Tag: devotional

TGFI, volume 534: unfulfilled hopes and why the ESV is overrated

You’ve heard of TGIF? This is TGFI: Things Glen Found Inter­est­ing

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues like­ly to be of inter­est to Chris­tians in col­lege. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

This week was espe­cial­ly dif­fi­cult to nar­row down to just 7 top-lev­el group­ings.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Hop­ing for Right­ly Ordered Desires (O. Alan Noble, Sub­stack): “One of the most dif­fi­cult truths to inter­nal­ize in this life is that you are not promised all that you desire, even when your desires are right­ly ordered. For exam­ple, you may desire friend­ship or a spouse or chil­dren or a job, and none of them are giv­en to you. Or at least, not on the time­line you expect. Each of these are good desires, and when you desire them right­ly (not exces­sive­ly, not before God, not as idols, not self­ish­ly), they are good things to desire and work towards. But God, in his per­fect will, does not promise to give us all our earth­ly desires.”
  2. Bureau­cra­tiz­ing Faith (Stephen Eide, Library of Law & Lib­er­ty): “Those con­cerned about anti-Chris­t­ian bias often frame the FBO [faith-based orga­ni­za­tions] ques­tion as a reli­gious lib­er­ty mat­ter. That fram­ing only clar­i­fies whether reli­gious groups can con­tract with gov­ern­ment. It’s less help­ful in deter­min­ing whether they should. In gen­er­al, an orga­ni­za­tion spir­i­tu­al­ly moti­vat­ed to serve the poor may take pub­lic mon­ey to do so, as long as it doesn’t dis­crim­i­nate based on sect and doesn’t use tax­pay­er dol­lars to evan­ge­lize. But evan­ge­lism is pre­cise­ly how FBOs reach some peo­ple failed by sec­u­lar pro­grams.”
    • I real­ly liked this essay. Lots of great insights.
  3. To Be Hon­est.. I’m Strug­gling with the ESV (Loren­zo Figueroa Cusick, Sub­stack): “The ESV has been revised the fol­low­ing times: 2001, 2002, 2007, 2011, 2016, 2025.  And when it is revised, it always claims to be sim­ply mod­est changes to bet­ter improve ‘accu­ra­cy and clar­i­ty’ (accord­ing to Cross­way). We can applaud when a Bible pub­lish­er wants to make the Bible even bet­ter for its users. Where it gets weird is the fact that they don’t iden­ti­fy (like the NASB, for exam­ple) when they do revise it. They don’t label it the ESV2001, ESV2002, ESV2007, etc. This leads to sit­u­a­tions where the Bible in your library or church bag is dif­fer­ent from the one used by the church.”
    • The ESV is a per­fect­ly ade­quate trans­la­tion — but some of the peo­ple who love it love it way too much. I pre­fer the NIV and the NET (which each have their own draw­backs, because no trans­la­tion is per­fect).
  4. Sor­ry, Liz Gilbert, Mar­ried Women Are (Increas­ing­ly) Hap­pi­est of All (Sophie Ander­son and Brad Wilcox, Insti­tute for Fam­i­ly Stud­ies): “There’s only one prob­lem with the pro­gres­sive case against mar­riage and fam­i­ly for women: It’s com­plete­ly wrong. Today, mar­ried women live longer, earn more, and report more mean­ing in their lives, com­pared to sin­gle women. They are also marked­ly hap­pi­er than their sin­gle peers, accord­ing to recent research by psy­chol­o­gist Jean Twenge and col­leagues.… lib­er­al mar­ried moms are dra­mat­i­cal­ly more like­ly to say they are hap­py with their lives, com­pared to their sin­gle and child­less peers.”
    • Relat­ed (at least in my mind): How monog­a­mous are humans? A study ranks us between meerkats and beavers. (Vic­to­ria Craw, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Pre­vi­ous work on the role of monogamy in human soci­ety­has relied on fos­sil records or com­par­i­son of mar­riage norms across cul­tures, Dyble said. His research stud­ied the data from human pop­u­la­tions and non­hu­man mam­mal species to find rates of full sib­lings, mean­ing those born to the same moth­er and father.… Analy­sis of near­ly 2 mil­lion human sib­ling rela­tion­ships and more than 60,000 mam­mal rela­tion­ships showed that the pro­por­tion of full sib­lings in the human groups ‘clus­ters close­ly’ with rates seen in social­ly monog­a­mous ani­mals and ‘con­sis­tent­ly exceeds rates seen in non-monog­a­mous mam­mals,’ Dyble wrote. He said the data showed there was a stark dif­fer­ence between groups that were con­sid­ered social­ly monog­a­mous and non­monog­a­mous, based on def­i­n­i­tions from a 2013 study by Cam­bridge researchers.”
  5. Pay Atten­tion to How You Pay Atten­tion (Ezra Klein, New York Times): “What Meta shows me is what Meta most want me to see, which is what­ev­er their pre­dic­tion mod­els believe will get me to spend as much time on their apps as pos­si­ble. The algo­rithms serve the company’s ends, not my ends. If Meta want­ed to know what I want to see, it could ask me. The tech­nol­o­gy has long exist­ed for users to shape their own rec­om­men­da­tions. These com­pa­nies do not offer us con­trol over what we see because they do not want us to have it. They do not want to be bound by who we seek to be tomor­row.”
    • A good essay with a poor title. Rec­om­mend­ed.
  6. No, You Are Not on Indige­nous Land (Noah Smith, Sub­stack): “Once the log­ic of land acknowl­edg­ments and ‘decol­o­niza­tion’ is fol­lowed, it leads very quick­ly to some very dark futures.… The gen­er­al prin­ci­ple here is that instead of a dark world of eth­nic cleans­ing in the name of ‘decol­o­niza­tion,’ we should try to build a bright future where Native Amer­i­cans and the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca exist in har­mo­ny and coop­er­a­tion rather than in con­flict.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed even if you think you know what it will say based on the title and the excerpt. The arti­cle has some sur­pris­es.
  7. The Mak­ing of a Tech­no-Nation­al­ist Elite (Tan­ner Greer, Amer­i­can Affairs): “The eco­nom­ic, social, and polit­i­cal activ­i­ties of the East­ern Estab­lish­ment were mutu­al­ly rein­forc­ing pil­lars of a larg­er pro­gram. Mem­bers of the Estab­lish­ment used the wealth gen­er­at­ed by new tech­nolo­gies to secure polit­i­cal influ­ence, used that influ­ence to sus­tain a nation­al mar­ket and legal frame­work geared for yet more tech­no­log­i­cal expan­sion, and then presided over a con­scious effort to pre­serve and trans­mit the val­ues of their class to future gen­er­a­tions, ensur­ing that the uni­ty and dis­ci­pline they gained in shared strug­gle would not dis­si­pate amid pow­er and pros­per­i­ty. Through these means, a tech­no-nation­al­ist elite guid­ed America’s devel­op­ment for more than sev­en­ty years. Under its stew­ard­ship, the Unit­ed States became the world’s wealth­i­est, most indus­tri­al­ly advanced, and most pow­er­ful nation: a true tech­no­log­i­cal repub­lic.… Behind the East­ern Estab­lish­ment stood a dense web of per­son­al ties that bound its fam­i­lies togeth­er. Many of these ties were con­sum­mat­ed, quite lit­er­al­ly, on the mar­riage bed. Karp and Zamiska are loathe to think in these terms. They write a great deal about the engi­neer­ing elite’s wan­ing com­mit­ment to West­ern civ­i­liza­tion, but they have lit­tle to say about its wan­ing com­mit­ment to rais­ing the next gen­er­a­tion of that civ­i­liza­tion. The East­ern Estab­lish­ment was self-con­scious­ly repro­duc­tive: it built schools, endowed uni­ver­si­ties, and found­ed lit­er­al dynas­ties. Part of build­ing ‘a shared cul­ture … that will make pos­si­ble our con­tin­ued sur­vival’ is cre­at­ing the chil­dren who will sur­vive us.”
    • Excel­lent. Long but rec­om­mend­ed. Also, OUCH. The clos­ing four para­graphs of this book review are absolute­ly bru­tal.

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 456



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

This is vol­ume 456, a very sat­is­fy­ing num­ber: each dig­it increas­es and I like it.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Holy Hag­gling: Learn to Pray like Abra­ham (Justin Dille­hay, The Gospel Coali­tion): “We’re often ready to write off an oth­er­wise good church or orga­ni­za­tion because of a few bad apples with­in it. But Abra­ham is the exact opposite—he asks God to spare an entire city of bad apples for the sake of a few good apples with­in it.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  2. The Non­prof­it Indus­tri­al Com­plex and the Cor­rup­tion of the Amer­i­can City (Jonathan Ire­land, Amer­i­can Affairs): “Who­ev­er came up with the idea of call­ing these orga­ni­za­tions ‘non­prof­its’ was a mar­ket­ing genius on the lev­el of Steve Jobs. When some­one hears the word non­prof­it, they assume that such an orga­ni­za­tion is work­ing for the pub­lic good; that it serves the home­less, pro­tects the weak, exists for the ben­e­fit and the bet­ter­ment of soci­ety at large.… Con­se­quent­ly, non­prof­its receive a ben­e­fit of the doubt that would not be grant­ed to any oth­er form of pri­vate cor­po­ra­tion. Yet non­prof­it orga­ni­za­tions are fre­quent­ly the exact oppo­site of what they appear to be.”
    • Stun­ning sto­ries in here. 100% worth your time.
  3. Why the Pan­dem­ic Prob­a­bly Start­ed in a Lab, in 5 Key Points (Ali­na Chan, New York Times): “Ulti­mate­ly, a nev­er-before-seen SARS-like virus with a new­ly intro­duced furin cleav­age site, match­ing the descrip­tion in the Wuhan institute’s Defuse pro­pos­al, caused an out­break in Wuhan less than two years after the pro­pos­al was draft­ed.…”
    • Unlocked. Empha­sis removed for read­abil­i­ty. The author is a mol­e­c­u­lar biol­o­gist at a joint MIT/Harvard insti­tute.
  4. Men Only Want One Thing (Nathan Bea­com, Com­ment): “Over a hun­dred years ago, William James, the father of Amer­i­can psy­chol­o­gy, argued that men need a ‘moral equiv­a­lent of war.’ To retain virtue, James thought, men need­ed the soul-shap­ing force of mil­i­tary life with­out war’s destruc­tive con­se­quences.”
    • This is a sol­id arti­cle, espe­cial­ly rec­om­mend­ed for guys. Ladies, you can eaves­drop if you like.
  5. Why No One Will Save Sudan (Cameron Hud­son, Per­sua­sion): “For those track­ing events in the coun­try, a seem­ing­ly end­less thread of head­lines and edi­to­ri­als lament this ‘for­got­ten con­flict.’ But this is the wrong fram­ing. The cri­sis in Sudan is nei­ther for­got­ten nor ignored. It is de-pri­or­i­tized. And that is worse.… Over the past sev­er­al weeks, a new Beng­hazi-like slaugh­ter has been tak­ing shape in the North Dar­fur city of El Fash­er. With near­ly one mil­lion inter­nal­ly dis­placed already tak­ing refuge there and more than one mil­lion more await­ing a com­ing onslaught by the Rapid Sup­port Forces mili­tia, which has promised to take the city and com­plete their takeover of all of Dar­fur, the specter of geno­cide once again hangs over the region. Egress out of the city has been cut off, as have aid flows into the city, lead­ing ana­lysts to refer to the city as a ‘kill box.’ ”
  6. Does Divorce Make You Hot­ter? (Kat Rosen­field, The Free Press): “…[cel­e­bra­to­ry sto­ries about divorce are] a prod­uct of a pop­u­lar ‘woman empow­ered by every­thing woman does’ par­a­digm, where all choic­es made by women are a prod­uct of lib­er­a­tion, hence fem­i­nist, hence good. There is no error or dis­ap­point­ment that can’t be yass-kweened away.… It’s only women who are seen as requir­ing this par­tic­u­lar brand of cheer­lead­ing, who are relent­less­ly encour­aged to reframe all their neg­a­tive expe­ri­ences as the best thing they ever did.”
    • Straight fire through­out. Rec­om­mend­ed.
  7. Speech Under the Shad­ow of Pun­ish­ment (Jean­nie Suk Gersen, New York­er): “…admin­is­tra­tors have become accus­tomed to using pun­ish­ment as a go-to solu­tion rather than as a last resort. The empha­sis on dis­ci­pli­nary action became par­tic­u­lar­ly pro­nounced in the twen­ty-tens, when uni­ver­si­ties were under urgent pres­sure to address cam­pus sex dis­crim­i­na­tion and harass­ment.… [fur­ther­more] some stu­dents may have been dis­ci­plined not mere­ly for par­tic­i­pat­ing in an encamp­ment but for vio­lat­ing dis­crim­i­na­tion, harass­ment, or bul­ly­ing poli­cies. The pres­sure to enforce those poli­cies can­not be over­stat­ed. In the twen­ty-tens, the Depart­ment of Edu­ca­tion inves­ti­gat­ed many schools, includ­ing Har­vard, for fail­ing to ade­quate­ly address alle­ga­tions of sex­u­al mis­con­duct; uni­ver­si­ties today are once again under fed­er­al scruti­ny, which threat­ens their fed­er­al fund­ing and tax-exempt sta­tus, for fail­ing to address alle­ga­tions of anti­semitism.”
    • The author is a law prof at Har­vard.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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 444

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

This is vol­ume 444, which is just the same dig­it repeat­ed. I like that. Clean. Classy. Ele­gant.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Rant About Wor­ship Songs (Jere­my Pierce, First Things): “Here are some of the things I real­ly hate in a wor­ship song.”
    • This is bril­liant, from back in 2010.
  2. Top Only­Fans cre­ator mak­ing $300,000 a month turns to Christ, walks away from porn indus­try (John Knox, Not The Bee): “From what I can tell, Nala here isn’t going through a Lil’ Nas X ‘Chris­t­ian era’ where she’s aging out of porn and wants to rebrand her­self as a good girl again before piv­ot­ing to anoth­er grift. All I see is gen­uine joy, like the pros­ti­tute who wept and was for­giv­en at Jesus’ feet.”
    • Includes a video of her shar­ing her tes­ti­mo­ny. I love this part: “The dev­il can tru­ly give you things in this life. He has a bud­get, though. He can only go so far.… The dev­il has a bud­get, but God does not.”
  3. Lati­nos Are Flock­ing to Evan­gel­i­cal Chris­tian­i­ty (Marie Arana, The Free Press): “In fact, some researchers project that by 2030, half of the entire pop­u­la­tion of Amer­i­can Lati­nos will iden­ti­fy as Protes­tant evan­gel­i­cals. Com­pare that growth with white evan­gel­i­cal Protes­tants, whose num­bers have declined from 23 per­cent of the Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tion in 2006 to 14 per­cent in 2020. With the His­pan­ic population’s pro­ject­ed growth, in less than a decade, we may see forty mil­lion Latinos—a con­gre­ga­tion the size of California—heading to Amer­i­can evan­gel­i­cal church­es every Sun­day.”
  4. Is Rome a True Church? (Chris Castal­do, Mere Ortho­doxy): “Protes­tants tend to answer the ques­tion of Roman Catholicism’s sta­tus in one of two ways. Look­ing through the lens of the ear­ly creeds (i.e., Nicene and Apos­tles’), some under­stand it to be fun­da­men­tal­ly ortho­dox. The ratio­nale is sim­ple: because the creeds uphold the basic tenets of Chris­tian­i­ty, and Rome upholds those creeds, her apos­tolic­i­ty is affirmed. Roman Catholi­cism is thus regard­ed as ‘inside the pale.’ An alter­na­tive read­ing, one that prob­a­bly informed the Face­book com­ment, is to view the Roman Catholic Church through the lens of the six­teenth-cen­tu­ry Ref­or­ma­tion in which the Coun­cil of Trent anath­e­ma­tized (pro­nounced to be cursed) the doc­trine of jus­ti­fi­ca­tion by faith alone. Because such faith is rec­og­nized as the dri­ving cen­ter of the bib­li­cal gospel, and Rome force­ful­ly repu­di­ates the doc­trine, the Roman Church is there­fore con­sid­ered incom­pat­i­ble with bib­li­cal faith.  I rec­og­nize the log­ic in these posi­tions, but in my opin­ion, both are incom­plete.”
  5. Jour­nal­ism Has a Reli­gion Prob­lem (Andrew T. Walk­er, Nation­al Review): “Jour­nal­ism has a reli­gion prob­lem. More specif­i­cal­ly, jour­nal­ists are either unaware or unwill­ing to admit that their own views, pre­sum­ably untouched by ‘reli­gion,’ are nonethe­less pas­sion­ate­ly held con­vic­tions ground­ed, well, some­where. What do I mean by that? Well, jour­nal­ism that touch­es on reli­gion and pol­i­tics tends to see reli­gious view­points as car­ry­ing a spe­cial bur­den. It goes some­thing like this: ‘Tell me, Mr. Pious, why a diverse pop­u­la­tion should accept your views on moral­i­ty, con­sid­er­ing they come from reli­gion.’ ”
  6. Har­vard Tram­ples the Truth (Mar­tin Kulldorff,City Jour­nal): “…as I dis­cov­ered, truth can get you fired. This is my story—a sto­ry of a Har­vard bio­sta­tis­ti­cian and infec­tious-dis­ease epi­demi­ol­o­gist, cling­ing to the truth as the world lost its way dur­ing the Covid pan­dem­ic.… Two Har­vard col­leagues tried to arrange a debate between me and oppos­ing Har­vard fac­ul­ty, but just as with Stan­ford, there were no tak­ers. The invi­ta­tion to debate remains open. The pub­lic should not trust sci­en­tists, even Har­vard sci­en­tists, unwill­ing to debate their posi­tions with fel­low sci­en­tists.”
  7. How the Gaza Min­istry of Health Fakes Casu­al­ty Num­bers (Abra­ham Wyn­er, Tablet Mag­a­zine): “If Hamas’ num­bers are faked or fraud­u­lent in some way, there may be evi­dence in the num­bers them­selves that can demon­strate it. While there is not much data avail­able, there is a lit­tle, and it is enough: From Oct. 26 until Nov. 10, 2023, the Gaza Health Min­istry released dai­ly casu­al­ty fig­ures that include both a total num­ber and a spe­cif­ic num­ber of women and chil­dren.”
    • The author is a pro­fes­sor of sta­tis­tics at the Whar­ton School, and I find his analy­sis com­pelling.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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 441

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

This is vol­ume 441, which is 212 and also the small­est square which is the sum of six con­sec­u­tive cubes: 13 + 23 + 33 + 43 + 53 + 63

No amus­ing stuff at the end this week. I’ve been busy trav­el­ing and am vast­ly underamused.😅

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Blessed Are Those Who Mourn (T. M. Suffield, Mere Ortho­doxy): “Pen­ning­ton describes the beat­i­tudes as ‘divine gold of price­less worth’ that ‘appears to be only dark­ness.’ Like wis­dom say­ings they don’t give up their gold imme­di­ate­ly. They are sup­posed to shock us and I fear we have become over­ly famil­iar with them. Jesus is argu­ing that flour­ish­ing, the good life, requires mourn­ing. The thing the mod­ern world wants to avoid most, sad­ness, is some­how a key to a good life. To us this appears to be pro­found­ly non-flour­ish­ing. The shock we should feel is part of how the beat­i­tudes are meant to work.”
    • This is a wise and per­cep­tive essay. 10/10 rec­om­mend.
  2. How Fem­i­nism Ends (Ginevra Davis, Amer­i­can Affairs Jour­nal): “If the goal of fem­i­nism is to improve the lot of females, then there are dozens of changes, social and sci­en­tif­ic, that could help alle­vi­ate their con­di­tion. But if the goal of fem­i­nism is per­fect sex­u­al equality—that no mind should ever have to make sac­ri­fices, in pro­duc­tiv­i­ty or love, because of its body—then the end of fem­i­nism must, nec­es­sar­i­ly, mean the end of females. There is no oth­er way.”
    • A long but fab­u­lous essay. It’s by a Stan­ford grad, inci­den­tal­ly — this is the same author who wrote about Stan­ford’s war on fun a while back. I don’t think we ever crossed paths when she was a stu­dent.
    • Vague­ly relat­ed (but inter­est­ing enough in its own right that I would have includ­ed it regard­less): Stan­ford Med­i­cine study iden­ti­fies dis­tinct brain orga­ni­za­tion pat­terns in women and men (Stan­ford Med­i­cine): “A new study by Stan­ford Med­i­cine inves­ti­ga­tors unveils a new arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence mod­el that was more than 90% suc­cess­ful at deter­min­ing whether scans of brain activ­i­ty came from a woman or a man. The find­ings, pub­lished Feb. 20 in the Pro­ceed­ings of the Nation­al Acad­e­my of Sci­ences, help resolve a long-term con­tro­ver­sy about whether reli­able sex dif­fer­ences exist in the human brain and sug­gest that under­stand­ing these dif­fer­ences may be crit­i­cal to address­ing neu­ropsy­chi­atric con­di­tions that affect women and men dif­fer­ent­ly.”
  3. I’m a fos­ter kid who went to Yale —and I think two-par­ent fam­i­lies are more impor­tant than col­lege (Rik­ki Schlott, New York Post): “Even though I was always aca­d­e­m­i­cal­ly inclined, the lev­el of dis­or­der in my life was weigh­ing me down so much that I wasn’t in a posi­tion to ful­ly exploit my own capa­bil­i­ties.… I had a class where a pro­fes­sor admin­is­tered an anony­mous poll. Out of the 20 stu­dents, 18 of them had been raised by both of their birth par­ents. That just floored me because where I grew up it was zero.”
  4. Kin­da Nice (Damo­la Morenike­ji, Sub­stack): “A kind per­son will help you under­stand real­i­ty as it is, prompt you to reflect, and nudge you to fine-tune your posi­tion till you get to a place where your res­o­lu­tion is help­ful for you. A nice per­son will tell you what feels good — and often what you think you want to hear at that time — even if it doesn’t help you move past that sit­u­a­tion.”
  5. Our Unhap­py Youth (Antho­ny Esolen, Cri­sis Mag­a­zine): “Instead of ask­ing why they are unhap­py, we might ask why they aren’t hap­py,which might in turn lead us to ask what they have to be hap­py about. That might reveal to us in all its drab­ness what appears to be the most anti­hu­man way of life that any civ­i­liza­tion has ever set­tled into: becalmed with­out rest, somber with­out sobri­ety, abstract­ed with­out thought, licen­tious with­out even the ani­mal vig­or of license; ever shout­ing, but with­out good cheer.”
  6. Are ‘Islamists in Charge of Britain’? (Kon­stan­tin Kisin, The Free Press): “In one sense, the Speaker’s deci­sion was not unfound­ed. MPs real­ly are at risk. Only weeks pri­or, Mike Freer, a Con­ser­v­a­tive MP who rep­re­sents a con­stituen­cy with a sig­nif­i­cant Jew­ish pop­u­la­tion, announced that he would not be seek­ing reelec­tion because of threats to him and his fam­i­ly over his sup­port for Israel. Explain­ing his deci­sion, he revealed that he had start­ed wear­ing stab-proof vests when meet­ing con­stituents. In 2021 anoth­er Con­ser­v­a­tive MP, Sir David Amess, was stabbed to death by an Islamist at such a meet­ing. In 2017, an Islamist ter­ror­ist mowed down pedes­tri­ans before stab­bing an unarmed police offi­cer to death out­side the gates of Par­lia­ment.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  7. Gaza’s Past Is Call­ing (Sarah Aziza, Lux Mag­a­zine): “Com­ing up in the 1990s and 2000s, the word ‘Gaza’ was already syn­ony­mous with ‘Hamas’ — a term which, I quick­ly learned, ren­dered an entire pop­u­la­tion mon­strous. I am ashamed I often mum­bled the name — Gaza — when white Amer­i­cans asked about my fam­i­ly ori­gins. It hurt to watch them flinch, to see in their cold stares the impos­si­bil­i­ty that Gaza could ever mean moth­ers, banana, joy. The world they erased — and erase — my father’s fin­gers, draw­ing in the sand. My grandmother’s pigeons, her par­tic­u­lar way of brew­ing tea. The thou­sand, thou­sand feet that have run into the Mediter­ranean, each laugh­ter a dif­fer­ent splash. Gaza, for me, means teem­ing — a cru­el over-con­cen­tra­tion of bod­ies, yes, but at the same time, one of the world’s dens­est points of human love.”

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 435

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

This is vol­ume 435, a tri­an­gu­lar num­ber.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Ground of Our Assur­ance (D. A. Car­son, YouTube): three and a half excel­lent min­utes
  2. No, Not Every­one Needs Ther­a­py (Freya India, Sub­stack): “… there are peo­ple who now feel pres­sured to get pro­fes­sion­al help for nor­mal neg­a­tive emotions—teens and pre-teens con­vinced the rea­son they’re sad some­times is because they’re bro­ken and haven’t paid enough to be healed. Now not going to ther­a­py is a red flag. Seek­ing sup­port from friends and fam­i­ly is exploit­ing their ’emo­tion­al labour’. And men are shamed for pre­fer­ring to chat to their mates about their prob­lems than pay a stranger, like that one Bet­ter­Help ad where a woman dis­miss­es a guy she’s dat­ing because he ‘doesn’t do ther­a­py’. Think about that! How have we reached the point where we’re stig­ma­tis­ing peo­ple for not need­ing men­tal health sup­port?”
  3. What If There Is No Such Thing as ‘Bib­li­cal’ Pro­duc­tiv­i­ty? (Brady Bow­man, Mere Ortho­doxy): “…the ‘pro­duc­tiv­i­ty mind­set’ seems to me, at least in some ways, deeply incon­gru­ent with the Bible’s vision of real­i­ty. To say it more sim­ply, to adopt an out­look dom­i­nat­ed by speed and effi­cien­cy and pro­duc­tiv­i­ty is to adopt a per­spec­tive that is alien to the writ­ers of Scrip­ture.…”
  4. New tech­nol­o­gy inter­prets archae­o­log­i­cal find­ings from Bib­li­cal times (Tel Aviv Uni­ver­si­ty, Phys.org): “Apply­ing their method to find­ings from ancient Gath (Tell es-Safi in cen­tral Israel), the researchers val­i­dat­ed the Bib­li­cal account, ‘About this time Haz­a­el King of Aram went up and attacked Gath and cap­tured it. Then he turned to attack Jerusalem’ (2 Kings 12, 18). They explain that, unlike pre­vi­ous meth­ods, the new tech­nique can deter­mine whether a cer­tain item (such as a mud brick) under­went a fir­ing event even at rel­a­tive­ly low tem­per­a­tures, from 200°C and up.”
  5. US Intel­li­gence Shows Flawed Chi­na Mis­siles Led Xi to Purge Army (Peter Mar­tin and Jen­nifer Jacobs, Bloomberg): “The cor­rup­tion inside China’s Rock­et Force and through­out the nation’s defense indus­tri­al base is so exten­sive that US offi­cials now believe Xi is less like­ly to con­tem­plate major mil­i­tary action in the com­ing years than would oth­er­wise have been the case, accord­ing to the peo­ple, who asked not to be named dis­cussing intel­li­gence.”
    • This may be the most impor­tant bit of geopo­lit­i­cal news you read this year.
  6. The Mis­guid­ed War on the SAT (David Leon­hardt, New York Times): “With the Supreme Court’s restric­tion of affir­ma­tive action last year, emo­tions around col­lege admis­sions are run­ning high. The debate over stan­dard­ized test­ing has become caught up in deep­er ques­tions about inequal­i­ty in Amer­i­ca and what pur­pose, ulti­mate­ly, the nation’s uni­ver­si­ties should serve. But the data sug­gests that test­ing crit­ics have drawn the wrong bat­tle lines. If test scores are used as one fac­tor among oth­ers — and if col­leges give appli­cants cred­it for hav­ing over­come adver­si­ty — the SAT and ACT can help cre­ate diverse class­es of high­ly tal­ent­ed stu­dents. Restor­ing the tests might also help address a dif­fer­ent frus­tra­tion that many Amer­i­cans have with the admis­sions process at elite uni­ver­si­ties: that it has become too opaque and uncon­nect­ed to mer­it.”
    • Not the main point of the essay, but worth com­ment­ing that pol­i­tics poi­sons what­ev­er it polar­izes.
  7. The Pecu­liar Sto­ry of C. S. Lewis and Janie King Moore (Bethel McGrew, First Things): “Lewis’s let­ters from this peri­od are marked by an under­stat­ed deep relief. He wrote to a fre­quent cor­re­spon­dent that he was only just begin­ning to appre­ci­ate ‘how bad it was’ in hind­sight. And yet, though we miss the works he might have writ­ten under dif­fer­ent cir­cum­stances, we might also won­der whether the books we have would have been the same, had duty not com­pelled him to die to self every day for the sake of one frag­ile, impos­si­ble old woman. In the end, his own words rang as true for him­self as they did for every­one else: ‘Whether we like it or not God intends to give us what we need, not what we now think we want.’”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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 420

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

This is vol­ume 420, a num­ber with cul­tur­al sig­nif­i­cance and also two inter­est­ing math­e­mat­i­cal prop­er­ties. 420 = 101 + 103 + 107 + 109 = 20 x 21. In oth­er words, it is both the sum of con­sec­u­tive primes and also the prod­uct of two con­sec­u­tive num­bers.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. We Are Repa­ganiz­ing (Louise Per­ry, First Things): “The supreme­ly strange thing about Chris­tian­i­ty in anthro­po­log­i­cal terms is that it takes a top­sy-turvy atti­tude toward weak­ness and strength. To put it crude­ly, most cul­tures look at the pow­er­ful and the wealthy and assume that they must be doing some­thing right to have attained such might. The poor are poor because of some fail­ing of their own, whether in this life or the last. The small­ness and fee­ble­ness of women and chil­dren is a sign that they must be com­mand­ed by men. The suf­fer­ing of slaves is not an argu­ment against slav­ery, but an argu­ment against allow­ing one­self to be enslaved. Most cultures—perfectly logically—glorify war­riors and kings, not those at the bot­tom of the heap. But Chris­tian­i­ty takes a per­verse atti­tude toward sta­tus and puts that per­ver­si­ty at the heart of the the­ol­o­gy. ‘God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong’ is a baf­fling and alarm­ing claim to any­one from a soci­ety untouched by the strange­ness of the Jesus move­ment.”
    • This is a remark­able essay about Chris­tian­i­ty by a non-Chris­t­ian. 10/10 rec­om­mend.
  2. Ross Douthat’s The­o­ries of Per­sua­sion (Isaac Chotin­er, The New York­er): “This is not con­spir­a­cy-adja­cent, but I think that nice sec­u­lar peo­ple like you and Sam are sort of blind to some obvi­ous super­nat­ur­al real­i­ties about the world. I think lots of peo­ple have good rea­sons to end up in that kind of ter­ri­to­ry. And the ques­tion I don’t know the answer to is: Why is it so nat­ur­al once you’re in that ter­ri­to­ry to go all the way to where R.F.K. is?” He con­tin­ued, “I spend a lot of my own intel­lec­tu­al ener­gy try­ing not to let my sort of eccen­tric views blind me to the fact that the estab­lish­ment still gets a lot of bor­ing, obvi­ous things right.”
    • I found this interview/profile of Douthat charm­ing.
  3. Sin­gle­ness Is Not a Sin (Lyman Stone, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Mar­riage is insti­tut­ed for mutu­al ser­vice by spous­es and joint ser­vice to the next gen­er­a­tion. Celiba­cy is insti­tut­ed for ser­vice to the church (not as a require­ment for church ser­vice but as a pos­si­ble aid to it). Wid­ows like­wise are com­mand­ed to be hos­pitable and help­ful to younger peo­ple. Unless sin­gle­ness is clear­ly defined as a state that has some pur­pose ori­ent­ed toward the good of the neigh­bor (not just inci­den­tal­ly ben­e­fi­cial but pur­po­sive­ly so), it is dif­fi­cult to under­stand what pos­si­ble endorse­ment the sta­tus can be giv­en. It is not sin­ful, but it is not good.”
  4. Let’s Have a Talk About Edu­ca­tion and Reli­gious Atten­dance (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “I just don’t know how you look at all this data that I’ve brought to bear and con­clude that there’s not a pos­i­tive rela­tion­ship between edu­ca­tion and reli­gious atten­dance. You most cer­tain­ly can­not con­clude that it’s a neg­a­tive rela­tion­ship. That finds basi­cal­ly no sup­port in this data at all. There’s some evi­dence that the rela­tion­ship may not be sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant, but for me, the regres­sion clears that up. Peo­ple who are more edu­cat­ed are more like­ly to be attend­ing a reli­gious ser­vice in the local house of wor­ship this week­end than those with a high school diplo­ma or less. That’s what the pre­pon­der­ance of evi­dence tells me.”
    • A deep­er dive than you often find on this top­ic. Empha­sis in orig­i­nal.
  5. ‘O Slay the Wicked’: How Chris­tians Sing Curs­es (Greg Morse, Desir­ing God): “Do we ever say any­thing uncom­fort­able in the pres­ence of evil — or worse, do we even care? The psalmists did. We accuse them of cru­el­ty; they accuse us of a twist­ed sen­ti­men­tal­i­ty. We accuse them of not con­sid­er­ing man; they accuse us of not con­sid­er­ing God.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  6. Before You Share Your Faith! How to Be ‘Evan­ge­lism Ready’ (Matt Smethurst, The Gospel Coali­tion): a 16 minute pod­cast rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. I liked the con­tent, the deliv­ery was less grip­ping than I expect­ed. Worth­while.
  7. Book Review: Elon Musk (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “I think Elon Musk is 1‑in‑1,000 lev­el intel­li­gent — which is great, but means there are still 300,000 peo­ple in Amer­i­ca smarter than he is. I think he wins by being 1‑in-10,000,000 intense.”
    • This review is full of fas­ci­nat­ing sto­ries. 10/10 rec­om­mend if you have any inter­est what­so­ev­er in Elon Musk.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

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 417

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

This is vol­ume 417, which is clear­ly not prime because 4+1+7=12, but the prime fac­tor­iza­tion is sur­pris­ing: it’s 3·139.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Advice for Stu­dents Enter­ing Col­lege (Robert P. George, Mir­ror of Jus­tice): “As the new aca­d­e­m­ic year begins, I have some advice for con­ser­v­a­tive and reli­gious­ly obser­vant stu­dents who are enter­ing col­leges and uni­ver­si­ties in which their beliefs will place them in the minor­i­ty, and per­haps make them feel like ‘out­siders.’ ”
  2. Glo­ri­fy­ing God and Glo­ri­fy­ing Moun­tains (Tim Chal­lies, per­son­al blog): “As I drove along the road I couldn’t help but notice how many peo­ple put them­selves between the cam­era and the moun­tain so that the moun­tain was mere­ly a prop, the back­drop for a pho­to that fea­tured them­selves. Often these influ­encers would be doing some­thing showy or wear­ing some­thing skimpy that was meant to draw the eye to them­selves rather than to the moun­tain behind. They made them­selves the focus of the pho­to­graph rather than the moun­tain. They stole the glo­ry of the moun­tain by using it to glo­ri­fy them­selves. And this helps us under­stand how we can fail to glo­ri­fy God. We place our­selves in the fore­ground so that God winds up in the back­ground.”
  3. A sin­gle reform that could save 100,000 lives imme­di­ate­ly (Ned Brooks and ML Cavanaugh, LA Times): “The head of the Nation­al Kid­ney Foun­da­tion tes­ti­fied in March that Medicare spends an esti­mat­ed $136 bil­lion, near­ly 25% of its expen­di­tures, on the care of peo­ple with a kid­ney dis­ease. Of that, $50 bil­lion is spent on peo­ple with end-stage kid­ney dis­ease, on par with the entire U.S. Marine Corps bud­get.… The Nation­al Organ Trans­plant Act pro­hibits com­pen­sat­ing kid­ney donors, which is strange in that in Amer­i­can soci­ety, it’s com­mon to pay for plas­ma, bone mar­row, hair, sperm, eggs and even sur­ro­gate preg­nan­cies. We already pay to cre­ate and sus­tain life. Anoth­er way to think about this, as one bioethi­cist points out: ‘Every per­son in the chain of liv­ing organ dona­tion, except one, prof­its.’ The hos­pi­tal gets paid, the doc­tors and nurs­es and staff get paid, the phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal indus­try gets paid and the recip­i­ent is the main ben­e­fi­cia­ry. Every­one ben­e­fits except the donors, who get reim­bursed only for their expens­es.”
  4. With­out Belief in a God, But Nev­er With­out Belief In A Dev­il (Rob K. Hen­der­son, Sub­stack): “Per­son­al­ly, I saw this when I first arrived at Yale. I recall being stunned at how sta­tus anx­i­ety per­vad­ed elite col­lege cam­pus­es. Inter­nal­ly, I thought, ‘You’ve already made it, what are you so stressed out about?’ Hof­fer, though, would say these stu­dents believed they had almost made it. That is why they were so aggra­vat­ed. The clos­er they got to real­iz­ing their ambi­tions, the more frus­trat­ed they became about not already achiev­ing them.”
  5. Why are Charis­mat­ics so Weird? (Sam Storms, per­son­al blog): “There are approx­i­mate­ly 645 mil­lion peo­ple in the world today who iden­ti­fy as either Pen­te­costal or charis­mat­ic. Among them there are cer­tain lead­ers and pop­u­lar voic­es who believe ‘weird’ things and have amassed a con­sid­er­able fol­low­ing among those who are gullible and undis­cern­ing. But for every one mis­guid­ed teacher or inter­net per­son­al­i­ty there are thou­sands of faith­ful and bib­li­cal­ly root­ed, gospel-cen­tered pas­tors and pro­fes­sors in the charis­mat­ic com­mu­ni­ty. And for every one of those who naive­ly falls for the ‘weird’ things said and done there are, again, thou­sands who do not.”
  6. Should I Offer My Pro­nouns? (Kara Bet­tis Car­val­ho, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Ear­li­er this year, Atlantic jour­nal­ist George Pack­er argued against what he called ‘equi­ty lan­guage’ and the often unrea­son­able pres­sure it puts on the cul­ture. It is polite and dig­ni­fy­ing to ‘address peo­ple as they request,’ Pack­er wrote, but equi­ty lan­guage isn’t organ­ic; it’s being ‘hand­ed down in com­mu­niqués writ­ten by obscure ‘experts’ who pur­port to speak for vague­ly defined ‘com­mu­ni­ties,’ remain­ing unan­swer­able to a pub­lic that’s being moral­ly coerced.’ New lan­guage makes ide­o­log­i­cal claims, he wrote. ‘If you accept the change—as, in cer­tain con­texts, you’ll sure­ly feel you must—then you also acqui­esce in the argu­ment.’ ”
    • Unlocked. Allows peo­ple from mul­ti­ple per­spec­tives to make their argu­ments.
  7. When few do great harm (Inquis­i­tive Bird, Sub­stack): “Anoth­er notable fact: approx­i­mate­ly half of vio­lent crime con­vic­tions were com­mit­ted by peo­ple who already had 3 or more vio­lent crime con­vic­tions. In oth­er words, if after being con­vict­ed of 3 vio­lent crimes peo­ple were pre­vent­ed from fur­ther offend­ing, half of vio­lent crime con­vic­tions would have been avoid­ed.… The fact that a small minor­i­ty is respon­si­ble for a large chunk of crime is true for shoplift­ing and bur­glar­ies as well, per­haps to an even greater extent. Data from New York City finds that a tiny num­ber of shoplifters com­mit thou­sands of theft. The police stat­ed that near­ly a third of all shoplift­ing arrests in the city in 2022 involved just 327 peo­ple, who col­lec­tive­ly were arrest­ed and rear­rest­ed more than 6,000 times. Thus 0.00386% of New York City’s pop­u­la­tion (327 out of 8.468 mil­lion, 1 in ~26,000) account­ed for near­ly a third of all shoplift­ing arrests in the city.” Empha­sis in orig­i­nal.

    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 412

    On Fri­days (Sat­ur­days when I feel ill on Fri­day) 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.

    412 is the sum of twelve con­sec­u­tive primes: 13 + 17 + 19 + 23 + 29 + 31 + 37 + 41 + 43 + 47 + 53 + 59

    Things Glen Found Interesting

    1. If Satan Took Up Mar­riage Coun­sel­ing  (Tim Chal­lies, per­son­al blog) : “If Satan took up mar­riage coun­sel­ing, he would want peo­ple to believe mar­riage is so risky that it is best to post­pone it almost indef­i­nite­ly, that it is so sig­nif­i­cant and per­ilous an under­tak­ing that peo­ple should not even con­sid­er it until they have com­plet­ed their edu­ca­tion, begun a career, and become well estab­lished in life. He would espe­cial­ly want young peo­ple to antic­i­pate it with a sense of dread instead of excite­ment.”
      • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. Well worth your time.
    2. Spir­its of the Cloud: A Demonolo­gy of the Inter­net (Thomas Har­mon, The Amer­i­can Mind): “…there is much wis­dom that can be gained by turn­ing to ancient sources to under­stand how these mys­te­ri­ous forces oper­ate and how to resist them. In brief, they oper­ate by prey­ing on our imag­i­na­tions and desires, which are often­times obscure even to us, espe­cial­ly when we try to pen­e­trate the veil between present and future or between human and divine by some sort of mag­i­cal or tech­ni­cal means. James Lind­say zeroes in on this aspect: ‘Demons influ­ence peo­ple through their emo­tions and their inter­pre­ta­tions of fea­tures of their lives.’ Since they are airy, and proud of their ele­va­tion over our earth­i­ness, they have a weak­ness: humil­i­ty and an embrace of our earth­bound bod­ies (as a mat­ter of fact, the word ‘humil­i­ty’ is derived from a Latin word mean­ing ‘dirt’ or ‘earth’, humus).”
      • The author is a Catholic the­olo­gian.
    3. Many on dat­ing apps are already in rela­tion­ships or aren’t seek­ing actu­al dates, new study finds (Angela Yang, NBC News): “Hope­ful swipers look­ing to find their next part­ners on dat­ing apps have grown increas­ing­ly dis­il­lu­sioned in recent years, and a new study reveals the poten­tial root of their dif­fi­cul­ties: Many dat­ing app users aren’t seek­ing roman­tic mee­tups at all. Half of near­ly 1,400 Tin­der users sur­veyed said they weren’t inter­est­ed in actu­al­ly find­ing dates, accord­ing to research pub­lished last month. Near­ly two-thirds report­ed they were already in rela­tion­ships, and some were mar­ried while they were using the app.”
      • Just meet some­one cute and flirt with them in real life. Like, say, in your cam­pus min­istry or church.
    4. What’s Wrong With the “What’s Wrong With Men” Dis­course (Conor Fitzger­ald, Sub­stack): “…men find ther­a­py and the ther­a­peu­tic world­view alien and unhelp­ful. Even the flim­si­est male spec­i­men has psy­cho­log­i­cal needs relat­ed to accom­plish­ment, strength, use­ful­ness and capa­bil­i­ty; an atmos­phere of uncon­di­tion­al empa­thy and unre­strained emo­tion­al dis­clo­sure can be poi­so­nous to those things. What­ev­er the rea­son, men under­stand that ther­a­py (the prac­tice) is most­ly just the med­ical cod­i­fi­ca­tion of a typ­i­cal­ly female world­view as objec­tive­ly true and cor­rect. Most men aren’t going to be inter­est­ed in join­ing a con­ver­sa­tion con­duct­ed in that spir­it.”
      • This is very well put. The whole essay is inter­est­ing. Ignore the typos and dig in!
      • Relat­ed: Gen­der cri­sis is real­ly a mar­riage cri­sis (Inez Step­man, Tri­bune-Demo­c­rat): “…women with few or no ties to the oppo­site sex in the form of mar­riage and fam­i­ly are diverg­ing sharply not only from the views of men, but also from those of their mar­ried sis­ters. Mar­ried men, unmar­ried men and mar­ried women are reg­is­ter­ing pri­mar­i­ly the same polit­i­cal pref­er­ences, with only small gaps in vot­ing pat­terns between them, while sin­gle women are run­ning fast in the oppo­site direc­tion from the rest. For exam­ple, a poll in the past round of midterms found mar­ried peo­ple of both sex­es and sin­gle men all going for Repub­li­cans by major­i­ty mar­gins with­in a hand­ful of points of each oth­er (52% to 59%). Sin­gle women, on the oth­er hand, went strong­ly Demo­c­ra­t­ic by a land­slide of 68% to 31%.”
    5. Stan­ford Pres­i­dent Will Resign After Report Found Flaws in His Research (Stephanie Saul, New York Times): “Dr. Tessier-Lav­i­gne, 63, will relin­quish the pres­i­den­cy at the end of August but remain at the uni­ver­si­ty as a pro­fes­sor of biol­o­gy.”
      • Tessier-Lav­i­gne mat­ter shows why run­ning a lab is a full-time job (H. Hold­en Thorp, Sci­ence): “I had seen many researchers who had tak­en big admin­is­tra­tive jobs strug­gle with over­see­ing their research group. Many inci­dents sim­i­lar to those involv­ing Tessier-Lav­i­gne arose because the prin­ci­pal inves­ti­ga­tors were too busy attend­ing to their oth­er high-pro­file jobs. David Bal­ti­more had to resign as pres­i­dent of Rock­e­feller Uni­ver­si­ty when sci­en­tif­ic mis­con­duct in his lab­o­ra­to­ry was uncov­ered (he lat­er became the pres­i­dent of the Cal­i­for­nia Insti­tute of Tech­nol­o­gy, and like Tessier-Lav­i­gne, was not found to have direct knowl­edge of the mis­con­duct). In a dif­fer­ent set of prob­lem­at­ic inter­ac­tions relat­ed to research, José Basel­ga resigned as head of Memo­r­i­al Sloan-Ket­ter­ing Can­cer Cen­ter because he failed to dis­close (inten­tion­al­ly or not) indus­try rela­tion­ships in papers pub­lished by his research group. These exam­ples reflect how tend­ing to a major admin­is­tra­tive posi­tion and run­ning a lab­o­ra­to­ry at the same time are sim­ply too much for one per­son.”
      • Richard Saller to take over as inter­im pres­i­dent in Sep­tem­ber (Ori­ana Riley, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty is a huge oper­a­tion with a $9 bil­lion bud­get — about 10 times larg­er than the first Roman emper­or Augus­tus had for the whole empire,” Saller wrote. “I have a steep learn­ing curve ahead of me.”
    6. Reli­gion as a Cul­tur­al and Polit­i­cal Iden­ti­ty (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “Peo­ple like the *idea* of reli­gion, with­out the actu­al trap­pings of said reli­gion. They are the kind of folks that talk about con­cepts like bib­li­cal val­ues with­out every step­ping foot inside a church. They want (pri­mar­i­ly) Chris­t­ian val­ues to be pro­tect­ed, but they don’t actu­al­ly want to spend much time under­stand­ing the the­ol­o­gy around the val­ues. For them, reli­gion has become a social and cul­tur­al mark­er — not a spir­i­tu­al one. It’s basi­cal­ly become anoth­er cud­gel in the cul­ture war. So, when the debate heats up over issues of sex­u­al­i­ty, gen­der, or abor­tion these are the kind of folks who will post memes on Face­book that include ref­er­ences to scrip­ture vers­es, despite the fact that they them­selves nev­er read the Bible.”
      • Empha­sis in orig­i­nal.
    7. The Con­sum­ing Fire of Love (Peter J. Lei­thart, First Things): “God isn’t ter­ri­fy­ing because he’s unlov­ing. He’s ter­ri­fy­ing because Love is terrifying—undiluted love, love that refus­es com­pro­mise with evil, love that will not nego­ti­ate away the good of the beloved by allow­ing the beloved to set the terms of her love, love that promis­es a good and a future beyond all the beloved can ask or imag­ine.”

    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 “Major­i­ty-Minor­i­ty” Myth (Andrew Sul­li­van, Sub­stack): “Most demo­graph­ic esti­mates of the ‘white’ pop­u­la­tion are based on the Cen­sus def­i­n­i­tion: ‘non-His­pan­ic white.’ But what of ‘His­pan­ic whites’ — those whose lin­eage may come from South or Latin Amer­i­ca in eth­nic­i­ty but who also iden­ti­fy racial­ly and social­ly as white? If you include them in this cat­e­go­ry, Amer­i­ca remains two-thirds ‘white’ all the way through 2060 and beyond.” A fas­ci­nat­ing read. From vol­ume 289

    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 411

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

    This is vol­ume 411, which is the num­ber you used to dial to get direc­to­ry assis­tance from the phone com­pa­ny. It’s now slang for infor­ma­tion, so an emi­nent­ly appro­pri­ate num­ber for today’s com­pi­la­tion.

    Things Glen Found Interesting

    1. This roundup has more spir­i­tu­al­ly enrich­ing con­tent than usu­al.
      • The Shep­herd Boy Who Wasn’t (Jor­dan K. Mon­son, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “If we stick only to the ‘God can use any­one’ read­ing of David’s ori­gin sto­ry, we cel­e­brate God’s ele­va­tion of the over­looked and risk miss­ing God’s clear warn­ing to the ele­vat­ed: It can hap­pen to you. But if we see David for who he real­ly was, we real­ize that every great man or woman who ris­es to pow­er in the church is only one rooftop stroll away from a David-sized crash.”
        • I have unlocked this arti­cle. It’s longer than it needs to be, but good. The author is a pro­fes­sor of Old Tes­ta­ment at Hunt­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty.
      • Fear­ing God as Sons, Not Slaves (Ben Edwards, Detroit Bap­tist The­o­log­i­cal Sem­i­nary): “This dis­tinc­tion is per­haps most clear­ly seen in Exo­dus 20: ‘And all the peo­ple were watch­ing and hear­ing the thun­der and the light­ning flash­es, and the sound of the trum­pet, and the moun­tain smok­ing; and when the peo­ple saw it all, they trem­bled and stood at a dis­tance. 19 Then they said to Moses, ‘Speak to us your­self and we will lis­ten; but do not have God speak to us, or we will die!’ How­ev­er, Moses said to the peo­ple, ‘Do not be afraid; for God has come in order to test you, and in order that the fear of Him may remain with you, so that you will not sin.’’ Moses tells Israel: ‘Don’t be afraid, but fear.’ The Israelites were tempt­ed to cow­er in ter­ror as they beheld God’s majesty. But the fear they tru­ly need­ed was one that would lead them to avoid sin.”
        • Empha­sis in orig­i­nal
      • Why I Gave Up Drink­ing (Sarah Bessey, Rel­e­vant Mag­a­zine): “I think that con­vic­tion has got­ten a bit of a bad rap in the Church over the past lit­tle while. It’s under­stand­able. We have an over­cor­rec­tion to a lot of the legal­ism and bound­ary-mark­er Chris­tian­i­ty that dam­aged so many, the behav­iour mod­i­fi­ca­tion and rule-mak­ing and impo­si­tion of oth­er people’s con­vic­tions onto our own souls. But in our steer­ing away from legal­ism, I won­der if we left the road to holi­ness or began to for­get that God also cares about what we do and how we do it and why.”
        • From last year, but was just rec­om­mend­ed to me by a friend. It’s good.
      • Why Do We Go to Church? (Mike Glenn, Sub­stack): “Why do so many of us who claim to be Chris­tians nev­er attend church? I know every­one has their rea­sons, but here’s the hard truth: Jesus loves the church. He gave His life for the church. Jesus con­sid­ers the church to be His bride. I don’t care how close you are to Jesus, you can’t tell Him His wife is ugly. If we love Jesus, then we love His church. If you don’t love the church, then there’s rea­son to ques­tion if you love Jesus.”
      • Rap­ture (Pre­cept Austin): “In our day, the Rap­ture has come under attack by many. Some think it rep­re­sents the nov­el teach­ings of ‘defeatist Chris­tians.’ Oth­ers think it is pure fan­ta­sy. Still oth­ers seem to savor the idea of the Church going through the events of the Tribu­la­tion in order to ‘prove her met­al’ or refine her. We find it dif­fi­cult to under­stand why there is such oppo­si­tion by Chris­tians to the idea that the bride­groom would come for His bride pri­or to pour­ing forth His wrath (John 14:1–3)?”
        • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent and I quite liked this one. I’m pret­ty famil­iar with the argu­ments in favor of a pret­ribu­la­tion­al rap­ture (a posi­tion I myself hold), but there was stuff in here that was new to me.
    2. Why Match School And Stu­dent Rank? (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “…elite col­leges are machines for laun­der­ing priv­i­lege. That is: Har­vard accepts (let’s say) 75% smart/talented peo­ple, and 25% rich/powerful peo­ple. This is a good deal for both sides. The smart peo­ple get to net­work with elites, which is the first step to becom­ing elite them­selves. And the rich peo­ple get mixed in so thor­ough­ly with a pool of smart/talented peo­ple that every­one assumes they must be smart/talented them­selves. After all, they have a degree from Har­vard!”
    3. A Church’s Quest for Enchant­ment (Mag­gie Phllips, Tablet): “[Pen­te­costal­ism] began in the 19th cen­tu­ry, with the par­al­lel devel­op­ment through­out the Anglos­phere of a grass­roots spir­i­tu­al enthu­si­asm ground­ed in per­son­al expe­ri­ence. Its the­ol­o­gy is root­ed in his­to­ry both ancient and more con­tem­po­rary: a key event in the Chris­t­ian Bible’s Book of the Acts of the Apos­tles, as well as the the­ol­o­gy of John Wes­ley, who is rec­og­nized as the father of Method­ism. In the U.S., its cat­a­lyst is usu­al­ly iden­ti­fied as a reli­gious revival move­ment that began in Los Ange­les in 1906; over a cen­tu­ry lat­er, it still enjoys a wide­spread pres­ence in the U.S., and is a rapid­ly grow­ing glob­al phe­nom­e­non.”
      • This is actu­al­ly a pret­ty good overview of Pen­te­costal Chris­tian­i­ty for a sec­u­lar audi­ence. She gets a few details wrong, but over­all this is sol­id.
    4. The Church in a Time of Gen­der War (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “What I am say­ing is that I now believe most evan­gel­i­cal church­es should look at their sin­gle mem­bers with both eyes open: an appre­ci­a­tion for the won­der­ful poten­tial of their sea­son of life, but also a desire and strat­e­gy, as the Lord per­mits, to find ways to get these peo­ple Chris­t­ian spous­es. In oth­er words, I don’t think we should fear admit­ting that mar­riage is, in the major­i­ty of sit­u­a­tions we will come across, prefer­able to sin­gle­ness.”
      • Some peo­ple think I empha­size romance too much. I actu­al­ly won­der if I empha­size it too lit­tle.
      • Also, not reflect­ed in the excerpt but very much at the heart of the piece is the author’s con­cern that men and women in our cul­ture are col­lec­tive­ly believ­ing the worst of each oth­er and assum­ing the answer is for the oth­er gen­der to become more like them. He’s get­ting at some­thing real here. I think Chi Alpha has a health­i­er dat­ing cul­ture than oth­er places at Stan­ford, and I still see the ten­den­cies James cri­tiques in this piece in mem­bers of our com­mu­ni­ty.
      • Men are awe­some. Women are awe­some. You should prob­a­bly want to get mar­ried. Which means you should prob­a­bly go on dates.
    5. Men are lost. Here’s a map out of the wilder­ness. (Chris­tine Emba, Wash­ing­ton Post): “To the extent that any vision of ‘non­tox­ic’ mas­culin­i­ty is pro­posed, it ends up sound­ing more like stereo­typ­i­cal fem­i­nin­i­ty than any­thing else: Guys should learn to be more sen­si­tive, qui­et and social­ly apt, seem­ing­ly overnight.… I’m con­vinced that men are in a cri­sis. And I strong­ly sus­pect that end­ing it will require a pos­i­tive vision of what mas­culin­i­ty entails that is par­tic­u­lar — that is, nei­ther neu­tral nor inter­change­able with fem­i­nin­i­ty. Still, I find myself reluc­tant to ful­ly artic­u­late one. There’s a rea­son a lot of the writ­ing on the cri­sis in mas­culin­i­ty ends at the diag­no­sis stage.”
      • Unlocked. Sol­id over­all but amus­ing­ly clue­less at a few points. 
      • Relat­ed, although the author dis­claims it: Fight­ing (Marc Andreesen, Sub­stack): “At a pri­vate con­fer­ence this week, I was asked what I think of Mark Zuckerberg’s recent Mixed Mar­tial Arts (MMA) train­ing, Elon Musk’s chal­lenge to a cage fight, and pub­lic reports that a Zuckerberg/Musk MMA fight may well hap­pen lat­er this year, per­haps in the actu­al Roman Colos­se­um. I said, ‘I think that’s all great.’ And in this post I explain why.… I was also asked whether I con­sid­er Mark and Elon to be role mod­els to chil­dren in their embrace of fight­ing, and I said, enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly, yes. And I fur­ther rec­om­mend­ed to the audi­ence that they have their chil­dren trained in MMA, as my wife and I are.”
    6. The Tri­umph of the Good Samar­i­tan (Ash Mil­ton, Pal­la­di­um Mag­a­zine): “The activist defend­ers of the tent cities had seized on a moral lan­guage deeply ingrained in West­ern soci­eties. The notion of duty to neigh­bors, espe­cial­ly those who are poor and vul­ner­a­ble, is a par­tic­u­lar­ly strong inher­i­tance from Chris­tian­i­ty. But they were using con­cepts they did not care to under­stand. For the activists, the home­less weren’t neigh­bors in any rec­i­p­ro­cal sense, just a bat­ter­ing ram to use in their own con­flicts with soci­ety. By rhetor­i­cal­ly re-premis­ing neigh­bor­ly duties as a one-way rela­tion­ship of trib­ute and def­er­ence paid to the wretched by soci­ety, they ren­dered the very moral con­cepts they invoked use­less. They demand­ed neigh­bor­ly duties from strangers but pro­vid­ed no pos­si­bil­i­ty of those involved ever becom­ing any­thing like real neigh­bors to each oth­er.”
      • A bit longer than nec­es­sary, but quite good.
    7. Who’s Afraid of Moms for Lib­er­ty? (Robert Pondis­cio, The Free Press): “Moms for Lib­er­ty is the beat­ing heart of this country’s move­ment of angry parents—and Amer­i­can edu­ca­tion has nev­er seen any­thing quite like it.… The basic thrust of Moms for Liberty’s advocacy—that par­ents, not the gov­ern­ment, should have the ulti­mate say in what chil­dren are taught in pub­lic schools—has legs. Not one sub­group in McLaughlin’s crosstabs—Trump or Biden vot­ers; pro-life or pro-choice; black, white, or His­pan­ic; urban, rur­al, or suburban—disagrees.”

    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 Book Review: The Cult Of Smart (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “DeBoer recalls hear­ing an immi­grant moth­er proud­ly describe her old­er kid’s achieve­ments in math, sci­ence, etc, “and then her younger son ran by, and she said, off­hand, ‘This one, he is maybe not so smart.’ ” DeBoer was orig­i­nal­ly shocked to hear some­one describe her own son that way, then real­ized that he wouldn’t have thought twice if she’d dis­missed him as unath­let­ic, or bad at music. Intel­li­gence is con­sid­ered such a basic mea­sure of human worth that to dis­miss some­one as unin­tel­li­gent seems like con­sign­ing them into the out­er dark­ness.” Nor­mal­ly the best thing about Alexander’s blog is his book reviews. This one was just okay (smart and well-writ­ten but not astound­ing) and then all of a sud­den he turned his rant up to 11. Hang in until you reach the phrase “child prison.” If you’re not sold at that point, stop read­ing. From vol­ume 289.

    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 404

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

    This is vol­ume 404, which makes me hap­py that I’ve final­ly found it. If you know, you know.

    Things Glen Found Interesting

    1. Two arti­cles for spir­i­tu­al growth, both rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
      • Roast What You Kill: Becom­ing a Man Who Fol­lows Through (Greg Morse, Desir­ing God): “What a strange pic­ture. The man woke up ear­ly. He pre­pared his tools. He lay in wait. He act­ed delib­er­ate­ly, force­ful­ly. He took the prize, brought home the meat — but nev­er cooked it. Per­haps he decid­ed he had worked hard enough for one day. Per­haps he real­ized just how tired he felt. His enthu­si­asm died before the meal was pre­pared. He labored promis­ing­ly, for a time. He remained focused, for a while. His was hard but unfin­ished work. In the end, his plate is just as emp­ty as that of the oth­er slug­gard, wak­ing at his return.”
        • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent who notes: “The author focus­es on men, but I think a lot of his points apply to women too.”
      • 3 Rea­sons We Avoid Evan­ge­lism (Matt Smethurst, Gospel Coali­tion): “In a post-Chris­t­ian age, we can’t pre­sume any basic assump­tions in those we’re try­ing to reach with the gospel. So we must take care to lean in and lis­ten well, to climb into our neighbor’s way of see­ing and inhab­it­ing the world. Oth­er­wise, we’ll be speak­ing about terms—even bib­li­cal ones—that’ll be sim­ply mis­un­der­stood or reject­ed out­right. ‘God loves you’ is great news, but mean­ing­less if you don’t under­stand the nature of God (or for that mat­ter, love).”
        • Rec­om­mend­ed by the very same stu­dent
    2. Why this Jew is binge-watch­ing The Cho­sen (and maybe you should too) (Fay­dra Shapiro. The Times of Israel): “I wish that Jews could under­stand that the New Tes­ta­ment is thor­ough­ly Jew­ish – replete with Jew­ish cat­e­gories and Jew­ish prac­tices, Jew­ish con­tro­ver­sies, Jew­ish scrip­ture, and brim­ming with Jews – I think we could reclaim some of our own his­to­ry. Because let’s face it, if we want to under­stand some­thing about the Judaism of our ances­tors in this spe­cif­ic peri­od, the New Tes­ta­ment has some real val­ue. And if Jews could feel more com­fort­able with the New Tes­ta­ment as com­pris­ing an impor­tant piece of Jew­ish cul­tur­al lit­er­a­ture, we might be able to engage more deeply togeth­er as Jews and Chris­tians.”
      • I’ve met Fay­dra twice and will prob­a­bly meet her again this sum­mer on the Pas­sages trip.
    3. What Chris­t­ian Nation­al­ism Has Done to My State and My Faith Is a Sin (Susan Stub­son, New York Times): “I am adrift in this unnamed sea, unteth­ered from both my faith com­mu­ni­ty and my polit­i­cal par­ty as I try to rec­on­cile evan­gel­i­cals’ repeat­ed endorse­ments of can­di­dates who thumb their noses at the least of us. Chris­tians are called to serve God, not a polit­i­cal par­ty, to put our faith in a high­er pow­er, not in human beings. We’re taught not to bow to false idols. Yet idol­a­try is increas­ing­ly promi­nent and our foun­da­tion­al prin­ci­ples — humil­i­ty, kind­ness and com­pas­sion — in short sup­ply.”
      • A good read. Unlocked.
    4. When the Ther­a­peu­tic God Isn’t Suf­fi­cient (John Car­pen­ter, Mere Ortho­doxy): “God’s peo­ple have to endure the cat­a­stro­phes of the world. We can protest ‘it’s not fair, why should we taste the worm­wood and the gall when we didn’t do what brought about the judg­ment?’ But it hap­pens. Peo­ple live mate­ri­al­is­ti­cal­ly, tak­ing loans they can’t pay, get­ting hous­es too expen­sive for them. It’s greed; it’s mate­ri­al­ism. Then the econ­o­my crash­es, like it did in 2008. Is it only the greedy and mate­ri­al­is­tic who suf­fer? No. Many are swept along into unem­ploy­ment and bank­rupt­cy. Ethiopia made some hor­ri­ble eco­nom­ic and polit­i­cal choic­es in the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry. One result was that our daugh­ter died and there was blood every­where.”
      • This is quite good.
    5. The Price of Pot (Aaron Renn, Insti­tute for Fam­i­ly Stud­ies): “Accord­ing to a new study from Colum­bia Uni­ver­si­ty researchers, recre­ation­al pot use in teens is asso­ci­at­ed with increased depres­sion and increased sui­ci­dal thoughts. It’s also asso­ci­at­ed with high­er lev­els of tru­an­cy and fight­ing, as well as low­er grade point aver­ages. It’s impor­tant to note that this study zeroed in on non-abu­sive recre­ation­al use, exclud­ing peo­ple that researchers iden­ti­fied as hav­ing a drug prob­lem.”
    6. I taught in San Fran­cis­co. Chil­dren are trained to be offend­ed (James Vescovi, Newsweek): “The city’s trou­bles are in large part due to a mind­set that seems to per­vade life and that I encoun­tered in schools, where I was a high school teacher. In a nut­shell, adults are afraid to offend, while chil­dren seem trained to be offend­ed.”
      • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. A dif­fer­ent stu­dent, for those keep­ing track at home.
    7. Yet more praise for Tim Keller
      • 5 ways Tim Keller was the anti-celebri­ty celebri­ty pas­tor (Kate­lyn Beaty, Sub­stack): “This might sound insult­ing, but I mean it in the best way: Tim Keller didn’t lead with his looks. His appear­ance and dress were pleas­ant, and pleas­ant­ly unre­mark­able. I loved this anec­dote from Tyler Huck­abee, that Keller declined doing a pho­to­shoot for a mag­a­zine pro­file. (Free makeover and glossy images? Sign me up!) Huck­abee said Keller just didn’t seem inter­est­ed. Anoth­er way of say­ing this: Keller val­ued sub­stance over style. He didn’t need to be dressed in lux­u­ry cloth­ing for New York­ers to find his mes­sage com­pelling.”
      • A Tale of Two New York City Pas­tors (Kara Bet­tis Car­val­ho, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “[In col­lege I attend­ed both Redeemer and Hill­song and] it was hard to miss the stark dif­fer­ences between both church­es and their lead­ers: One formed me. The oth­er enter­tained me.… The nefar­i­ous truth is that we, too, are often respon­si­ble for cre­at­ing celebri­ty pas­tors. In col­lege, was I hun­gry for Scrip­ture and gospel-cen­tered com­mu­ni­ty? Yes. Was I also will­ing to be emo­tion­al­ly tit­il­lat­ed, spir­i­tu­al­ly dis­tract­ed and even enter­tained, and look­ing for a place to belong? Also, yes.”
      • The Far-See­ing Faith of Tim Keller (Michael Luo, New York­er): “His lim­it­ed preach­ing expe­ri­ence, in a small-town church in the Bible Belt, made him an unlike­ly fit for New York City. With­in three years of its found­ing, how­ev­er, Redeemer had swelled from fifty peo­ple to a thou­sand. By the mid-aughts, it had become a bea­con, around the world, for pas­tors inter­est­ed in min­is­ter­ing to cos­mopoli­tan audi­ences. Unlike many sub­ur­ban megachurch­es, with their soft-rock praise bands and user-friend­ly ser­mons, Redeemer’s ser­vices were almost defi­ant­ly staid, fea­tur­ing tra­di­tion­al hymns and litur­gy. But the ser­mons were wry and eru­dite, filled with lit­er­ary allu­sions and philo­soph­i­cal ref­er­ences, and Keller was shrewd about urg­ing his con­gre­gants to exam­ine their ‘coun­ter­feit gods’—their pur­suit of totems like pow­er, sta­tus, and wealth, which the city encour­aged.”
      • Tim Keller Lives (Mar­vin Olasky, Reli­gion and Lib­er­ty Online): “I had one-to-one talks with Keller only three times, so I hope you’ll read else­where about his influ­ence via friend­ships. My wife and I did lis­ten in per­son to his ser­mons from 2008 to 2011, and at first we did so anx­ious­ly. Lis­ten­ing to how he han­dled dif­fi­cult Bible pas­sages was like watch­ing a short­stop rang­ing far to his right on a hard-hit ball: Will he be able to reach it? He has. He’s on the out­field grass: How can he pos­si­bly throw out the run­ner at first? He just did.”
        • As a preach­er, I want to high­light this. Keller’s preach­ing was extra­or­di­nary. Lis­ten­ing to him preach was like watch­ing a gold medal­ist com­pete. No. That’s not right, because lis­ten­ing to preach­ing isn’t pas­sive. Lis­ten­ing to him preach was like being in the ring with a cham­pi­on — when you weren’t busy get­ting pum­meled you were in awe of his skill.
      • What Has Trump Cost Amer­i­can Chris­tian­i­ty? (Ross Douhat, New York Times): “When reli­gious con­ser­vatism made its peace with Don­ald Trump in 2016, the fun­da­men­tal cal­cu­la­tion was that the ben­e­fits of polit­i­cal pow­er — or, alter­na­tive­ly, of keep­ing cul­tur­al lib­er­al­ism out of full polit­i­cal pow­er — out­weighed the costs to Chris­t­ian cred­i­bil­i­ty inher­ent in accept­ing a hea­then fig­ure as a polit­i­cal cham­pi­on and leader. The con­trary cal­cu­la­tion, made by the Chris­t­ian wing of Nev­er Trump, was that accept­ing Trump required moral com­pro­mis­es that Amer­i­can Chris­tian­i­ty would ulti­mate­ly suf­fer for, what­ev­er Supreme Court seats or pol­i­cy vic­to­ries reli­gious con­ser­v­a­tives might gain.”
        • Does not go where you expect — this is actu­al­ly an inter­est­ing reflec­tion on Tim Keller. Rec­om­mend­ed.

    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 Great Unrav­el­ing (Bari Weiss, Sub­stack): “I don’t know the answer. But I know that you have to be sort of strange to stand apart and refuse to join Team Red or Team Blue. These strange ones are the ones who think that polit­i­cal vio­lence is wrong, that mob jus­tice is nev­er just and the pre­sump­tion of inno­cence is always right. These are the ones who are skep­ti­cal of state and cor­po­rate pow­er, even when it is clamp­ing down on peo­ple they despise.” From vol­ume 284.

    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.