­ing his books, after he helped son with essay and got a C+ (Han­nah Fur­ness, The Tele­graph): this is a real arti­cle. First shared in vol­ume 151.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 250

Prob­a­bly my favorite arti­cle in this bunch is the epi­demi­o­log­i­cal analy­sis of the sev­en dead­ly sins. What a genius idea.

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.

Also, this is the 250th of these week­ly roundups I have pub­lished. Even though last week was num­ber 249, I was still sur­prised to type in 250 this week. Some­day I’ll remem­ber a spe­cial num­ber is com­ing up and do some­thing dif­fer­ent for it. But not this day.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Are the Wages of Sin Real­ly Death?: Moral and Epi­demi­o­log­ic Obser­va­tions (David Lyle Jef­frey and Jeff Levin, Chris­t­ian Scholar’s Review): “So, are the wages of sin real­ly death? As far as pop­u­la­tion-health research sug­gests, the answer is a guard­ed yes.” The authors are pro­fes­sors at Bay­lor, one of epi­demi­ol­o­gy and the oth­er of lit­er­a­ture. 
  2. Kids’ TV has a porn prob­lem (Brazy­Day, Medi­um): “In a very real way, the ‘hyper­sex­u­al and tox­ic’ cul­ture that has sprung up around children’s TV car­toons is of com­pa­nies’ own mak­ing. They active­ly allow it to hap­pen sim­ply by doing noth­ing — cre­at­ing a law­less vac­u­um where any­thing goes and porn coex­ists with harm­less fan cre­ations.” This arti­cle was much bet­ter than I expect­ed it to be. 
  3. How We Got the Bible (Dirk Jongkind,Desiring God): “…by under­stand­ing what God had done over the ages, we will see that it is rea­son­able and jus­ti­fied to trust that the Bible in our hands is a trans­la­tion of the trust­wor­thy words of Scrip­ture.” The author is a research fel­low in New Tes­ta­ment text and lan­guage at Tyn­dale House, Cam­bridge Uni­ver­si­ty. 
  4. The real Lord of the Flies: what hap­pened when six boys were ship­wrecked for 15 months (The Guardian): “The kids agreed to work in teams of two, draw­ing up a strict ros­ter for gar­den, kitchen and guard duty. Some­times they quar­relled, but when­ev­er that hap­pened they solved it by impos­ing a time-out. Their days began and end­ed with song and prayer. Kolo fash­ioned a makeshift gui­tar from a piece of drift­wood, half a coconut shell and six steel wires sal­vaged from their wrecked boat – an instru­ment Peter has kept all these years – and played it to help lift their spir­its.“ Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
    • Fas­ci­nat­ing Twit­ter thread in response by Tan­ner Greer: “Lord of the Flies is one of those nov­els that peo­ple remem­ber wrong. Peo­ple remem­ber its cen­tral theme as ‘take away civ­i­liza­tion, and we all turn into Hobbe­sian lit­tle mon­sters.’ But if you read the book as an adult, instead of an 8th grad­er speed­ing through, you find a dif­fer­ent mean­ing.”
  5. Should Reli­gious Con­ser­v­a­tives Aspire to Noto­ri­ety? (Jake Meador, Mere Ortho­doxy): “You don’t go look­ing for pow­er and pres­tige. You aspire to be faith­ful. If pres­tige finds you, then you allow your­self to be extrud­ed into it and pray that God pro­tect you from the spir­i­tu­al dan­gers.” This is essay is part of a swarm of inter­net arti­cles about the tra­jec­to­ry of the mag­a­zine First Things, but you don’t have to read any­thing else about that (or even care much about that) to find this essay worth­while. 
  6. Pan­dem­ic Per­spec­tives
    • “Our reg­u­la­to­ry state is fail­ing us” Tyler Cowen, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “When the CDC pooh-poohed masks ear­ly on, or botched their test­ing kit there­by delay­ing U.S. test­ing by weeks or maybe months, did the per­ma­nent staff of the CDC rise up and rebel and leak howl­ing protests to the media, real­iz­ing that thou­sands of lives were at stake? That is sure­ly what would hap­pen if say the cur­rent FDA announced it was going to approve thalido­mide.” This is a link to a search result on his blog, keep scrolling after you fin­ish the main arti­cle to see sev­er­al exam­ples of what he is describ­ing. 
    • Coro­n­avirus Pan­dem­ic: A Plea for Gen­eros­i­ty (Michael Bren­dan Dougher­ty, Nation­al Review): “There is a good rea­son to hes­i­tate to judge, name­ly our igno­rance. Plagues are a time for scape­goats and blame-shift­ing pre­cise­ly because they deal out suf­fer­ing such a seem­ing­ly unjust and ran­dom fash­ion. Our lead­ers say they will fol­low the sci­ence, but they can’t, real­ly. With a hereto­fore-unseen virus such as this one, the sci­ence is more like inher­it­ed wis­dom and intu­ition from pre­vi­ous, sim­i­lar mal­adies, at least at the start. What fol­lows is a con­fused rush to catch up through tri­al and error.“
    • The Risks — Know Them — Avoid Them (Erin Bro­mage, per­son­al blog): “I reg­u­lar­ly hear peo­ple wor­ry­ing about gro­cery stores, bike rides, incon­sid­er­ate run­ners who are not wear­ing masks.… are these places of con­cern? Well, not real­ly. Let me explain.” The author is a biol­o­gy pro­fes­sor at U Mass who teach­es cours­es on immunol­o­gy and infec­tious dis­ease. Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. 
    • No, the super­spread­er choir in Wash­ing­ton does­n’t prove church is dan­ger­ous (Tim­o­thy P. Car­ney, Wash­ing­ton Exam­in­er): “It’s hard to blame the choir for not tak­ing more pre­cau­tions, as this was March 10, before stuff real­ly hit the fan (and when our gov­ern­ment was still telling peo­ple NOT to wear masks).”
      • This op-ed is based on a CDC inves­ti­ga­tion: “The March 10 choir rehearsal last­ed from 6:30 to 9:00 p.m. Sev­er­al mem­bers arrived ear­ly to set up chairs in a large mul­ti­pur­pose room. Chairs were arranged in six rows of 20 chairs each, spaced 6–10 inch­es apart with a cen­ter aisle divid­ing left and right stages.”
    • Lock­down is over. Some­one tell the gov­ern­ment (Dominic Green, Spec­ta­tor USA): “Every soci­ety has react­ed to COVID-19 accord­ing to its prin­ci­ples or, if no prin­ci­ples were to hand, its habits. It has been America’s mis­for­tune that its prin­ci­ples and habits are ill-suit­ed to man­ag­ing an epi­dem­ic.”
    • Take the Shut­down Skep­tics Seri­ous­ly (Conor Frieder­s­dorf, The Atlantic): “The gen­er­al point is that min­i­miz­ing the num­ber of COVID-19 deaths today or a month from now or six months from now may or may not min­i­mize the human costs of the pan­dem­ic when the full spec­trum of human con­se­quences is con­sid­ered. The last glob­al depres­sion cre­at­ed con­di­tions for a cat­a­stroph­ic world war that killed rough­ly 75 to 80 mil­lion peo­ple. Is that a pos­si­bil­i­ty? The down­side risks and costs of every approach are real, fright­en­ing, and depress­ing, no mat­ter how lit­tle one thinks of reopen­ing now.”
    • Coro­n­avirus and The Myopia of Amer­i­can Excep­tion­al­ism (Brad Lit­tle­john, Mere Ortho­doxy): “Rather than prov­ing our­selves excep­tion­al, we sim­ply assume that we are. The ordi­nary rules do not apply to us, because we are Amer­i­ca. We make things bet­ter here, we run things more effi­cient­ly here, we live more hap­pi­ly here, because we are Amer­i­ca. There is no need to look at OECD rank­ings, because we already know that they are wrong if they show us any­where but #1…. this way of think­ing, far from mak­ing Amer­i­ca great, is almost cer­tain to make her the oppo­site. After all, the only way to improve is to learn, and the chief way we learn as human beings is from the exam­ples of oth­ers.”
    • The Mir­a­cle of the Inter­net (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “The surge in traf­fic, on the inter­net as a whole and on AT&T’s part of the net­work, is extra­or­di­nary in a way that the phrase 20 per­cent increase doesn’t quite cap­ture. AT&T’s net­work is car­ry­ing an extra 71 petabytes of data every day. How much is 71 petabytes? One com­par­i­son: Back at the end of 2014, AT&T’s total net­work traf­fic was 56 petabytes a day; in just a few weeks, AT&T has accom­mo­dat­ed more new traf­fic every day than its total dai­ly traf­fic six years ago. (Dur­ing the pan­dem­ic, the AT&T net­work has been car­ry­ing about 426 petabytes a day—one petabyte is 1 mil­lion giga­bytes.)”
    • Stan­ford’s $27.7 bil­lion not enough to house stu­dents in need amid pan­dem­ic (Sheikh Sri­jon, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “Har­vard is allow­ing those on cam­pus with demon­strat­ed need to stay for the whole sum­mer for only $200. MIT is offer­ing free hous­ing and meals. Duke is offer­ing free hous­ing and par­tial com­pen­sa­tion for lost sum­mer earn­ings to those with sub­stan­tial finan­cial aid.… Com­pare Stanford’s pol­i­cy to these insti­tu­tions’ poli­cies. Though it has a $27.7 bil­lion dol­lar endow­ment (as of Octo­ber 2019), it is charg­ing stu­dents near­ly $6,000 for sum­mer hous­ing and meals in times of such finan­cial uncer­tain­ty.”
  7. The New York Times Sur­ren­dered to an Out­rage Mob. Jour­nal­ism Will Suf­fer For It. (Pamela Paresky, Jonathan Haidt, Nadine Strossen And Steven Pinker, Politi­co): “…for the Times to ‘dis­ap­pear’ pas­sages of a pub­lished arti­cle into an inac­ces­si­ble mem­o­ry hole is an Orwellian act that, thanks to the newspaper’s actions, might now be seen as accept­able jour­nal­is­tic prac­tice. It is all the worse when the edi­tors’ pub­lished account of what they delet­ed is itself inac­cu­rate. This does a dis­ser­vice to read­ers, his­to­ri­ans and jour­nal­ists, who are left unable to deter­mine for them­selves what the con­tro­ver­sy was about, and to Stephens, who is left unable to defend him­self against read­ers’ worst sus­pi­cions.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have If I Were 22 Again (John Piper, Desir­ing God): “There have been about 18,340 days since I turned 22, and I think I have read my Bible on more of those days than I have eat­en. I have cer­tain­ly read my Bible on more of those days that I have watched tele­vi­sion or videos.… Read your Bible every day of your life. If you have time for break­fast, nev­er say that you don’t have time for God’s word.” This whole thing is real­ly good. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed. First shared in vol­ume 151.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 249

The vin­di­ca­tion of a vil­i­fied mis­sion­ary, thoughts about the mur­der of Ahmaud Arbery, and pan­dem­ic per­spec­tives.

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. A Mis­sion­ary on Tri­al (Ariel Levy, The New York­er): “Accord­ing to a study pub­lished in 2017 in The Amer­i­can Jour­nal for Clin­i­cal Nutri­tion, four­teen per cent of chil­dren treat­ed for severe acute mal­nu­tri­tion at Mula­go Hospital—Uganda’s best facility—died. The study notes that the over-all mor­tal­i­ty rate in Africa for chil­dren with S.A.M. is between twen­ty and twen­ty-five per cent. Dur­ing the years when Serv­ing His Chil­dren func­tioned as an in-patient facil­i­ty, its rate was eleven per cent.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed. If you want to dig deep­er, last Octo­ber a Ugan­dan tele­vi­sion sta­tion did a twen­ty-minute sto­ry on this case which also dis­cred­it­ed the missionary’s accusers. Proverbs 18:17 wins again.
    • I see a sim­i­lar dynam­ic in some stu­dents who are feel­ing angst over their faith. Upon con­ver­sa­tion, I often learn that they have been told untrue or mis­lead­ing things about mis­sions, the his­to­ry of the church, and the present sta­tus of the church in the world. Always remem­ber that crit­ics might have motives beyond sim­ply estab­lish­ing the truth. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t lis­ten to them, but it does mean that you don’t treat their com­plaints as axioms. When this reporter flew to Ugan­da and talked to peo­ple on the ground she quick­ly learned that the inter­na­tion­al­ly-accept­ed nar­ra­tive was not right.
  2. Why We Opened a Chris­t­ian Uni­ver­si­ty in Iraq Amid ISIS’ Geno­cide (Jayson Cas­par, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “There was an unwrit­ten under­stand­ing that the Chris­tians would not overt­ly pros­e­ly­tize and share the gospel, but be indi­rect and not offend sharia law. But after ISIS and the lack of any real response from the Mus­lim world, Arch­bish­op War­da says that this agree­ment is now fin­ished. That as we go for­ward, we will no longer be shy. We are going to pro­claim the gospel, pro­claim the teach­ings of Christ, and who­ev­er comes to us will come…. There may not be many Chris­tians in Iraq. But as an old priest said once to me, ‘Well, remem­ber Christ only had 12, and every­one want­ed to kill them, too.’”
  3. Exquis­ite Scan­dal (Nan­cy Lemann, Lapham’s Quar­ter­ly): “The famil­iar the­o­ry at the tri­al was that the peo­ple of Louisiana would rather be enter­tained than served with ethics. Some would call this a Gal­lic atti­tude, to be blind­ed by charm at the expense of integri­ty, and indeed the cul­ture of Louisiana is his­tor­i­cal­ly French Catholic. And as the Catholics might say, the fall from grace is inevitable, a mys­tery to be endured rather than a prob­lem to be solved. And some in Louisiana would pre­fer a smart crook to an unin­tel­li­gent oppor­tunist masked as a cru­sad­er whose ambi­tion blinds him to his own stu­pid­i­ty. Such a one could be just as dan­ger­ous, if not more so, than a crook.” As some­one born in Louisiana, I very much enjoyed this arti­cle. 
  4. Gre­go­ry and Travis McMichael face mur­der charges in con­nec­tion with Ahmaud Arbery case (Steve Almasy and Angela Bara­jas, CNN): “Two men involved in the fatal shoot­ing of Ahmaud Arbery near Brunswick, Geor­gia, have been arrest­ed and face mur­der and aggra­vat­ed assault charges, accord­ing to the Geor­gia Bureau of Inves­ti­ga­tion.”
    • It is amaz­ing to me that it was not the video evi­dence that led to their arrest, but the pub­lic out­cry in response to the video evi­dence. 
    • A Vig­i­lante Killing in Geor­gia (David French, The Dis­patch): “When white men grab guns and mount up to pur­sue and seize an unarmed black man in the street, they stand in the shoes of lynch mobs past.”
    • Think­ing Chris­tian­ly About the Ahmaud Arbery Lynch­ing (Jake Meador, Mere Ortho­doxy): “If we are to be peo­ple who act just­ly and pro­mote jus­tice, which is that each per­son receives their right­ful dues, then we must right­ly dis­cern what has hap­pened in the case of Arbery. This was a lynch­ing. It was an act that God hates. And so we must rec­og­nize that and we must call it by its name and speak out against it and against all such acts of injus­tice.”
    • Relat­ed in the abstract: How to Pun­ish Vot­ers (Josie Duffy Rice, New York Times): “It’s well known that vot­er sup­pres­sion has tak­en the form of the clos­ing of polling places, new restric­tive vot­er ID laws, vot­er roll purges of thou­sands of eli­gi­ble vot­ers and nine-hour lines at the polls. But Ms. Pearson’s case is a reminder that it can also take the form of the aggres­sive pros­e­cu­tion of indi­vid­ual black vot­ers for polling-place offens­es — which in many cas­es appears moti­vat­ed less by a sin­cere desire to address fraud than by a desire to intim­i­date.”
  5. Pan­dem­ic Per­spec­tives
    • The Covid-19 Rid­dle: Why Does the Virus Wal­lop Some Places and Spare Oth­ers? (Han­nah Beech, Alis­sa J. Rubin, Ana­toly Kur­manaev and Ruth Maclean, New York Times): “The coro­n­avirus has killed so many peo­ple in Iran that the coun­try has resort­ed to mass buri­als, but in neigh­bor­ing Iraq, the body count is few­er than 100. The Domini­can Repub­lic has report­ed near­ly 7,600 cas­es of the virus. Just across the bor­der, Haiti has record­ed about 85.”
    • Coro­n­avirus Could Dis­rupt Weath­er Fore­cast­ing (Hen­ry Foun­tain, New York Times): “…data on tem­per­a­ture, wind and humid­i­ty from air­plane flights, col­lect­ed by sen­sors on the planes and trans­mit­ted in real time to fore­cast­ing orga­ni­za­tions around the world, has been cut by near­ly 90 per­cent in some regions.” I must con­fess I did not see that com­ing. At all. 
    • Google App Cen­sor­ing Covid-19 Cours­es (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “Google is a pri­vate enti­ty. It has the right to con­trol what goes out on its app plat­form. Whether Google is moral­ly cor­rect to exer­cise that right to sup­press any unof­fi­cial pan­dem­ic infor­ma­tion is a dif­fer­ent ques­tion — and a very impor­tant one. Google owns YouTube — how long will they allow these cours­es to remain on YouTube?” These are cours­es by aca­d­e­mics speak­ing with­in their areas of exper­tise.
    • Relat­ed: Who is Judy Mikovits in ‘Plan­dem­ic,’ the coro­n­avirus con­spir­a­cy video just banned from social media? (Katie Shep­herd, Wash­ing­ton Post): “The film is so ques­tion­able that social media plat­forms includ­ing Face­book, YouTube and Vimeo on Thurs­day scrubbed it from their sites. A Vimeo spokesper­son, for exam­ple, said that the com­pa­ny ‘stands firm in keep­ing our plat­form safe from con­tent that spreads harm­ful and mis­lead­ing health infor­ma­tion. The video in ques­tion has been removed … for vio­lat­ing these very poli­cies.’” A friend sent me a link to her video but it was pulled down. I have no opin­ion about the video because I haven’t seen it. But I do have an opin­ion about it being pulled down. I dis­like that intense­ly. I fear the risks of mis­in­for­ma­tion far less than I fear the risks of con­trol­ling infor­ma­tion. 
    • A pas­tor in the Bronx thought he knew hard­ship. Then his church saw 13 coro­n­avirus deaths. (Sarah Pul­liam Bai­ley, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Promised Land, in the poor­est con­gres­sion­al dis­trict in the nation, sees about 250 most­ly African Amer­i­can and Lati­no wor­shipers on a nor­mal week­end. Pub­lic hous­ing units line the streets near the church in the Mott Haven neigh­bor­hood, where city offi­cials esti­mate the pover­ty rate is about 44 per­cent.”
    • In Inner-City Black Church­es: More Grief, Few­er Resources, Stronger Faith (Kate Shell­nutt, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Despite bear­ing the dis­pro­por­tion­ate impact of the out­break, black believ­ers have demon­strat­ed par­tic­u­lar spir­i­tu­al endurance. In a Pew sur­vey released last week, mem­bers of his­tor­i­cal­ly black church­es were more like­ly than any oth­er reli­gious tra­di­tion to say their faith has been strength­ened through the out­break. More than half (56%) say their faith has become stronger, com­pared to 35 per­cent of all Chris­tians and 24 per­cent of adults over­all.”
    • Clin­i­cal Study Con­sid­ers The Pow­er Of Prayer To Com­bat COVID-19 (Tom Gjel­ten, NPR): “Half of the patients, ran­dom­ly cho­sen, will receive a ‘uni­ver­sal’ prayer offered in five denom­i­na­tion­al forms, via Chris­tian­i­ty, Hin­duism, Islam, Judaism, and Bud­dhism. The oth­er 500 patients will con­sti­tute the con­trol group.” This study looks like a mess. How do they expect to keep the 500 in the con­trol group from being prayed for? I am pret­ty sure that if you are hos­pi­tal­ized with Covid-19 some­one is pray­ing for you. And my the­ol­o­gy leads me to believe those organ­ic, heart­felt prayers offered by peo­ple who actu­al­ly know the patients are going to be more sig­nif­i­cant than the “uni­ver­sal prayers” offered by the research par­tic­i­pants. I expect this study will lead inter­net athe­ists to claim that all prayer has been debunked when at most it will show that script­ed mul­ti­faith prayers offered on behalf of strangers do not move the heart of God. 
    • Food Banks Can’t Go On Like This (Conor Frieder­s­dorf, The Atlantic): “Nor­mal­ly, ‘res­cued’ food—items that would oth­er­wise be thrown out as their sell-by date approaches—accounts for 97 per­cent of Feed­ing San Diego’s dis­tri­b­u­tions. Until the pan­dem­ic, the group was receiv­ing unpur­chased food from 204 Star­bucks loca­tions every night of the year. Most of those stores are now closed. The orga­ni­za­tion nor­mal­ly gets excess food from 260 gro­cery stores too, but con­sumers have been stock­ing up enough late­ly that many shelves are picked clean.”
  6. The UK Bless­ing — Church­es sing ‘The Bless­ing’ over the UK (YouTube): sev­en mov­ing min­utes. Shared with me by a student’s father.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Sis­ter… Show Mer­cy! (Dan Phillips, Team Pyro): “Sis­ter, if there’s one thing you and I can cer­tain­ly agree on, it’s this: I don’t know what it’s like to be a woman, and you don’t know what it’s like to be a man. We’re both prob­a­bly wrong where we’re sure we’re right, try as we might. So let me try to dart a telegram from my camp over to the distaff side.” (first shared in vol­ume 148)

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.