Tag: media

TGFI Volume 531: Christianity improves longevity, plus some smart people who believe

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.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. More Than a Mag­ic Pill (Kathryn But­ler, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Church atten­dance reduces all-cause mor­tal­i­ty by near­ly 30 per­cent over a 15-year peri­od and pro­tects woman against sui­cide by 400 per­cent. Week­ly church­go­ing in women over 40 is as pro­tec­tive against death as annu­al mam­mo­grams, McLaugh­lin writes. Those attend­ing ser­vices more than week­ly at age 20 have ‘a rough­ly sev­en-year greater life expectan­cy than their nonchurch­go­ing peers.’ Church­go­ing pro­tects against alco­hol, smok­ing, and drug abuse and decreas­es the odds of depres­sion by one-third.”
    • I been sayin’ it. Preach!
  2. Alvin Planti­nga, God’s Philoso­pher (Daniel Sil­li­man, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “In the 1950s there was not a sin­gle pub­lished defense of reli­gious belief by a promi­nent philoso­pher,” said philoso­pher Kel­ly James Clark, one of Plantinga’s stu­dents. “By the 1990s there were lit­er­al­ly hun­dreds of books and arti­cles, from Yale to UCLA and from Oxford to Hei­del­berg, defend­ing and devel­op­ing the spir­i­tu­al dimen­sion. The dif­fer­ence between 1950 and 1990 is, quite sim­ply, Alvin Planti­nga.”
  3. The Mak­ing of an Elite: Japan­ese Chris­tians (Cremieux, Sub­stack): “It’s prob­a­bly sur­pris­ing to hear that 20% of the post-World War II Prime Min­is­ters of Japan before the new­ly-elect­ed Sanae Takaichi have been Chris­t­ian. Out of those 35 Prime Min­is­ters since 1945, Shigeru Yoshi­da and Tarō Asō were Catholic, and Tet­su Kataya­ma, Ichirō Hatoya­ma, Masayoshi ÅŒhi­ra, Shigeru Ishi­ba, and Yukio Hatoya­ma were var­i­ous fla­vors of Protes­tant. How this hap­pens in a coun­try that’s less than 1% Chris­t­ian and in which there’s sig­nif­i­cant anti-Chris­t­ian dis­crim­i­na­tion is per­plex­ing, but I think it makes sense giv­en how today’s Japan­ese Chris­tians came to be.”
    • Fas­ci­nat­ing read­ing. The role of the samu­rai was very unex­pect­ed to me!
  4. How Two Times Reporters Cov­er Chris­tian­i­ty in a Polar­ized Amer­i­ca (Patrick Healy, Eliz­a­beth Dias & Ruth Gra­ham, New York Times): “I think a lot about which details to include in a sto­ry, and how I’m describ­ing peo­ple and scenes. Part of fair­ness is not tak­ing cheap shots by sub­tly depict­ing one side as back­ward or unso­phis­ti­cat­ed, for exam­ple. I also try to bring peo­ple into as many hous­es of wor­ship as pos­si­ble. And I would define that expan­sive­ly, from tra­di­tion­al church ser­vices to prayer meet­ings to wor­ship ser­vices in the Trump White House.”
    • Unlocked. A real­ly well-done inter­view. I have gen­er­al­ly found Gra­ham and Dias to be fair and insight­ful. Most of the sto­ries involv­ing the NYT being tone-deaf to reli­gion have come about when jour­nal­ists who don’t cov­er the reli­gion beat try to drag reli­gion into their sto­ry with­out ful­ly under­stand­ing what they’re try­ing to describe.
  5. It Used to Be ‘Get Mar­ried.’ Now It’s ‘Stay Sin­gle.’ (Freya India, The Free Press): “I keep hear­ing about how there’s too much pres­sure to set­tle down. Appar­ent­ly every­one wants to know when you’re get­ting mar­ried, when you’re hav­ing kids.… My whole life I’ve only ever felt the oppo­site, an over­whelm­ing pres­sure to be sin­gle. In the sec­u­lar lib­er­al world I used to think there were no expec­ta­tions, no pres­sure. There is, though: The pres­sure today is to avoid any­thing that might stick, to run through life with­out get­ting snagged on any respon­si­bil­i­ties, with­out get­ting teth­ered to some­one else too ear­ly.… We don’t scru­ti­nize the 25-year-old who is still sin­gle but the one who set­tles down. In fact, this feels like the only life deci­sion left to dis­ap­prove of, the only one accept­able to judge. Want­i­ng to com­mit is the one desire that is dis­cour­aged, treat­ed with sus­pi­cion, the only thing in the mod­ern world we are ever told to delay.”
    • Relat­ed: Senior Scaries: Treat­ing dat­ing like the job mar­ket (Erin Ye, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “The last time I was on the phone with my mom, she told me that it was my own fault I didn’t have a boyfriend. ‘You need to start treat­ing dat­ing like it’s the job mar­ket: you’re not apply­ing to posi­tions, you’re not inter­view­ing, you’re not even doing things that you can add to your résumé,’ she said. ‘You just need to get out there. Think of it like get­ting an intern­ship. Don’t wor­ry about the return offer just yet!’ ”
  6. They Led at Sad­dle­back Church. ICE Said They Were Safe. (Andy Olsen, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The grow­ing abo­li­tion of dis­cre­tion, per­haps more than any oth­er aspect of the administration’s immi­gra­tion sup­pres­sion, will cause the deep­est pain for many fam­i­lies that pre­vi­ous­ly had lit­tle to fear. Indi­vid­u­als with­in the US immi­gra­tion edi­fice have long had some author­i­ty to exer­cise com­pas­sion in sit­u­a­tions where, in their judg­ment, the cost to soci­ety of a person’s removal might be high­er than the cost of non­re­moval. One could view such dis­cre­tion, as the Trump admin­is­tra­tion does, as a weak­ness. Or one could see dis­cre­tion as the car­di­nal qual­i­ty that sep­a­rates a human jus­tice sys­tem from a cold enforce­ment machine with all the sen­si­bil­i­ty of a red-light cam­era.”
    • A mov­ing sto­ry, told with all the messy details.
  7. Trump says Chris­tians are being per­se­cut­ed in Nige­ria. The real­i­ty is more com­pli­cat­ed (Chine­du Asadu, AP News): “Nigeria’s pop­u­la­tion of 220 mil­lion is split almost even­ly between Chris­tians, who live pre­dom­i­nant­ly in the south, and Mus­lims, most­ly in the north — where attacks have long been con­cen­trat­ed and where lev­els of illit­er­a­cy, pover­ty and hunger are among the country’s high­est. Nation­wide, Mus­lims con­sti­tute a slight major­i­ty. Experts and data from two non­par­ti­san sources — the U.S.-basedt and Coun­cil on For­eign Rela­tions — show Chris­tians are often tar­gets in a small per­cent­age of over­all attacks that appear to be moti­vat­ed by reli­gion, in some north­ern states. But the num­bers and ana­lysts also indi­cate that across the north, most vic­tims of over­all vio­lence are Mus­lims.”
    • I was skep­ti­cal of the head­line, but the arti­cle makes a good case for it. Hav­ing said that, the author has­n’t shown that there isn’t a prob­lem of reli­gious per­se­cu­tion in Nige­ria; the author has only shown that there is also a prob­lem of ram­pant law­less­ness.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • 6–7 in the Bible (Kristy Etheridge, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “News out­lets from The New York Times to The Indi­an Express have cov­ered the glob­al phe­nom­e­non that delights chil­dren, puz­zles grownups, and leaves school teach­ers 67 per­cent sure they should retire ear­ly.… a church in Char­lotte, North Car­oli­na, cre­at­ed an entire out­reach event around the infa­mous num­bers. Jonathan White is a pas­tor and direc­tor of children’s pro­gram­ming at Meck­len­burg Com­mu­ni­ty Church. When he deter­mined that the 6–7 trend wasn’t harm­ful and wasn’t going away, he wrote it into the church’s Novem­ber fam­i­ly night.”
  • Schol­ars Now Believe Num­ber Of The Beast Is Actu­al­ly 67 (Baby­lon Bee)
  • The Bat­man effect: The mere sight of the ‘super­hero’ can make us more altru­is­tic (Gaby Clark, Phys.org): “In the exper­i­men­tal con­di­tion, anoth­er exper­i­menter dressed as Bat­man entered the scene from anoth­er door of the train. Faced with this unex­pect­ed encounter, pas­sen­gers were sig­nif­i­cant­ly more like­ly to offer their seats: 67.21% of pas­sen­gers offered their seats in the pres­ence of Bat­man, or more than two out of three, com­pared to 37.66% in the con­trol exper­i­ment, or just over one out of three.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  • Mil­lions Con­vert To Chris­tian­i­ty After The­olo­gians Con­firm There Is No Microsoft Teams In Heav­en (Baby­lon Bee)

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 510: gambling, persecution, and free will

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. Online Sports Gam­bling and Col­lege Stu­dents: A Chris­t­ian Response to a Grow­ing Indus­try (Kim­ber­ley Reeve and Jared Pincin, Chris­t­ian High­er Edu­ca­tion): “Because the Bible does not offer direct guid­ance on the top­ic of gam­bling, Chris­t­ian denom­i­na­tions take dif­fer­ing posi­tions.… The com­mon thread across these tra­di­tions is that there is a point where gam­bling becomes moral­ly imper­mis­si­ble.”
    • Relat­ed: How to Rein in Run­away Sports Bet­ting (Lyman Stone, Sub­stack): “A good reg­u­la­to­ry response is sim­ple: ban all win lim­its. Let win­ners win. Bet­tors don’t like lim­its on win­nings. They are obvi­ous­ly unfair. They are also clear­ly a key source of prof­its for com­pa­nies.… Sec­ond­ly, there should be lim­its on how much an indi­vid­ual can lose on a web­site. Once an indi­vid­ual has lost a cer­tain amount of mon­ey, bet­ting web­sites should be required to shut down their account. The harms of gam­bling are dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly caused by big-losers, and gam­bling com­pa­nies can iden­ti­fy those big losers and pro­tect them. They don’t do this because they make mon­ey when losers lose.… So no lim­its for win­ning, lim­its for los­ing is a pret­ty rea­son­able reg­u­la­to­ry approach. Win­ners don’t threat­en seri­ous social harms. Losers do. Uncap­ping win­ners and pro­tect­ing losers will also dra­mat­i­cal­ly wors­en the bal­ance sheet of gam­bling sites, forc­ing them to charge high­er spreads on bets, which will deter many gam­blers.”
  2. As Chris­tians Are Slaugh­tered, the World Looks Away (Madeleine Kearns, The Free Press): “The world should have seen it com­ing. Since 2009, Islamists in north­ern Nige­ria have destroyed over 18,000 church­es and, through­out the coun­try, have mur­dered over 50,000 Chris­tians. A fur­ther 5 mil­lion Chris­tians have been dis­placed with­in the coun­try, accord­ing to a 2023 Vat­i­can report.… If West­ern media reports on the per­se­cu­tion at all, it typ­i­cal­ly char­ac­ter­izes it as land dis­putes between neigh­bor­ing eth­nic groups. For instance, after the atroc­i­ties at Yel­wa­ta, the BBC report­ed: ‘The author­i­ties have not blamed any group, but it is safe to assume that there are lots of vic­tims on both sides, as any attack usu­al­ly leads to revenge and then a cycle of vio­lence.’ But where is the evi­dence that Chris­tians are killing Fulani Mus­lims by the hun­dreds, shout­ing ‘Christ is king’ as they hack peo­ple of oth­er faiths to death?”
  3. Pen­te­costals Keep Grow­ing: What the Assem­blies of God’s 2024 Report Shows About the Spir­it-Filled Move­ment (Ed Stet­zer and Todd Kor­pi, Church­Lead­ers): “The AG in the Unit­ed States is a part of the World Assem­blies of God Fel­low­ship (WAGF), which togeth­er makes up one of the largest Protes­tant bod­ies on the plan­et with over 85 mil­lion adher­ents. The WAGF is now larg­er than the Angli­can com­mu­nion, which is often cit­ed as the third-largest Chris­t­ian tra­di­tion. Instead, the WAGF is itself now the third-largest Chris­t­ian denom­i­na­tion­al tra­di­tion.”
    • Ed Stet­zer is a professor/dean at the Tal­bot School of The­ol­o­gy, and Todd Kor­pi is a pro­fes­sor at Fuller The­o­log­i­cal Sem­i­nary. The Assem­blies of God is, of course, the spon­sor of Chi Alpha and the group with which I am ordained.
  4. When Women Are Rad­i­cal­ized (Claire Lehmann, The Dis­patch): “There is grow­ing aware­ness of how young men can be drawn into far-right extrem­ism or misog­y­nis­tic sub­cul­tures, but we in the media—and soci­ety more broadly—pay less atten­tion to how young women become drawn into polit­i­cal sub­cul­tures. Indeed, the terms ‘rad­i­cal­iza­tion’ and ‘women’ are rarely—if ever—seen togeth­er. This over­sight has con­se­quences, because radicalization—defined as rigid com­mit­ment to an ide­o­log­i­cal cause to the point where it dis­torts one’s world­view, harms men­tal health, under­mines rela­tion­ships, or dis­rupts functioning—is not a male-only phe­nom­e­non.”
  5. Solipsism»Determinism (Bryan Caplan, Sub­stack): “A large major­i­ty of my smartest friends insist that deter­min­ism is true. Physics text­books say so, basic log­ic (‘Every effect must have a cause’) says so, and they say so. Who am I to dis­agree? My answer begins with a tru­ism: The foun­da­tion of sci­ence is repeat­ed, care­ful obser­va­tion. If sci­en­tists are allowed to dis­miss piles of repeat­ed, care­ful obser­va­tions as ‘illu­sion,’ there is no sci­ence. Next step: I have a life­time of repeat­ed, care­ful obser­va­tion of my own mind. Via intro­spec­tion, I direct­ly observe myself mak­ing gen­uine choic­es in every wak­ing moment. There­fore: Any ‘sci­en­tif­ic’ the­o­ry that con­tra­dicts these obser­va­tions is, at best, incom­plete.”
  6. God and Woman at Cor­nell (Mary Eber­stadt, First Things): “Why does sec­u­lar­ism flour­ish on col­lege cam­pus­es? Ear­li­er today, some of us were talk­ing about the philoso­pher René Girard, who had an idea that sounds sim­ple, but isn’t: We fig­ure out what we desire by see­ing what oth­er peo­ple desire. That’s part of what hap­pens with stu­dents on cam­pus, and it’s why even those raised in a reli­gious home tend to become more secular—because they don’t see a lot of peo­ple like them­selves in a place like Cor­nell. The idea dawns, even sub­con­scious­ly, ‘Well, maybe there’s a rea­son why they all think dif­fer­ent­ly from me. After all, we’re in a very sophis­ti­cat­ed place with high­ly edu­cat­ed peo­ple, so maybe I should be like that.’ That’s the rel­a­tive­ly benign force that dri­ves peo­ple who were raised reli­gious toward sec­u­lar­ism. There is anoth­er force, more malev­o­lent: intim­i­da­tion, the chill­ing effect of being sur­round­ed by, or per­ceiv­ing one­self to be sur­round­ed by, peo­ple who think your belief sys­tem is ridicu­lous. There is also the fact that col­lege is famous­ly the place where a lot of young peo­ple break free from the con­strain­ing Judeo-Chris­t­ian rule­book about sex and mar­riage. These real­i­ties togeth­er con­spire to dri­ve col­lege kids away from faith.”
  7. Audi­ences Prove that Experts Are Dead Wrong (Ted Gioia, Sub­stack): “The rebirth of long­form runs counter to every­thing media experts are ped­dling. They are all try­ing to game the algo­rithm. But they’re mak­ing a huge mis­take. They believe that long­form is doomed. They see that dig­i­tal plat­forms reward ultra-short videos on an end­less scroll. And they under­stand that this works because the inter­face is extreme­ly addic­tive. So short must defeat long in the dig­i­tal mar­ket­place. That’s obvi­ous to them. But all the evi­dence now proves that this isn’t hap­pen­ing.”

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 459



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 the 459th instal­la­tion, a num­ber I find inter­est­ing sim­ply because 4 + 5 = 9.

I should prob­a­bly men­tion that I’m not shar­ing any arti­cles about last night’s pres­i­den­tial debate today because I want to wait and see how peo­ple are think­ing about the race after a few days. The reac­tions right now are too raw.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. A slap in the face for psy­chob­a­b­ble (Janan Ganesh, Finan­cial Times): “I can’t be the only for­eign­er in the US who has been chid­ed for not hav­ing a ther­a­pist by some­one who — choos­ing my words care­ful­ly here — seems to be get­ting uneven results from theirs. If psy­chob­a­b­ble were con­fined to actors going up to col­lect their big cer­tifi­cates, I’d leave it alone. But, like sand, it gets every­where.”
    • Old­er but gold.
  2. Rebels with a reli­gious cause: Meet New York’s avant-garde con­ser­v­a­tives (Leonar­do Bevilac­qua, Chris­t­ian Sci­ence Mon­i­tor): “Orig­i­nal­ly from Philadel­phia, Salomé has been a devout Catholic since she was young. She wears a ‘Make Amer­i­ca Great Again’ hat around town some­times as an act of iron­ic defi­ance. And even though she’s a trans­gen­der woman, she prefers the term of an ear­li­er age: cas­tra­to.  But first and fore­most, she says, she’s a child of God.”
    • Inter­est­ing and full of sur­pris­es.
  3. A Par­tial Expla­na­tion of Zoomer Girl Derange­ment (Zin­nia, Sub­stack): “Why are young women today so deranged? Because no one is hon­est with them and they can­not be hon­est with them­selves. Par­ents lie to you, teach­ers lie to you, friends lie to you, every­one lies to you. If any­one dares tell you the truth, they are ostra­cized. My teenage self could only find truth smug­gled away in the dark recess­es of obscure online com­mu­ni­ties; usu­al­ly couched in lay­ers of iron­ic (and sin­cere) big­otry. And while I did not enjoy the big­otry (at the time), I found val­ue in engag­ing with the trans­gres­sive mate­r­i­al I came across because I felt that it expressed truths oth­er­wise unavail­able to me. Today, truth lies with­in the domain of inter­net ghet­tos, siloed away from the rest of polite soci­ety. At best, what soci­ety tells you is entire­ly unhelp­ful: ‘You’re beau­ti­ful just the way you are.’ At worst, what soci­ety tells you is entire­ly destruc­tive: ‘If you feel alien­at­ed by your body, you should maybe con­sid­er a mas­tec­to­my.’ ”
    • A bit vul­gar in places, but inter­est­ing. Kin­da long.
  4. Elite mis­in­for­ma­tion is an under­rat­ed prob­lem (Matt Ygle­sias, Sub­stack): “…all this slop­py work and mis­lead­ing rhetoric is both more impact­ful than a lot of peo­ple real­ize, and also a lot less tac­ti­cal­ly savvy than those doing it think. The prob­lem is that it’s about a mil­lion times eas­i­er to per­suade a high­ly engaged mem­ber of your team of some­thing than it is to per­suade a swing vot­er (who is prob­a­bly skep­ti­cal, cyn­i­cal, and not that engaged with pol­i­tics) or a mem­ber of the oppo­si­tion (who instinc­tive­ly assumes you’re lying about every­thing). So when you put some­thing out there that’s false or mis­lead­ing, you’re about a mil­lion times more like­ly to con­fuse peo­ple who are friend­ly to your cause than to actu­al­ly per­suade any­one worth per­suad­ing.”
  5. It Is Time for Rad­i­cal Can­dor (Kevin D. Williamson, The Dis­patch): “It’s anoth­er lit­tle Bat­tle of Stal­in­grad: It’s a pity some­body has to win; all a decent per­son can do is pray for casu­al­ties.… Because we are gov­erned by imbe­ciles and thieves and mis­cre­ants and degen­er­ates and peo­ple who are will­ing to put up with all that imbe­cil­i­ty and thiev­ery and mis­cre­ance and degen­er­a­cy if it gets them even such a pathet­ic prize as a tem­po­rary seat in the U.S. House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives…”
  6. How (and How Not) to Wait (Mark Vroe­gop, Cross­way): “Focus. Adore. Seek. Trust. That’s how you wait on the Lord. It’s how you live on what’s true about God when you don’t know what’s true about your life.… Rather than allow­ing strong emo­tions to hold you hostage, you can embrace a strat­e­gy (FAST) that wel­comes God’s grace into your uncer­tain­ty.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  7. I feel awk­ward shar­ing this, but I was inter­viewed for a pod­cast. I did not choose the title (nor even the top­ic): Why I am NOT a Calvin­ist: Break­ing Down Every­thing from Calvin­ism, to Can We Lose Our Sal­va­tion (King­dom Come Pod­cast, YouTube): one hour long.

Less Serious Things Which Interested 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 437

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 the 437th com­pi­la­tion, and I was pleased to dis­cov­er that 437 is the prod­uct of 19 and 23, two of my favorite prime num­bers.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. A new glob­al gen­der divide is emerg­ing (John Burn-Mur­doch, Finan­cial Times): “Gen Z is two gen­er­a­tions, not one. In coun­tries on every con­ti­nent, an ide­o­log­i­cal gap has opened up between young men and women. Tens of mil­lions of peo­ple who occu­py the same cities, work­places, class­rooms and even homes no longer see eye-to-eye. In the US, Gallup data shows that after decades where the sex­es were each spread rough­ly equal­ly across lib­er­al and con­ser­v­a­tive world views, women aged 18 to 30 are now 30 per­cent­age points more lib­er­al than their male con­tem­po­raries.”
  2. Two com­pelling per­son­al sto­ries
    • The 2016 Elec­tion Sent Me Search­ing for Answers (Car­rie Sheffield, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Peo­ple laugh when I admit this, but my con­ver­sion to Chris­tian­i­ty result­ed from two pow­er­ful forces: sci­ence and Don­ald Trump. But before that jour­ney began, I need­ed dis­tance from extreme reli­gious trau­ma. I grew up with­in an off­shoot Mor­mon cult, liv­ing with sev­en bio­log­i­cal sib­lings in var­i­ous motor homes, tents, hous­es, and sheds. Besides time spent in home­school­ing, I attend­ed 17 dif­fer­ent pub­lic schools. When I took my ACT test, we lived in a shed with no run­ning water in the Ozarks.”
      • A remark­able tes­ti­mo­ny. Rec­om­mend­ed.
    • ‘I should be in prison or dead’: Cameron Black on his jour­ney from cult to cam­pus (Lau­ren Boles, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “Born into a cult led by his father, who pro­claimed him­self to be God, Black’s ear­ly life in Sedona, Ariz. was any­thing but ordi­nary. This famil­ial cult con­sist­ed of nine peo­ple and oper­at­ed under uncon­ven­tion­al reli­gious and sex­u­al prac­tices, deeply entan­gled in manip­u­la­tion and abuse, Black said. ‘Don’t try to make sense of it because it doesn’t make sense,” he said as he explained the cult’s phi­los­o­phy. “It’s like my father com­bined the Bible, sci-fi books and ‘The Matrix’ into one big ball of crazy.’ ”
      • Not Chris­t­ian but fas­ci­nat­ing.
  3. Every­thing You Ever Want­ed to Know About Church Atten­dance and Vot­ing for Trump (Ryan Burge, Sub­stack): “…look at Trump’s two elec­tions. Now, Cul­tur­al Evan­gel­i­cals rise in impor­tance. Three per­cent of all Trump vot­ers were nev­er attend­ing evan­gel­i­cals and anoth­er eight per­cent were sel­dom atten­ders. In both 2016 and 2020, 11% of the Trump coali­tion were Cul­tur­al Evan­gel­i­cals. It was just 6% in 2008, rep­re­sent­ing a near dou­bling [from McCain’s cam­paign]. Also note that 31% of all McCain vot­ers were week­ly attend­ing evan­gel­i­cals. For Rom­ney, this dropped to 28%. In 2016, it went even low­er to 25% of all Trump vot­ers. How­ev­er, this fig­ure rebound­ed in 2020 to 29% of all Trump vot­ers being week­ly attend­ing evan­gel­i­cals.”
  4. Vis­it­ing the Most Impor­tant Com­pa­ny in the World (Nicholas Kristof, New York Times): “…Tai­wan Semi­con­duc­tor Man­u­fac­tur­ing Com­pa­ny, or T.S.M.C., is the only cor­po­ra­tion I can think of in his­to­ry that could cause a glob­al depres­sion if it were forced to halt pro­duc­tion.”
    • What a stun­ning sen­tence.
  5. Is Gen­der Too Trou­bled? (Abi­gail Favale, Church Life Jour­nal): “Gen­der is not part of a per­son, con­tra the Gen­der Uni­corn, but rather encom­pass­es the whole per­son. Thus, gen­der includes one’s sexed bio­log­i­cal struc­ture, as well as the psy­cho­log­i­cal, spir­i­tu­al, and his­tor­i­cal­ly-sit­u­at­ed dimen­sions of human per­son­hood. What is arguably lost in the dichoto­my of sex and gen­der is the whole­ness, the com­plete­ness of the human per­son.… because gen­der can­not be sep­a­rat­ed from sex, in ordi­nary speech we can use these terms as syn­onyms. Yes: I am sug­gest­ing that we inten­tion­al­ly and enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly vio­late the taboo against con­flat­ing sex with gen­der, as a strat­e­gy of rein­te­gra­tion.”
    • The author is a pro­fes­sor of wom­en’s stud­ies at Notre Dame. If the excerpt is not clear, the author is advo­cat­ing that Chris­tians delib­er­ate­ly use gen­der and sex inter­change­ably as a way of resist­ing some of the non­sense in our cul­ture.
  6. What We Might Mean by “Lib­er­al Bias” (Fred­die deBoer, Sub­stack): “There’s no notion with­in Confessore’s piece that left crit­ics of DEI exist. I imag­ine he and the paper would cite space con­straints. But even accept­ing that expla­na­tion, the omis­sion is con­ve­nient for the NYT’s fun­da­men­tal finan­cial mod­el: it leaves the piece depict­ing a sim­plis­tic and pure­ly bina­ry con­trast of val­ues, where there are on one side the valiant Asso­ciate Vice Pres­i­dents of Stu­dent Expe­ri­ence and on the oth­er the wicked racism-per­pet­u­at­ing Repub­li­cans.”
    • A cri­tique of NYT bias from some­one on the social­ist left.
    • Some­what relat­ed: What Did Top Israeli War Offi­cials Real­ly Say About Gaza? (Yair Rosen­berg, The Atlantic): “In this per­ilous wartime envi­ron­ment, it is essen­tial to know who is say­ing what, and whether they have the author­i­ty to act on it. But while far too many right-wing mem­bers of Israel’s Par­lia­ment have expressed bor­der­line or straight­for­ward­ly geno­ci­dal sen­ti­ments dur­ing the Gaza con­flict, such state­ments attrib­uted to the three peo­ple mak­ing Israel’s actu­al mil­i­tary deci­sions, the vot­ing mem­bers of its war cabinet—Gallant, Netanyahu, and the for­mer oppo­si­tion law­mak­er Ben­ny Gantz—repeatedly turn out to be mis­tak­en or mis­rep­re­sent­ed.”
  7. Fol­low the Mon­ey to the After Par­ty (Megan Basham, First Things): “…dur­ing its ger­mi­na­tion phase, the project hit a road­block. Evan­gel­i­cal donors had lit­tle inter­est in fund­ing an explic­it­ly polit­i­cal Bible study. Thus, to get The After Par­ty off the ground, the trio (all fre­quent crit­ics of evan­gel­i­cals who vot­ed for Don­ald Trump) turned to ‘pre­dom­i­nant­ly pro­gres­sive’ ‘unbe­liev­ers.’ In fact, they turned to sec­u­lar left-wing foun­da­tions.… To offer a pol­i­tics cur­ricu­lum backed by the sec­u­lar left as the church’s solu­tion to idol­a­trous co-opta­tion by the right is like sug­gest­ing that a man who became obese eat­ing cake and ice cream will lose weight by gorg­ing on piz­za and pota­to chips. As a friend told me, ‘If you want the church to be less polit­i­cal, start by focus­ing less on pol­i­tics your­self.’?”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed to me by a stu­dent. Sto­ries like this make me sad. I’m remind­ed of 3 John 1:7–8, “For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accept­ing noth­ing from the Gen­tiles. There­fore we ought to sup­port peo­ple like these, that we may be fel­low work­ers for the truth.” (ESV)
    • To be clear, I don’t think that min­istries should always reject fund­ing from non-Chris­t­ian sources any more than Nehemi­ah should have refused sup­plies from the empire for rebuild­ing Jerusalem, I just think we should always do it with our eyes open and with trans­paren­cy about it. It’s risky.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

  • A Real Super­pow­er (Pearls Before Swine)
  • Despite Neg­a­tive Reviews, ‘Trump Vs. Biden’ Renewed For Sec­ond Sea­son (Baby­lon Bee)
  • You just met a beau­ti­ful girl at church (Matthew Pierce, Sub­stack): “Fel­las, it’s not easy to be a Chris­t­ian woman! Every time they choose what to wear, they have to nav­i­gate between fash­ion trends, puri­ty cul­ture, com­fort, and peer pres­sure! Val­i­date her feel­ings with gen­tle words of affir­ma­tion, such as ‘I can’t see even a lit­tle bit of your bosoms, which is good, because I bet they’re super nice,’ and then make, like, a motion of a rock­et launch­ing into out­er space and do the sound effects with your mouth, to show how your respect for her is going super high right now.”
    • This sub­stack is hit or miss, but this instal­la­tion is a sol­id hit.

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 432

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 432, a num­ber pleas­ant to look at because of the smooth­ly decreas­ing dig­its. Also, 432 = 4 · 33 · 22, which is kin­da cool.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Why Two Par­ents Are the Ulti­mate Priv­i­lege (Bari Weiss, Sub­stack): “Two par­ents com­bined have more resources than one. Two par­ents in a home bring in the earnings—or at least the earn­ings capac­i­ty—of two adults. And so, in a very straight­for­ward way, we see that kids grow­ing up in sin­gle-moth­er homes are five times more like­ly to live in pover­ty than kids grow­ing up in mar­ried par­ent homes. (Kids in sin­gle-father homes are three times as like­ly to live in pover­ty.) Some of that reflects the fact that peo­ple with low­er lev­els of edu­ca­tion or income are more like­ly to become sin­gle par­ents. But even if you com­pare across moms of the same edu­ca­tion group, you see that kids who grow up in a house­hold with two par­ents have house­hold incomes that are about twice as high. That means that those par­ents are pay­ing for things like a nicer house in a safe neigh­bor­hood with good school dis­tricts. But they also spend more time with their kids. We see that kids who grow up with mar­ried par­ents have more parental time invest­ed in them: read­ing to your kid, talk­ing to your kid, dri­ving your kids to activ­i­ties. If there are two par­ents in the house­hold, there’s just more time capac­i­ty.”
    • The inter­vie­wee, Melis­sa Kear­ney, is an econ­o­mist at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Mary­land.
    • This part near the end also caught my atten­tion: “You write that you would speak to your fel­low schol­ars about your plans for writ­ing this book, and they would say things along the lines of, ‘I tend to agree about all of this, but are you sure you want to be out there say­ing this pub­licly?’ How many areas of research, inquiry, and basic curios­i­ty about the most impor­tant things in our lives and cul­ture are third rail now? If it’s taboo to write a book say­ing two par­ents in a house are bet­ter mate­ri­al­ly than one, what else is off-lim­its, and what can we do to com­bat that?”
  2. Some links relat­ed to acad­e­mia, con­gres­sion­al tes­ti­mo­ny, and speech in gen­er­al:
    • You Could Not Pay Me Enough to Be a Col­lege Admin­is­tra­tor (Dan Drezn­er, Sub­stack): “Why are these hor­ri­ble, no-win posi­tions? Because the pri­ma­ry job of any col­lege dean or uni­ver­si­ty pres­i­dent is to deal with the most spoiled, enti­tled, pig-head­ed inter­est groups imag­in­able. First, there are the stu­dents…”
    • Free­dom of speech for uni­ver­si­ty staff? (Tyler Cowen, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “Free­dom of speech for uni­ver­si­ty staff is a hard­er ques­tion than for stu­dents or fac­ul­ty. Stu­dents will move on, and a lot of fac­ul­ty hate each oth­er any­way, and don’t have to work togeth­er very much. Plus the pro­tec­tion of tenure was (sup­pos­ed­ly?) designed to sup­port free­dom of speech and opin­ion, even ‘per­ceived to be offen­sive’ opin­ions. As for stu­dents, we want them to be exper­i­ment­ing with dif­fer­ent opin­ions in their youth, even if some of those opin­ions are bad or stu­pid. Staff in these regards are dif­fer­ent.”
    • What the Uni­ver­si­ty Pres­i­dents Got Right and Wrong About Anti­se­mit­ic Speech (David French, New York Times): “I’m a for­mer lit­i­ga­tor who spent much of my legal career bat­tling cen­sor­ship on col­lege cam­pus­es, and the thing that struck me about the pres­i­dents’ answers wasn’t their legal insuf­fi­cien­cy but rather their stun­ning hypocrisy. And it’s that hypocrisy, not the pres­i­dents’ under­stand­ing of the law, that has cre­at­ed a cam­pus cri­sis.”
    • Penn’s Lead­er­ship Resigns Amid Con­tro­ver­sies Over Anti­semitism (Stephanie Saul and Alan Blind­er, New York Times): “The pres­i­dent of the Uni­ver­si­ty of Penn­syl­va­nia, M. Eliz­a­beth Mag­ill, resigned on Sat­ur­day, four days after her tes­ti­mo­ny at a con­gres­sion­al hear­ing in which she seemed to evade the ques­tion of whether stu­dents who called for the geno­cide of Jews should be dis­ci­plined.… Ms. Mag­ill, a for­mer Stan­ford Law School dean and Uni­ver­si­ty of Vir­ginia provost, had come to the uni­ver­si­ty as part of a wave of women to lead Ivy League col­leges.”
  3. Some reflec­tions on the war between Israel and Hamas:
    • Who’s a ‘Col­o­niz­er’? How an Old Word Became a New Weapon (Roger Cohen, New York Times): “The clash over pur­port­ed Israeli colo­nial­ism is part of some­thing larg­er, a pro­found move­ment in people’s minds. The Pales­tin­ian nation­al strug­gle has become the cause of the jus­tice-seek­ing dis­pos­sessed through­out the world. At the same time, the quest of the Jews to find refuge in a nation­al home­land as the only answer to being the peren­ni­al out­cast has become a bat­tle to demon­strate that, far from being colo­nial­ist, Israel is a diverse nation large­ly formed by a gath­er­ing-in of the per­se­cut­ed.”
      • Cov­ers a lot of ground, broad­ly help­ful.
    • What Jus­tice Requires in Gaza (Jack Omer-Jacka­man, Per­sua­sion): “How much injus­tice can a war con­tain before it is no longer a just war? His­to­ry is cer­tain­ly replete with wars we con­sid­er just on the whole, but which were lit­tered with gross vio­la­tions of human rights and decen­cy. What was true on Octo­ber 7th is true today: Hamas is a mass-rap­ing, civil­ian-slaugh­ter­ing, baby-kid­nap­ping evil, whose defeat should be sup­port­ed by all friends of Israel and all friends of Pales­tine. But I can­not be silent when my own rea­son and my own heart con­clude that Gazan civil­ians are not being suf­fi­cient­ly pro­tect­ed. In the fail­ure of Israeli strikes to dis­tin­guish between civil­ian and ter­ror­ist, and in the ham­per­ing of human­i­tar­i­an aid efforts, too much of this war is being fought unjust­ly.”
  4. In 2024, the Ten­sion Between Macro­cul­ture and Micro­cul­ture Will Turn into War (Ted Gioia, Sub­stack): “The clash has reached some kind of bru­tal tip­ping point. I believe it’s about to turn into war. The fact that 2024 is an elec­tion year will esca­late the con­flict. Just wait and see. But even right now you can feel the ground shak­ing.… [alter­na­tive plat­forms are out­per­form­ing Hol­ly­wood.] This seems impos­si­ble. A sin­gle indi­vid­ual liv­ing in Greenville, North Car­oli­na defeats enor­mous glob­al busi­ness­es with tens of thou­sands of employ­ees and decades of experience—and does it repeat­ed­ly every month. But that’s exact­ly what’s hap­pen­ing.”
    • Fas­ci­nat­ing stats in here.
    • Relat­ed (at least to me): When the New York Times lost its way (James Ben­net, The Econ­o­mist): “This is a bit of a para­dox. The new news­room ide­ol­o­gy seems ide­al­is­tic, yet it has grown from cyn­i­cal roots in acad­e­mia: from the idea that there is no such thing as objec­tive truth; that there is only nar­ra­tive, and that there­fore who­ev­er con­trols the nar­ra­tive – who­ev­er gets to tell the ver­sion of the sto­ry that the pub­lic hears – has the whip hand. What mat­ters, in oth­er words, is not truth and ideas in them­selves, but the pow­er to deter­mine both in the pub­lic mind. By con­trast, the old news­room ide­ol­o­gy seems cyn­i­cal on its sur­face. It used to bug me that my edi­tors at the Times assumed every word out of the mouth of any per­son in pow­er was a lie. And the pur­suit of objec­tiv­i­ty can seem rep­til­ian, even nihilis­tic, in its abju­ra­tion of a fixed posi­tion in moral con­tests. But the basis of that old news­room approach was ide­al­is­tic: the notion that pow­er ulti­mate­ly lies in truth and ideas, and that the cit­i­zens of a plu­ral­is­tic democ­ra­cy, not lead­ers of any sort, must be trust­ed to judge both.”
    • This one is very long but I found it com­pelling.
  5. Con­ser­v­a­tives are suing law firms over diver­si­ty efforts. It’s work­ing. (Julian Mark and Tay­lor Telford, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Ken­ji Yoshi­no, a law pro­fes­sor and direc­tor of the Meltzer Cen­ter for Diver­si­ty, Inclu­sion and Belong­ing at New York Uni­ver­si­ty, said tar­get­ing law firms is effec­tive because it can serve as a warn­ing to oth­er indus­tries. ‘If you sue a law firm, then the law firm gets up to speed very, very quick­ly on what is per­mis­si­ble and what’s imper­mis­si­ble,’ Yoshi­no said, not­ing that many law firms advise For­tune 500 com­pa­nies, gov­ern­ment agen­cies and non­prof­its. ‘It’s a way of get­ting the mes­sage out about peo­ple need­ing to flip over their poli­cies in a wide vari­ety of domains — not just fel­low­ships, but hir­ing, recruit­ing retreats and the like.’”
    • Inter­est­ing. I don’t remem­ber hav­ing seen this strat­e­gy (sue law firms to bring about broad­er cul­tur­al change) used by either the left or the right before. Is it an inno­va­tion or am I just not remem­ber­ing some­thing in his­to­ry?
  6. How 1 in 4 Coun­tries Restrict Reli­gious Con­ver­sion (Jayson Casper, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The USCIRF report grouped the laws into four cat­e­gories. First, anti-pros­e­ly­tiz­ing laws restrict wit­ness­ing of one’s faith in 29 nations, includ­ing in Indone­sia, Israel, and Rus­sia. In Moroc­co, for exam­ple, it is ille­gal to cause a Mus­lim to ques­tion his or her reli­gion. The sec­ond cat­e­go­ry of inter­faith mar­riage is restrict­ed in 25 nations, includ­ing in Jor­dan, the Philip­pines, and Sin­ga­pore. In Qatar, for exam­ple, if a wife con­verts to Islam but the hus­band does not, a judge may annul their mar­riage. Iden­ti­fi­ca­tion doc­u­ment laws—the third category—in 7 nations restrict the right of an indi­vid­ual to for­mal­ly con­vert to anoth­er reli­gion, includ­ing in Iraq, Malaysia, and Turkey. Myan­mar, for exam­ple, requires con­verts to sub­mit an appli­ca­tion and be sub­ject to ques­tion­ing about the gen­uine­ness of the con­ver­sion. And final­ly, apos­ta­sy laws in 7 nations make con­ver­sion ille­gal, includ­ing in Brunei, Mau­ri­ta­nia, and Sau­di Ara­bia. In Yemen, for exam­ple, the pun­ish­ment is death.”
  7. A Kore­an Sect Tar­get­ed New Zealand Chris­tians. Did Church­es Respond Effec­tive­ly? (Will­liam Chong, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Shin­cheon­ji instruc­tors even­tu­al­ly con­vinced their recruits that God per­mits lying if it is done for ‘God’s will.’ Before Josh’s ses­sions com­menced in Jan­u­ary 2019, his men­tor warned him to keep them a secret, point­ing to Abraham’s silence before head­ing out to sac­ri­fice Isaac in Gen­e­sis 22. Josh con­coct­ed a sto­ry about teach­ing pri­vate gui­tar lessons three morn­ings a week, a lie he told his par­ents, his girl­friend, and Stu­dent Life col­leagues. When church lead­ers and a cam­pus staff work­er con­front­ed Josh with evi­dence that he was attend­ing Shin­cheon­ji class­es, his Shin­cheon­ji instruc­tors gave him step-by-step instruc­tions on how to deny his involve­ment. They even gave Josh pre-writ­ten let­ters express­ing ‘inex­plic­a­ble hurt and con­fu­sion’ about his fam­i­ly and friends’ accu­sa­tions and claim­ing that he was no longer involved in Shin­cheon­ji activ­i­ties. Josh sent the let­ter to the church yet con­tin­ued his class­es, and in May 2019 he ‘passed over’ into the group.”
    • Relat­ed: Escap­ing High-Con­trol Reli­gious Groups (William Chong, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “[If a friend is in a cult,] try to main­tain the rela­tion­ship and com­mu­ni­ca­tion at all costs. Mak­ing direct state­ments like ‘You’re in a cult!’ or ‘You’re deceived!’ are not help­ful. Cult mem­bers have often been warned that ‘a man’s ene­mies will be the mem­bers of his own house­hold’ (Matt. 10:36), so to con­front their group will be to ful­fill prophe­cies giv­en to them by their lead­ers and fur­ther prove the group to be cor­rect. It’s impor­tant not to dri­ve them fur­ther into the group. Ask your­self what need the group is ful­fill­ing in your loved one’s life.”

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 427

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.

427 feels kin­da prime-ish, but it’s not. 427 = 61*7.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. ‘Gen­der-Affirm­ing Care Is Dan­ger­ous. I Know Because I Helped Pio­neer It.’ (Riit­tak­ert­tu Kaltiala, The Free Press): “Soon after our hos­pi­tal began offer­ing hor­mon­al inter­ven­tions for these patients, we began to see that the mir­a­cle we had been promised was not hap­pen­ing. What we were see­ing was just the oppo­site. The young peo­ple we were treat­ing were not thriv­ing. Instead, their lives were dete­ri­o­rat­ing. We thought, what is this? Because there wasn’t a hint in stud­ies that this could hap­pen.”
  2. More Israel/Gaza per­spec­tives:
    • The Decol­o­niza­tion Nar­ra­tive Is Dan­ger­ous and False (Simon Sebag Mon­te­fiore, The Atlantic): “The decol­o­niza­tion nar­ra­tive… holds that Israel is an ‘impe­ri­al­ist-colo­nial­ist’ force, that Israelis are ‘set­tler-colo­nial­ists,’ and that Pales­tini­ans have a right to elim­i­nate their oppres­sors. (On Octo­ber 7, we all learned what that meant.) It casts Israelis as ‘white’ or ‘white-adja­cent’ and Pales­tini­ans as ‘peo­ple of col­or.’ This ide­ol­o­gy, pow­er­ful in the acad­e­my but long over­due for seri­ous chal­lenge, is a tox­ic, his­tor­i­cal­ly non­sen­si­cal mix of Marx­ist the­o­ry, Sovi­et pro­pa­gan­da, and tra­di­tion­al anti-Semi­tism from the Mid­dle Ages and the 19th cen­tu­ry. But its cur­rent engine is the new iden­ti­ty analy­sis, which sees his­to­ry through a con­cept of race that derives from the Amer­i­can expe­ri­ence.”
      • Long but good. The author, who is Jew­ish, is well-known for his his­to­ry books (per­haps the best way to describe him is as a non-aca­d­e­m­ic his­to­ri­an).
    • Whose Geno­cide Is It Any­way? (Zachary R. Gold­smith, Quil­lette): “Since the year 2000, the pop­u­la­tion of Gaza has near­ly dou­bled; it boasts the 39th high­est birthrate among the world’s coun­tries, and the aver­age life expectan­cy is near­ly 76 years of age (the aver­age life expectan­cy in the US is just over 77 years of age). If Israel is intent on com­mit­ting geno­cide in Gaza, it is doing a very poor job.… Since the Mid­dle Ages, Jews have been accused of mur­der­ing chil­dren and using their blood for rit­u­al pur­pos­es. This blood libel lives on today in a new form, as the Jews of the state of Israel are accused of pur­pose­ful­ly killing chil­dren in a cam­paign of geno­cide.”
    • Hamas’ Bid for Rev­o­lu­tion­ary Legit­i­ma­cy (Damir Maru­sic, Sub­stack): “…for rev­o­lu­tion­ary move­ments, vio­lence is a polit­i­cal act. Like any num­ber of rev­o­lu­tion­ary move­ments, Hamas knew exact­ly what it was doing. But in my ini­tial read of its cyn­i­cal cal­cu­la­tion, I didn’t give them their due. They weren’t mere­ly try­ing to tor­pe­do a deal that could be their undo­ing. They were mak­ing a bid for full polit­i­cal legit­i­ma­cy among Pales­tini­ans.”
      • The author is an edi­tor at the Wash­ing­ton Post.
    • Stop help­ing Hamas win its dis­in­for­ma­tion war (Sam Wineb­urg, Times of Israel): “Along with my col­leagues at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty, I have spent the last sev­en years study­ing how peo­ple learn to make bet­ter deci­sions about what to believe online.… Here are four guide­lines for see­ing through the fog and stay­ing sane in the midst of this cur­rent infor­ma­tion war.”
      • The author is an emer­i­tus pro­fes­sor of edu­ca­tion at Stan­ford.
    • What Hap­pens When There Aren’t Enough Jews to Lynch? (Avi­tal Chizhik-Gold­schmidt, The Free Press): “…a flight from Tel Aviv was land­ing on Sun­day evening at the air­port in the city of Makhachkala. Hun­dreds of peo­ple stormed the air­port to greet that flight—of 45 pas­sen­gers, 15 were Israeli, many of them chil­dren. ‘Allahu Akbar,’ they shout in videos that have emerged online, some men wav­ing Pales­tin­ian flags. On the tar­mac, they attack an air­port employ­ee, who des­per­ate­ly explains: ‘There are no pas­sen­gers here any­more,’ and then exclaims, ‘I am Mus­lim!’ Some of the riot­ers demand­ed to exam­ine the pass­ports of arriv­ing pas­sen­gers, seem­ing­ly try­ing to iden­ti­fy those who were Israeli, and oth­ers searched cars as they were leav­ing. Anoth­er video emerged of two young boys at the air­port, proud­ly declar­ing that they came to ‘kill Jews’ with knives.”
      • Anti­semitism is surg­ing glob­al­ly and it is ter­ri­fy­ing to watch.
    • The Israel-Hamas War Will Reshape West­ern Pol­i­tics (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “These [decades-old Amer­i­can] group­ings still exist — evan­gel­i­cals are still very pro-Israel, the Demo­c­ra­t­ic pres­i­dent is a Zion­ist lib­er­al, the pro­gres­sive move­ment is pro-Pales­tin­ian — but in the cur­rent cri­sis you can see a more com­plex align­ment tak­ing shape, with impli­ca­tions that extend beyond the Israeli-Pales­tin­ian ques­tion alone.”
  3. Just the Facts on ‘Geofenc­ing’ (Mag­gie Mac­Far­land Phillips, Real Clear Pol­i­cy): “Data bro­kers, includ­ing Safe­Graph, insist that their infor­ma­tion is anonymized. But it is pre­cise­ly the lack of speci­fici­ty that wor­ries crit­ics. ‘There’s no par­tic­u­lar indi­vid­ual who the gov­ern­ment is sus­pi­cious of,’ Adam Schwartz of the Elec­tron­ic Fron­tier Foun­da­tion, told Real­Clear­In­ves­ti­ga­tions. ‘It’s a drag­net.’ More­over, there is no guar­an­tee that the data col­lect­ed through geofenc­ing stays anony­mous. ‘It is often very easy to take sup­pos­ed­ly de-iden­ti­fied data and re-iden­ti­fy a per­son,’ said Schwartz, ‘And it’s very, very easy to do that with loca­tion data.’”
  4. Movies, Moral Revul­sion, and a Post-Chris­t­ian Age (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “It seems to me that the idea that you can elic­it moral revul­sion mere­ly by depict­ing evil assumes two things. First, it assumes that the realm of the visu­al can be manip­u­lat­ed to bypass tit­il­la­tion and pro­ceed straight to con­dem­na­tion. Sec­ond, it assumes an audi­ence who pos­sess a moral imag­i­na­tion that would both moti­vate and equip them to do this. The first assump­tion could be false. The sec­ond assump­tion absolute­ly is. Sec­u­lar soci­ety, aid­ed by the litur­gi­cal effect of the Inter­net and the porno­graph­ic nature of the Web, has long been feed­ing itself on images of the moral­ly out­ra­geous.”
    • Chris­tians were famous­ly hos­tile towards mass enter­tain­ment a few decades ago. The next gen­er­a­tion of evan­gel­i­cals rebelled against that and too often became uncrit­i­cal­ly accept­ing of all forms of enter­tain­ment. We need to get to place of reject­ing what needs to be reject­ed and allow­ing free­dom oth­er­wise. There are shows you should not watch and songs you should not jam out to. And you should be will­ing to tell peo­ple why, “Yeah, I did­n’t watch Game of Thrones once I real­ized how porno­graph­ic it was.” Or in a paper about a film you had to watch for a class, “The direc­tor made a mis­take includ­ing [what­ev­er it is]: it does­n’t advance the plot or enhance the theme. It actu­al­ly under­mines the pur­pose of the work and seems to have been includ­ed most­ly to appeal to a cer­tain intel­lec­tu­al demo­graph­ic, there­by mak­ing the film’s mes­sage need­less­ly inac­ces­si­ble to those not already pre­dis­posed to agree with it.”

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

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 425

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 425, the sum of 3 con­sec­u­tive primes. 425 = 137 + 139 + 149

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. I’m going to start today’s roundup off with an expla­na­tion of why this email is the way it is. First read this brief arti­cle by Nate Sil­ver: It’s easy to screw up on break­ing news. But you have to admit when you do. (Nate Sil­ver, Sub­stack): “This morn­ing, Gallup pub­lished its annu­al poll on trust in the media. Over­all, only 32 per­cent of Amer­i­cans say they trust the mass media ‘a great deal’ or ‘a fair amount’ to ‘report the news ful­ly, accu­rate­ly and fair­ly’ — tied with 2016 for a record low. ”
    • Sil­ver’s arti­cle made me reflect on how I think about mod­ern jour­nal­ism and then made me want to explain it. First, I do believe jour­nal­ists try to get things right. Places like the NYT and the Wash­ing­ton Post rarely pub­lish false infor­ma­tion and gen­er­al­ly cor­rect false­hoods when they become aware of them. The more spe­cif­ic a claim is the more like­ly it is to be true.
    • Jour­nal­ists do, how­ev­er, fre­quent­ly fail to report true infor­ma­tion they are not inter­est­ed in or excit­ed about. This is rarely a con­scious choice — it’s just a byprod­uct of the way they think about real­i­ty. This comes up espe­cial­ly on so-called “cul­ture war” issues. Many top-notch reporters are simul­ta­ne­ous­ly unaware of and strange­ly incu­ri­ous about many of the facts and sto­ries around trans­gen­derism, mar­riage, reli­gious lib­er­ty, and so on.
    • In fact, news­rooms are so ide­o­log­i­cal­ly mono­cul­tur­al that there are often mas­sive holes in what is report­ed. Not only are reporters blind to incon­ve­nient facts, they are often blind to entire sto­ries and trends. An excel­lent his­tor­i­cal exam­ple of this is when­ev­er the 60s and 70s are remem­bered. Amer­i­ca legit expe­ri­enced a Great Awak­en­ing (the Jesus Peo­ple move­ment) that hap­pened in par­al­lel with the Sex­u­al Rev­o­lu­tion. We only ever talk about the sec­ond not because reporters/commentators are sup­press­ing knowl­edge of the Jesus Peo­ple but because they gen­uine­ly are not even aware that they exist­ed or that what hap­pened then is still shap­ing our cul­ture today.
    • And so when I want a fact, I turn to some­place like the NYT, WaPo, WSJ, Reuters or to a cred­i­ble expert who writes direct­ly to the pub­lic (Ryan Burge is a good exam­ple of this). But when I want an analy­sis, I look for cred­i­ble, sane voic­es both with­in and with­out the con­fines of the media estab­lish­ment. I fre­quent­ly look to places like Sub­stack or niche web­sites like Mere Ortho­doxy or to main­stream media com­men­ta­tors like Ross Douthat or David French or Megan McAr­dle who have a track record of syn­the­siz­ing infor­ma­tion accu­rate­ly and form­ing opin­ions wise­ly.
    • And when I’m read­ing some­thing, I often ask, “Does this per­spec­tive seem plau­si­ble in light of my expe­ri­ence?” Espe­cial­ly when it is a claim about evan­gel­i­cal­ism or charismatic/Pentecostal Chris­tian­i­ty — I like­ly know more about that world than 98% of the staff of the New York Times (and after read­ing some arti­cles I think I know more about it than all their staff put togeth­er). Some­times they take an odd­ball church or reli­gious leader and put their sto­ry for­ward as rep­re­sen­ta­tive when it is not at all.
    • Any­way, there is prob­a­bly a lot more to say about mod­ern media, but what I just said is pret­ty much why this week­ly update fea­tures the mix of con­tent that it does: main­stream media sources for facts and a diverse array of experts for analy­sis, all fil­tered through evan­gel­i­cal sen­si­bil­i­ties.
    • A relat­ed thought on news con­sump­tion: peri­od­ic­i­ty (Alan Jacobs, per­son­al blog): “The more unsta­ble a sit­u­a­tion is, the more rapid­ly it changes, the less valu­able minute-by-minute report­ing is. I don’t know what hap­pened to the hos­pi­tal in Gaza, but if I wait until the next issue of the Econ­o­mist shows up I will be bet­ter informed about it than peo­ple who have been rage-refresh­ing their brows­er win­dows for the past sev­er­al days, and I will have suf­fered con­sid­er­ably less emo­tion­al stress.… If you’re read­ing the news sev­er­al times a day, you’re not being informed, you’re being stim­u­lat­ed.”
  2. Mov­ing on, here are some arti­cles that give con­text for the Israel war on Hamas:
    • Pales­tin­ian right of return mat­ters (Matt Ygle­sias, Sub­stack): “Because it seems to me that what­ev­er you per­son­al­ly think about [the Pales­tin­ian right of return], it is absolute­ly cen­tral to how the Arab world and dias­po­ra Jews and sec­u­lar Israelis all view the con­flict. Which in turn means that it’s cen­tral to the col­lapse of the Two-State Solu­tion as a polit­i­cal con­struct and to the col­lapse of the peace camp in Israeli pol­i­tics that might have been inclined make a deal that was favor­able to Pales­tin­ian inter­ests. There is, in fact, a whole school of thought asso­ci­at­ed with Bill Clin­ton and Amer­i­can nego­tia­tor Den­nis Ross that holds the right of return almost sin­gle-hand­ed­ly respon­si­ble for scut­tling the Camp David talks and pre­vent­ing the emer­gence of an inde­pen­dent Pales­tine. Of course, many oth­er well-informed peo­ple deny that’s the case or believe it’s an over­sim­pli­fi­ca­tion. But even if you think it is fac­tu­al­ly incor­rect to say the res­o­lu­tion of this con­flict hinges on the right of return, its cen­tral­i­ty to so many of the nar­ra­tives around this issue makes it an impor­tant con­cept to under­stand.”
    • The For­got­ten His­to­ry of the Term “Pales­tine” (Dou­glas J. Fei­th, Mosa­ic): “The term ‘Pales­tine’ was used for mil­len­nia with­out a pre­cise geo­graph­ic def­i­n­i­tion. That’s not uncommon—think of ‘Tran­scau­ca­sus’ or ‘Mid­west.’ No pre­cise def­i­n­i­tion exist­ed for Pales­tine because none was required. Since the Roman era, the name lacked polit­i­cal sig­nif­i­cance. No nation ever had that name.”
      • This is from back in 2021. Super inter­est­ing stuff.
    • Hamas does not yet under­stand the depth of Israeli resolve (Haviv Ret­tig Gur, Times of Israel): “That ene­my is not the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple, of course, even though sup­port for ter­ror attacks is wide­spread among Pales­tini­ans. The ene­my is not exact­ly Hamas either, though Hamas is part of it. The ene­my is the Pales­tin­ian the­o­ry of Israelis that makes the vio­lence seen on Octo­ber 7 seem to many of them a ratio­nal step on the road to lib­er­a­tion rather than, as Israelis judge it, yet anoth­er in a long string of self-inflict­ed dis­as­ters for the Pales­tin­ian cause.… A tragedy is about to unfold in Gaza made worse by the long learn­ing curve it will take for Hamas to grasp the depth of Israeli resolve. It has robbed Israel of any oth­er inter­est but its destruc­tion. In the Israeli mind, any bru­tal­i­ty Hamas can com­mit it will com­mit. And so it can­not be allowed to ever com­mit any act ever again.”
  3. Some Chris­t­ian per­spec­tives
    • Anti­se­mit­ic Vio­lence and Its Shame­ful Defense (Mike Cosper, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “To be hor­ri­fied by the slaugh­ter of Israeli inno­cents doesn’t require deny­ing the suf­fer­ing of the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple. And car­ing for Pales­tin­ian inno­cents doesn’t require being cold or numb to the hor­rors of anti­semitism and Hamas. We can con­demn Hamas while demand­ing account­abil­i­ty from Israeli lead­ers who have foment­ed vio­lence, ele­vat­ed right-wing extrem­ists, and excused vio­la­tions of inter­na­tion­al law. Indeed, Chris­tians should be marked by our will­ing­ness to oppose all injus­tice and to care for Israeli and Pales­tin­ian vic­tims alike. And while that includes under­stand­ing that Pales­tini­ans have suf­fered great injus­tices from the gov­ern­ment of Israel—as well as neigh­bor­ing states of Egypt, Jor­dan, Iran, Lebanon, Syr­ia, and Sau­di Ara­bia, as well as Hamas and the Pales­tin­ian Author­i­ty itself—it must also include active rejec­tion of anti­semitism.”
    • With­er the Poi­so­nous Plant of Hamas (Tamir Khouri, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “In this envi­ron­ment of hatred, racism, and vio­lence, Hamas has exploit­ed young peo­ple with false promis­es. With no hori­zon of hope, Hamas’s adher­ents in Pales­tine sank into dark­ness and helped Hamas vic­tim­ize Israelis too. But it does not have to be this way. As Chris­tians, we believe in the pow­er of redemp­tion. With real hope for the future of this land, these hate­ful move­ments will with­er. For a last­ing peace, we must respect the image of God in Israelis and Pales­tini­ans alike. Is it too much to ask that we don’t see this as a zero-sum game? Shouldn’t both Israelis and Pales­tini­ans live in the dig­ni­ty God intend­ed for us?”
      • The pseu­do­ny­mous author is a Pales­tin­ian Chris­t­ian who is an Israeli cit­i­zen.
  4. Some arti­cles about mod­ern acad­e­mia:
    • Why Big Mon­ey Can’t Eas­i­ly Change Cam­pus Pol­i­tics (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “…donors should find ways to give mon­ey to the actu­al stu­dents — through the Hil­lel or oth­er Jew­ish or Israeli stu­dent groups if you’re espe­cial­ly con­cerned with the Jew­ish place on cam­pus, but more gen­er­al­ly through polit­i­cal or reli­gious groups that promise to work against the school’s dom­i­nant assump­tions, or through stu­dent asso­ci­a­tions that seem to fos­ter free debate, or through cam­pus-adja­cent insti­tu­tions that serve stu­dents but are inde­pen­dent of the schools. But not with the goal of using such stu­dent groups as a means of con­flict with the admin­is­tra­tion or the fac­ul­ty. Rather, with the goal that such groups can become micro­cosms of the uni­ver­si­ty you loved once and fear no longer exists, cells in a body yet to be restored, whose health and flour­ish­ing with­in the large world of Penn or Har­vard or wher­ev­er is an end unto itself.”
      • Ross Douthat speaks noth­ing but truth through­out this essay. If you know any gazil­lion­aires who want to influ­ence the tra­jec­to­ries of elite uni­ver­si­ties have them read this essay and then tell them about Chi Alpha. Men­tion we’d like a build­ing near cam­pus.
    • The War Comes to Stan­ford (Pamela Paul, New York Times): “Alma Andi­no, a Jew­ish senior at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty, spent the day of Hamas’s attacks against Israel cry­ing and dis­traught. Like many Jews around the coun­try, much of the week­end passed on the phone with fam­i­ly mem­bers, fear­ing for the safe­ty of friends and extend­ed fam­i­ly in Israel. Andino’s fel­low stu­dents in Colum­bae, the social jus­tice and anti­war res­i­den­tial house where she is a res­i­den­tial assis­tant, held her through her pan­ic attacks. ‘I felt so pow­er­less,’ she recalled when we spoke this week. On Mon­day, a friend asked if she’d seen the ban­ner some of her house­mates were prepar­ing to hang on the front of Colum­bae, the house she con­sid­ered to be her com­mu­ni­ty and her home. The sheet bore the slo­gan ‘Zion­ism is geno­cide’ in red let­ters, styled to look as if they were drip­ping with blood.… For Alma Andi­no, events on cam­pus have already reached a break­ing point. After beg­ging her house­mates not to hang the ban­ner, she said the group debat­ed for hours, with the impli­ca­tion they would desist only if a suit­able jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for Israel’s exis­tence could be giv­en. They told her they felt that as stu­dent activists, they need­ed to dis­play a mes­sage that would put them on the right side of his­to­ry. We should be advo­cat­ing for mar­gin­al­ized com­mu­ni­ties, they said. ‘Except for Jews?’ Alma replied. The group scoffed.”
    • What Con­ser­v­a­tives Mis­un­der­stand About Rad­i­cal­ism at Uni­ver­si­ties (Tyler Austin Harp­er, The Atlantic): “The ten­sion burst­ing into view right now—between a major­i­ty of schol­ars, for whom ‘decol­o­niza­tion’ means putting few­er white Euro­peans on their syl­labi, and a small minor­i­ty who believe it entails any­thing-goes vio­lent revolution—is the unwel­come and unsur­pris­ing result of uni­ver­si­ties want­i­ng to cos­play rebel­lion while still churn­ing out Wall Street–executive alum­ni who will one day pad endow­ments that are larg­er than Israel’s annu­al defense bud­get.”
      • The title makes this sound more par­ti­san than it is. 100% worth a read and pon­der.
    • Stu­dents for Pogroms in Israel (Conor Frieder­s­dorf, The Atlantic): “Look­ing back on the Man­son killings, Joan Did­ion wrote, ‘Many peo­ple I know in Los Ange­les believe that the Six­ties end­ed abrupt­ly on August 9, 1969, end­ed at the exact moment when word of the mur­ders on Cielo Dri­ve trav­eled like brush­fire through the com­mu­ni­ty, and in a sense this is true. The ten­sion broke that day. The para­noia was ful­filled.’ A few peo­ple I know believe last Saturday’s attack on Israel and the respons­es from left­ist stu­dent groups mark the end of the ‘Great Awok­en­ing.’ Although it is too ear­ly to eval­u­ate the accu­ra­cy of that hypoth­e­sis, cam­pus pol­i­tics have cer­tain­ly trans­formed in recent days. Now we are left won­der­ing whether what comes next is bet­ter or worse than what pre­ced­ed it.”
      • He makes spe­cif­ic men­tion of Stan­ford at one point, although it is hard­ly his focus.
    • Moral con­tro­ver­sies and aca­d­e­m­ic pub­lic health: Notes on nav­i­gat­ing and sur­viv­ing aca­d­e­m­ic free­dom chal­lenges (Tyler Van­der­Weele, Glob­al Epi­demi­ol­o­gy): “I think that there needs to be more open dis­cus­sion in acad­e­mia, and in soci­ety, about these mat­ters. Most peo­ple, even those who are deeply con­cerned, seem very uneasy dis­cussing these issues, for fear of being attacked for sim­ply rais­ing them. Col­leagues at Har­vard, rang­ing from an expert in child devel­op­ment to a clin­i­cian pro­vid­ing men­tal health care for teenage girls, have told me that they are uncom­fort­able shar­ing their con­cerns on these mat­ters in many or most set­tings at Har­vard. An evo­lu­tion­ary biol­o­gist at Har­vard like­wise recent­ly came under attack because she explic­it­ly stat­ed that sex was bio­log­i­cal and bina­ry, even though she also not­ed that we can nev­er­the­less respect a per­son­’s gen­der iden­ti­ty. The attack was suf­fi­cient­ly severe, and the admin­is­tra­tion’s response suf­fi­cient­ly weak, that she even­tu­al­ly felt she had no choice but to resign. Rather than open dis­cus­sion, it seems we are often now rely­ing on anony­mous arti­cles, or brave, and sub­se­quent­ly vil­i­fied, authors and whis­tle-blow­ers to raise alter­na­tive view­points. One may strong­ly dis­agree with their posi­tions, but it is not unrea­son­able to raise the ques­tions.”
      • I removed hyper­linked foot­notes from this excerpt for read­abil­i­ty. This is worth read­ing as a mod­el of mature­ly and wise­ly respond­ing to aca­d­e­m­ic intol­er­ance. Not many schol­ars have com­port­ed them­selves with as much class as Van­der­Weele when their views came under attack. Also, I learned in this arti­cle that Van­der­Weele is Catholic. I had assumed he was an evan­gel­i­cal based on some­thing I heard else­where.
  5. Think­ing about the moral dimen­sions of the war
    • The Moral Ques­tions at the Heart of the Gaza War (David French, New York Times): “This is the prob­lem Israeli sol­diers and com­man­ders face. They must pro­tect their cit­i­zens from sav­agery. They must com­ply with the laws of war. And they must make a series of moral choic­es, under extreme duress, that can define them and their nation — all while they face a ter­ror­ist ene­my that appears to pos­sess no con­science at all.”
      • Worth read­ing. As I men­tioned when I shared French’s pre­vi­ous arti­cle, he is more qual­i­fied than any oth­er colum­nist I know to weigh in on this.
    • This Way for the Geno­cide, Ladies and Gen­tle­men (Chris Hedges, Scheer­Post): “I spent sev­en years report­ing on the con­flict, four of them as the Mid­dle East Bureau Chief of The New York Times. I stood over the bod­ies of Israeli vic­tims of bus bomb­ings in Jerusalem by Pales­tin­ian sui­cide-bombers. I saw rows of corpses, includ­ing chil­dren, in the cor­ri­dors in Dar Al-Shi­fa Hos­pi­tal in Gaza City. I watched Israeli sol­diers taunt small boys who in response threw rocks and were then cal­lous­ly shot in the Khan You­nis refugee camp. I shel­tered from bombs dropped by Israeli war­planes. I climbed over the rub­ble of demol­ished Pales­tin­ian homes and apart­ment blocks along the bor­der with Egypt. I inter­viewed the blood­ied and dazed sur­vivors. I heard the soul crush­ing wails of moth­ers keen­ing over the corpses of their chil­dren.… it is not Israel’s assault on Gaza I fear most. It is the com­plic­i­ty of an inter­na­tion­al com­mu­ni­ty that licens­es Israel’s geno­ci­dal slaugh­ter and accel­er­ates a cycle of vio­lence it may not be able to con­trol.”
      • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  6. Smart­phones Have Tur­bocharged the Dan­ger of Porn (Mary Har­ring­ton, Wall Street Jour­nal): “It should come as no sur­prise that the per­son­al­ized, tac­tile, portable smart­phone would be the dig­i­tal por­tal of choice for some­thing as inti­mate as porn con­sump­tion. But of the new com­pul­sive behav­iors enabled by smart­phones, few have as intense and imme­di­ate a reward cycle as porn—or as many far-reach­ing con­se­quences.”
  7. Is It Wrong to Cure Blind­ness? (Francesca Block, The Free Press): “The Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health, the $40 bil­lion-endowed fund­ing arm of the Depart­ment of Health and Human Ser­vices, recent­ly took a stand against ableism by propos­ing a change to its mis­sion state­ment, which promis­es to ‘enhance health, length­en life, and reduce ill­ness and dis­abil­i­ty.’ An advi­so­ry com­mit­tee with­in the NIH took issue with the phrase ‘reduce… dis­abil­i­ty,’ writ­ing in a 66-page report pub­lished last Decem­ber that it ‘could be inter­pret­ed as per­pet­u­at­ing ableist beliefs that dis­abled peo­ple are flawed and need to be ‘fixed.’ ”
    • There are legit insane per­spec­tives being nor­mal­ized in the world right now. Cur­ing blind­ness is an unequiv­o­cal good.

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 What The Media Gets Wrong About Israel (Mat­tie Fried­man, The Atlantic): “…one of the most impor­tant aspects of the media-sat­u­rat­ed con­flict between Jews and Arabs is also the least cov­ered: the press itself. The West­ern press has become less an observ­er of this con­flict than an actor in it, a role with con­se­quences for the mil­lions of peo­ple try­ing to com­pre­hend cur­rent events, includ­ing pol­i­cy­mak­ers who depend on jour­nal­is­tic accounts to under­stand a region where they con­sis­tent­ly seek, and fail, to pro­duc­tive­ly inter­vene.” This is an old arti­cle I share peri­od­i­cal­ly, I think I first shared it way back in my fifth Fri­day email. Help­ful in pars­ing media cov­er­age in the cur­rent war.

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 419

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 419, a twin prime num­ber (paired with 421).

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Cli­mate Change Paper Pub­lished (Patrick T Brown, The Free Press): “In the­o­ry, sci­en­tif­ic research should prize curios­i­ty, dis­pas­sion­ate objec­tiv­i­ty, and a com­mit­ment to uncov­er­ing the truth. Sure­ly those are the qual­i­ties that edi­tors of sci­en­tif­ic jour­nals should val­ue. In real­i­ty, though, the bias­es of the edi­tors (and the review­ers they call upon to eval­u­ate sub­mis­sions) exert a major influ­ence on the col­lec­tive out­put of entire fields. They select what gets pub­lished from a large pool of entries, and in doing so, they also shape how research is con­duct­ed more broad­ly. Savvy researchers tai­lor their stud­ies to max­i­mize the like­li­hood that their work is accept­ed. I know this because I am one of them.”
  2. Tex­ting With AI Jesus (Casey Chalk, First Things): “Text With Jesus rep­re­sents the age-old human vice of pride. Through our cre­ativ­i­ty and bril­liance, we seek to ascend to God’s lev­el, to be like him, and even to dic­tate terms to the divine. Or rather, the app is a dia­bol­i­cal inver­sion of this: Instead of being trans­formed into God’s image, we aim to make him into our own.”
  3. Bap­tized Bronze Age Per­vert (Bri­an Matt­son, Sub­stack): “So-called ‘Chris­t­ian Nation­al­ism’ is a renais­sance of 19th cen­tu­ry ‘blood and soil’ nation­al­ism with some ‘Chris­tiany’ lan­guage sprin­kled on top.… They are bap­tiz­ing the lan­guage, ethos, and ethics of a Niet­zschean pagan—a lit­er­al antichrist. An awful lot of ‘Chris­t­ian Nation­al­ism’ sounds to me like Bap­tized Bronze Age Per­vert. Per­verse, is right.”
  4. Who Has The Best Food? (Zvi Mow­showitz, Sub­stack): “It is a fun ques­tion going around the inter­net this past week, so here we go. In par­tic­u­lar, peo­ple focused on the ques­tion of France vs. Amer­i­ca. As one would expect, those on the French side think those on the Amer­i­can side are crazy, it is insult­ing to even con­sid­er this a ques­tion. Those on the Amer­i­can side like food.… What I love most about Amer­i­can food, and eat­ing in Amer­i­ca in gen­er­al, is that it is the oppo­site of the French mis­take of try­ing to impress you or waste your time. Amer­i­can food wants you to be hap­py, it wants to give you the expe­ri­ence you want and not hold back, it val­ues your time and it does not much care how it looks doing it.”
  5. Burn­ing Man is a cap­i­tal­ist lie (Mary Har­ring­ton, UnHerd): “Some­times described as an exper­i­ment in ‘rad­i­cal self-suf­fi­cien­cy’, Burn­ing Man is per­haps more accu­rate­ly an exper­i­ment in cre­at­ing a rad­i­cal post-scarci­ty soci­ety by hav­ing done all your shop­ping ahead of time.”
  6. How to actu­al­ly win back trust in news. (Isaac Saul, Tan­gle): “Now, there are a few things worth not­ing here. One is that a reporter who is lib­er­al is not defin­i­tive­ly a biased lib­er­al reporter. There are fair jour­nal­ists and there are hacks. I know a lot of jour­nal­ists with lib­er­al polit­i­cal beliefs who are hard­er on Democ­rats pre­cise­ly because they care about fair­ness and about how Democ­rats act. I know a lot of lib­er­al jour­nal­ists whose pol­i­tics you’d nev­er spot by read­ing their report­ing.…  This, in some ways, actu­al­ly cre­ates an unex­pect­ed imbal­ance in the media: Con­ser­v­a­tive jour­nal­ists and pun­dits, sens­ing that they are the minor­i­ty in the space, are far more reluc­tant to crit­i­cize ‘their side.’ Lib­er­al jour­nal­ists and pun­dits, under­stand­ing that they can ‘stick out’ or earn cred­it by being hard on both sides, are more will­ing to do so. It’s com­pli­cat­ed. Just because The New York Times is over­whelm­ing­ly made up of peo­ple who prob­a­bly vote for Democ­rats does­n’t mean that it’s always going to play nice with Demo­c­ra­t­ic politi­cians. My favorite exam­ple to cite is that it was The New York Times that broke the ‘Hillary emails’ sto­ry, which effec­tive­ly ruined her polit­i­cal career.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  7. The Misog­y­ny Myth (John Tier­ney, City Jour­nal): “Gen­der dis­par­i­ties gen­er­al­ly mat­ter only if they work against women. In com­put­ing its Glob­al Gen­der Gap, the much-quot­ed annu­al report, the World Eco­nom­ic Forum has explic­it­ly ignored male dis­ad­van­tages: if men fare worse on a par­tic­u­lar dimen­sion, a coun­try still gets a per­fect score for equal­i­ty on that mea­sure. Prod­ded by the fed­er­al Title IX law ban­ning sex­u­al dis­crim­i­na­tion in schools, edu­ca­tors have con­cen­trat­ed on elim­i­nat­ing dis­par­i­ties in ath­let­ics but not in oth­er extracur­ric­u­lar pro­grams, which most­ly skew female. The fact that there are now three female col­lege stu­dents for every two males is of no con­cern to the White House Gen­der Pol­i­cy Coun­cil. Its ‘Nation­al Strat­e­gy on Gen­der Equi­ty and Equal­i­ty’ doesn’t even men­tion boys’ strug­gles in school, instead focus­ing exclu­sive­ly on new ways to help female stu­dents get fur­ther ahead.”
    • Long, worth the read espe­cial­ly if you’re unfa­mil­iar with the argu­ments that mod­ern soci­ety is struc­tured to advan­tage women over men.
    • Relat­ed: How Then Should Men Live? (Mike Cosper, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The new social script for women is at once pur­pose­ful and lib­er­tar­i­an. Girls can do any­thing, as the slo­gan goes, including—if they want—pursuing a tra­di­tion­al mod­el of mar­riage and fam­i­ly. Mean­while, Reeves says, men have yet to find our new social script. The old role of bread­win­ner, pro­tec­tor, and spir­i­tu­al head of the house­hold isn’t mere­ly viewed as quaint; it’s often seen as pater­nal­is­tic or worse.”
    • I also believe this to be relat­ed: Sec­u­lar­iza­tion Begins at Home (Lyman Stone, The Insti­tute For Fam­i­ly Stud­ies): “By now, it should be clear that child­hood, includ­ing before age 13, is the key bat­tle­ground for reli­gious for­ma­tion, not adult­hood. By the time a child goes to col­lege, much of the reli­gious ques­tion has already been set­tled.… For par­ents to keep their kids in the faith, they must recap­ture their influ­ence. Shield chil­dren from school­ing envi­ron­ments that rel­e­gate faith to a sec­ond-class top­ic, deny access to unsu­per­vised online com­mu­ni­ties and pornog­ra­phy, and have dai­ly, par­ent-led activ­i­ties cen­tered on fam­i­ly sol­i­dar­i­ty around shared faith. Fam­i­lies that do these things still have extreme­ly high rates of suc­cess­ful reli­gious trans­mis­sion, but fam­i­lies who trust that chil­dren will ‘pick it up along the way’ fail to trans­mit their reli­gious beliefs, and sud­den­ly find to their great sur­prise that their 20-some­thing chil­dren cat­e­gor­i­cal­ly reject their faith.”

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 391

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 391, which is a prod­uct of two of my favorite prime num­bers. 391 = 17 * 23.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Facts Don’t Care About Your Heal­ings (Samuel D. James, Sub­stack): “His­tor­i­cal­ly, ‘jus­tice’ is about law. There’s an objec­tive given­ness to it that tran­scends per­son­al nar­ra­tive or expe­ri­ence, which helps to explain why jus­tice his­tor­i­cal­ly has been right-cod­ed. But this is no longer true. ‘Jus­tice’ is left-cod­ed because it has become nar­ra­ti­val. Jus­tice is what peo­ple talk about when they talk about their per­son­al expe­ri­ences. Jus­tice is the sub­text of peo­ple speak­ing their truth.”
    • This is an excep­tion­al­ly acute bit of cul­tur­al analy­sis. Rec­om­mend­ed for its core insight.
  2. Amer­i­ca’s Cul­ture Is Boom­ing. Real­ly. (Ted Goia, The Free Press): “Con­sid­er the fact that there are now 36 YouTube chan­nels with more than 50 mil­lion subscribers—each of these has far more reach than any record label or news­pa­per.… Can all this trans­form our cul­ture? The sim­ple fact is that it already has. And it will con­tin­ue to do so at an accel­er­at­ing rate.”
    • There are some shock­ing stats in here even if you already know the broad out­lines. Rec­om­mend­ed.
  3. The Bit­ter End of “Con­tent” (Fred­die deBoer, Sub­stack): “So long as adver­tis­ing is the dom­i­nant fund­ing source of the online world, any and every cre­ative plat­form will be a race to the bot­tom. Peo­ple will find ways to abuse the sys­tem to receive atten­tion and mon­ey based on noth­ing more than manip­u­la­tion.”
    • This essay is built around a real­ly impor­tant insight. It’s worth read­ing.
  4. More on Asbury. I find it inter­est­ing that the New York Times, CNN, and the Wash­ing­ton Post all pub­lished rel­a­tive­ly sol­id arti­cles about it.
    • ‘No Celebri­ties Except Jesus’: How Asbury Pro­tect­ed the Revival (Daniel Sil­li­man, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “By evening the crowd had grown to about 3,000, and the uni­ver­si­ty had to set up over­flow rooms. At the same time, an unco­or­di­nat­ed infra­struc­ture of sup­port began to appear. An Asbury stu­dent set up a table and start­ed hand­ing out tea and cof­fee. She said Jesus told her to. A woman in Indi­anapo­lis baked choco­late chip cook­ies for a full day and then drove down to give them away. A pro­fes­sor went and got cas­es of bot­tled water. Piz­za appeared, unbid­den, along with home­made pota­to soup, cake, a table of pro­tein bars, and what one vol­un­teer called ‘all the Chick-fil‑A.’ Some­one vol­un­teered to start orga­niz­ing hous­ing and put up signs with QR codes that peo­ple could scan to start the process of find­ing a place to sleep.”
      • I’ve unlocked the pay­wall for this one. Rec­om­mend­ed for the behind-the-scenes info. Also, the “all the Chick-fil‑A” line made me chuck­le.
    • ‘Wood­stock’ for Chris­tians: Revival Draws Thou­sands to Ken­tucky Town (Ruth Gra­ham, New York Times): “The uni­ver­si­ty esti­mates that the revival has drawn more than 50,000 peo­ple to Wilmore, a sleepy town of 6,000 peo­ple where the gro­cery store hosts a week­ly Bible study and police cars read ‘In God We Trust.’ Asbury was found­ed in 1890, and its roots are in the Methodist and Wes­leyan-Holi­ness tra­di­tion, which has a his­tor­i­cal empha­sis on trans­for­ma­tive move­ments of the Holy Spir­it.”
      • I have unlocked the pay­wall for this arti­cle. Includes details that are not in oth­er arti­cles I have read.
    • Why Stu­dents in Ken­tucky Have Been Pray­ing for 250 Hours (Olivia Rein­gold, The Free Press): “It all start­ed on Wednes­day, Feb­ru­ary 8, when Zach Meerkreebs, a vol­un­teer soc­cer coach who had addressed the stu­dent body only twice before, gave an impro­vised ser­mon about love.… In a final, kind of corny throw­away line, he said: ‘I pray that this sits on you guys like an itchy sweater, and you got­ta itch, you got­ta take care of it.’ Meerkreebs told me he was cer­tain that he had ‘total­ly whiffed’ the ser­mon, and imme­di­ate­ly got off stage and texted his wife, ‘Lat­est stinker. I’ll be home soon.’ ”
      • What a won­der­ful anec­dote.
    • A non­stop wor­ship gath­er­ing at a Ken­tucky school echoes an old Chris­t­ian tra­di­tion (AJ Will­ing­ham, CNN): “The Asbury Revival, as it has been called, has cap­tured the atten­tion and imag­i­na­tion of every pos­si­ble cir­cle in the expan­sive Venn dia­gram of Chris­tian­i­ty. Among their end­less debates are some ques­tions like­ly shared by those on the out­side, look­ing in at the com­mo­tion: What in the world is going on here? And what, exact­ly, is a Chris­t­ian revival?”
    • Opin­ion: What is Revival—and is it Hap­pen­ing at Asbury? (Craig Keen­er, The Roys Report): “Calvin­ists dom­i­nat­ed the First Great Awak­en­ing, the Hebrides Revival, and the West Tim­or Revival. Wes­leyans dom­i­nat­ed the Sec­ond Great Awak­en­ing, the Azusa Street Revival, and the 1950 and 1970 Asbury Revivals. Wit­ness­es from the West Tim­or Revival report­ed a sound like a rush­ing wind. Wit­ness­es from the revival at Pan­di­ta Ramabai’s orphan­age in India report­ed tongues of fire. Mirac­u­lous signs accom­pa­nied evan­ge­lism in the Shan­dong Revival. Why should an infi­nite God fit our box­es?”
      • Keen­er is an emi­nent New Tes­ta­ment schol­ar at Asbury Sem­i­nary (and, I might add, a grad­u­ate of my own sem­i­nary — AGTS).
    • Non­stop wor­ship ser­vice at a Ken­tucky col­lege is spread­ing through Tik­Tok (Amber Fer­gu­son, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Asbury Uni­ver­si­ty is no stranger to revivals but thanks to social media the lat­est gath­er­ing has sparked both nation­al and inter­na­tion­al atten­tion, attract­ing groups of stu­dents from at least 22 col­leges and uni­ver­si­ties to descend upon its cam­pus, and even gain­ing the sup­port of for­mer vice pres­i­dent Mike Pence, who tweet­ed his sup­port of the move­ment.”
      • Pence appar­ent­ly got saved while vis­it­ing Asbury years ago.
      • Also, the byline is sur­pris­ing. She’s not one of their reli­gion beat spe­cial­ists.
  5. Time to Think by Han­nah Barnes review – what went wrong at Gids? (Rachel Cooke, The Guardian): “Han­nah Barnes’s book about the rise and calami­tous fall of the Gen­der Iden­ti­ty Devel­op­ment Ser­vice for chil­dren (Gids), a nation­al­ly com­mis­sioned unit at the Tavi­s­tock and Port­man NHS Foun­da­tion Trust in north Lon­don, is the result of inten­sive work, car­ried out across sev­er­al years.… As Barnes makes per­fect­ly clear, this isn’t a cul­ture war sto­ry. This is a med­ical scan­dal, the full con­se­quences of which may only be under­stood in many years’ time.”
    • Not much new here if you’ve been fol­low­ing. But the info is becom­ing more and more wide­spread.
  6. Sell­ing a Pos­i­tive Cul­ture War Mes­sage (Richard Hana­nia, Sub­stack): “The high-sta­tus way to oppose wok­e­ness runs away from con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries, which are not only false and stu­pid, but have the added effect of por­tray­ing one’s oppo­nents as extreme­ly smart, suc­cess­ful, and com­pe­tent. High-sta­tus oppo­si­tion to wok­e­ness is not only bet­ter elec­toral­ly, but will bring high­er qual­i­ty indi­vid­u­als to the cause that will be will­ing and able to focus on mak­ing impor­tant pol­i­cy changes.”
    • Most­ly about pres­i­den­tial can­di­date Vivek Ramaswamy, but also about larg­er issues of pol­i­tics. Quite inter­est­ing.
  7. Do masks work? (Kate­lyn Jetelina & Kris­ten Pan­tha­gani, Sub­stack): “The sci­en­tif­ic ‘arc’ of mask dis­cov­ery is ongo­ing. Sci­ence is always evolv­ing. Do not let any­one con­vince you of a one word answer to the ques­tion: Do masks work? It depends.”

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 New Research Shows Reli­gious Lib­er­ty Dri­ves Human Flour­ish­ing – And Why This Mat­ters Now More Than Ever (Chris­tos Makridis, Real Clear Reli­gion): “…reli­gious lib­er­ty is an inte­gral pre­req­ui­site for demo­c­ra­t­ic gov­er­nance, aid­ing the process for civic engage­ment and women’s empow­er­ment and reduc­ing the poten­tial for pub­lic and polit­i­cal cor­rup­tion.” Chris­tos is an alum­nus of our min­istry. From vol­ume 270.

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 390

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 390, which is the num­ber of unique ways to sum up to 32 (in oth­er words, 32 has 390 dis­tinct par­ti­tions).

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Con­cern­ing Asbury:
    • Asbury Pro­fes­sor: We’re Wit­ness­ing a ‘Sur­pris­ing Work of God’ (Tom McCall, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “By Thurs­day evening, there was stand­ing room only. Stu­dents had begun to arrive from oth­er uni­ver­si­ties: the Uni­ver­si­ty of Ken­tucky, the Uni­ver­si­ty of the Cum­ber­lands, Pur­due Uni­ver­si­ty, Indi­ana Wes­leyan Uni­ver­si­ty, Ohio Chris­t­ian Uni­ver­si­ty, Tran­syl­va­nia Uni­ver­si­ty, Mid­way Uni­ver­si­ty, Lee Uni­ver­si­ty, George­town Col­lege, Mt. Ver­non Nazarene Uni­ver­si­ty, and many oth­ers.… In pre­vi­ous revivals, there has always been fruit that has blessed both the church and soci­ety. For instance, even sec­u­lar his­to­ri­ans acknowl­edge that the Sec­ond Great Awak­en­ing was piv­otal to bring­ing about the end of slav­ery in our coun­try. Like­wise, I look for­ward to see­ing what fruit God will bring from such a revival in our gen­er­a­tion.”
    • a quirky but pos­i­tive take on Asbury by Lyman Stone (Twit­ter)
    • Anoth­er inter­est­ing take by a PhD stu­dent at Asbury Sem­i­nary (Twit­ter)
    • A non­stop Ken­tucky prayer ‘revival’ is going viral on Tik­Tok, and peo­ple are trav­el­ing thou­sands of miles to take part (Jake Tray­lor, NBC News): “The set­up is sim­ple. No pro­jec­tor screens or high-tech inte­gra­tions, just wood­en sanc­tu­ary chairs filled with peo­ple, and an open altar call with an invi­ta­tion to prayer that still hasn’t end­ed. That equa­tion has been a pow­er­ful recipe on social media. On Tik­Tok and Insta­gram, videos hash­tagged ‘Asbury Revival’ are rack­ing up mil­lions of views. At the time this arti­cle was pub­lished, the hash­tag #asburyre­vival had 24.4 mil­lion views on Tik­Tok.”
    • The Revival at Asbury (Thomas Lyons, Sub­stack): “For what it’s worth, it’s my ini­tial eval­u­a­tion that this is the real deal. None of the hall­marks of man­u­fac­tured revival are present. And I’m not alone in this eval­u­a­tion. As Law­son Stone, an Old Tes­ta­ment Pro­fes­sor at Asbury The­o­log­i­cal Sem­i­nary, recent­ly stat­ed on social media, ‘The old saints know.’ Arguably more sig­nif­i­cant for the eval­u­a­tion of the revival’s authen­tic­i­ty than the opin­ions of revival schol­ars are the tes­ti­monies of the pri­or gen­er­a­tions who were present at sim­i­lar moves of God with­in the com­mu­ni­ty.”
    • The author is a schol­ar whose dis­ser­ta­tion focused on revivals.
  2. No Hookups, No ‘Talk­ing,’ and No Breakups: A Bet­ter Way to Date (Charles E. Stokes, Insti­tute for Fam­i­ly Stud­ies): “My wife and I have served as rela­tion­ship men­tors now for 10 years, and as a fam­i­ly schol­ar and pro­fes­sor, I’ve paid atten­tion to every nugget of wis­dom I could glean—not only from aca­d­e­mics but from many of my stu­dents. I have been able to craft a bet­ter approach to dat­ing that I believe improves the chances of suc­cess for sin­gles desir­ing a life­long monog­a­mous rela­tion­ship.”
    • The author is a soci­ol­o­gist at Sam­ford. I am delib­er­ate­ly not includ­ing his pro­posed solu­tion in the excerpt because it’s worth read­ing in full. If you read his sug­ges­tion out of con­text you’ll prob­a­bly form an opin­ion about it too quick­ly.
  3. ‘Hon­or­ing’ Your Father and Moth­er Isn’t Always Bib­li­cal (Karen Wong, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “But does the Chi­nese under­stand­ing of fil­ial piety real­ly mean exact­ly the same as the bib­li­cal descrip­tion of hon­or­ing par­ents? And can an empha­sis on obey­ing the fifth com­mand­ment over­look or even ratio­nal­ize par­ent-child rela­tion­ships char­ac­ter­ized by con­tention, pain, dis­re­spect, and suf­fer­ing?”
    • Not pay­walled — I have unlocked it for you.
  4. Why Amer­i­ca Needs Foot­ball. Even Its Bru­tal­i­ty. (Ethan Strauss, The Free Press): “Mod­ern life might be unful­fill­ing, but the fact remains you’re unlike­ly to die on a beach sep­a­rat­ed from your entrails. Still, the old imper­a­tives remain. We have war with­in us, whether or not there’s one to wage. And the NFL gives Amer­i­cans that war, as spec­ta­cle, week after week.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. I am still skep­ti­cal Amer­i­can foot­ball can sur­vive moms pulling their kids out of the sport and direct­ing them to safer ath­let­ic exploits.
  5. Con­tra Kavanagh On Fideism (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “In a free soci­ety, at one or anoth­er point in your life, you’ll actu­al­ly have to form your own opin­ion about some­thing. You’ll do bet­ter at that if you have some prac­tice form­ing opin­ions. When experts have strong opin­ions on some­thing, this is a good oppor­tu­ni­ty to prac­tice your opin­ion-form­ing skills, see whether you get the same result as the experts, and, if not, fig­ure out where you went wrong. This requires peo­ple to have some tol­er­ance for oth­ers doing this.”
    • Start­ed off quite unin­ter­est­ing and then quick­ly ramped up. The ques­tion under con­sid­er­a­tion: how to bal­ance defer­ring to experts with inves­ti­gat­ing things on your own.
    • A fol­low-up Try­ing Again On Fideism (Scott Alexan­der, Astral Codex Ten): “I come back to this exam­ple again and again, but only because it’s so bla­tant: the New York Times ran an arti­cle say­ing that only 36% of econ­o­mists sup­port­ed school vouch­ers, with a strong impli­ca­tion that the pro­fes­sion was major­i­ty against. If you checked their sources, you would find that actu­al­ly, it was 36% in favor, 19% against, 46% unsure or not respond­ing. If you are too quick to seek epis­temic clo­sure because ‘you have to trust the experts’, you will be easy prey to peo­ple mis­rep­re­sent­ing what they are say­ing.”
  6. McCullough’s Mis­take, and Ours (Adri­an Gaty, Sub­stack): “As long as edu­ca­tion stays true to its past and cul­ti­vates faith and virtue, McCullough’s mis­take doesn’t mat­ter. But once edu­ca­tion becomes unmoored from its ori­gins, once it becomes open­ly hos­tile to reli­gion, we betray our own ori­gins – and con­demn our future – by con­tin­u­ing to ’empha­size’ school­ing. Our founders, pio­neers like the Rev­erend Cut­ler, spread the gospel of pub­lic edu­ca­tion not for its own sake but because such edu­ca­tion in turn spread the Gospel. To achieve that good gov­ern­ment and hap­pi­ness they envi­sioned, our task today is not to encour­age pub­lic edu­ca­tion as it cur­rent­ly exists – it is to remake it in His image.”
    • Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
    • This is a fol­low up to the also inter­est­ing This is… Sci­ence! (Adri­an Gaty, Sub­stack): “These are pro­found­ly anti-life, anti-human move­ments – yet they advance by manip­u­lat­ing our human­i­ty, our ten­der­ness, our hatred of sui­cide. Spoil­er alert: the doc­tors and ethi­cists mak­ing these claims about abor­tion and affir­ma­tion are 100% on board with doc­tor-assist­ed sui­cide (which killed over ten thou­sand Cana­di­ans last year). They don’t hate sui­cide, not in the least — but they know that you do. They are using your com­pas­sion to cre­ate a cul­ture of death.”
  7. In Defense of J.K. Rowl­ing (Pamela Paul, New York Times): “Take it from one of her for­mer crit­ics. E.J. Roset­ta, a jour­nal­ist who once denounced Rowl­ing for her sup­posed trans­pho­bia, was com­mis­sioned last year to write an arti­cle called ’20 Trans­pho­bic J.K. Rowl­ing Quotes We’re Done With.’ After 12 weeks of report­ing and read­ing, Roset­ta wrote, ‘I’ve not found a sin­gle tru­ly trans­pho­bic mes­sage.’ On Twit­ter she declared, ‘You’re burn­ing the wrong witch.’ ”
    • The tide is turn­ing on Rowl­ing. She’s not where I am ide­o­log­i­cal­ly, but watch­ing her be tarred and feath­ered for say­ing com­mon sense things has been dis­may­ing.

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 Does the Bible Pass the Bechdel Test? A Data-Dri­ven Look at Women in the Sto­ry of Scrip­ture (John Dyer, per­son­al blog): “So does the Bible pass the Bechdel test? This short answer is: yes, there are scenes where two named women have a con­ver­sa­tion not about a man. The longer answer is more com­plex, but also, I think, rich­er.” This is REALLY well done. From vol­ume 268.

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.