A Biblical Critique of the Liberal Arts, Parts 2-3 unabridged

Coming soon!

Supah Cute Orangutang-Dog Friendship

And they keep insisting that animals don't have reason. Not as much, sure, but you can't tell me there's not something going on in that orangutan brain, and in the brain of the squirrels who look both ways before carrying a nut across the street. 

Kid under anesthesia says funny things

Completely unrelated to conservatism or The Forum (unsurprising) yet completely hilarious:

Hot dog! Bonus material to supplement March 2013 issue

A Biblical Critique of the Liberal Arts: Part One

*As seen in The Forum’s December 2012 issue, but this is the unabridged version*

By Rachael Wierenga

            Many Christians on Hillsdale’s campus would say that their studies here have deepened their faith and their understanding of God. This implies that a liberal arts education and the Christian faith fit together neatly and work together for common ends. While I partly agree, I also think that a complimentary relationship between a liberal arts education and the Christian faith is too readily assumed.

            I have condensed three-years’ worth of reflections on my Hillsdale experience into the following argument: The biblical account should counterbalance and correct the habits of thinking students receive from their Hillsdale liberal arts education. This article will argue that Hillsdale studies should be tempered with the Bible’s account of the differences between human wisdom and God’s wisdom. By examining three biblical passages, we will see that human wisdom can be hostile to, inferior to, or dangerously heretical when compared with God’s wisdom.

            The first three chapters of First Corinthians suggest that human wisdom is hostile to, or in opposition to, God’s wisdom. In these chapters, Paul says that Christ is God’s wisdom and righteousness, and he says that the message of the cross is the wisdom and power of God. Yet the world crucified Christ when he came, and the world rejected the message of the cross. If that does not prove the antagonistic relationship between human wisdom and God’s wisdom, then nothing does. Christ, who is the wisdom and power of God, was crucified by men; the message of the cross, which is the power and wisdom of God, is rejected by men.

            There are many ways that First Corinthians 1-3 shows the hostile relationship between human wisdom and God’s wisdom. One is Paul’s argument that the wise according to the world are not truly wise, nor are the things the world esteems as wise truly wise. He makes a shocking statement: “Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God…therefore let no one boast in men” (3:18-23).

            Another way these chapters show the hostile relationship between man’s and God’s wisdom is by saying that God does not like the pride and glory of human wisdom; he intentionally chose a way for mankind to be reconciled to him that will bring wise, mighty men to nothing and despised, foolish men to glory. Continuing this point, Paul clearly emphasizes the irrational nature of belief in the word of the cross: he repeatedly calls it foolishness, as opposed to wisdom. God intentionally chose an irrational means for people to know him and be reconciled to him: “For it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe” (1:21). God is after belief, not rational acceptance of a wise message. The foolish message will save those who believe. 

            Liberal arts education develops a habit of reverence for human wisdom and the things of the world that is problematic in light of Corinthians’ account of the incompatible relationship that exists between human wisdom and God’s wisdom. A liberal arts education is all about studying the wise things of the world and seeking wisdom from the record of human thought and history. If, as 1 John 2:15 and James 4:4 suggest, there is a fundamental difference between the things of the world and the things of God, and one cannot simultaneously love the things of the world and the things of God, then is it not possible that seeking the world’s wisdom could make one more prone to reject God’s wisdom? If God does not like the pride and glory of human wisdom, and if God chooses things that man does not in order that no one should glory in men, should that not inform the way one studies the wisdom of man and how fervently one seeks it and believes it to be good, true, and beautiful? Furthermore, liberal arts education develops a habit of rationally accepting wise messages that is problematic, since it works at cross-purposes to an attitude of faith and belief. The habit of weighing good and evil that liberal arts inculcates—determining the best way to live, the best arguments to study, the best principles to preserve—sets one up to live rationally rather than through faith.

            Whereas Corinthians established a relationship of hostility, the second passage we will move to examining, the book of Colossians, establishes a relationship of inferiority between human wisdom and God’s wisdom. In Colossians, Paul calls all philosophies and human doctrines that do not center on Christ inferior (technically, he calls them “empty deceit,” and “persuasive words” that are “of no value”) to “all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” that alone are found in knowing the mystery of God and Christ. Paul does not condemn human philosophies as being wicked to the point of being hostile to the truth. Rather, he says that they are imperfect in the sense that they are less than Christ and the mystery of the gospel; and therefore, they cannot accomplish what understanding Christ and the gospel can.

            Colossians 2:2-10 is a critical and relevant passage for Hillsdale students to consider. In it, Paul says, “Beware lest anyone take you captive through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.” The human wisdom Paul gears up to critique is any doctrine and knowledge that does not center on Christ. Persuasive words, philosophy, and empty deceit are “not according to Christ”; rather, they are “according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world.”

            Paul’s critique of human wisdom (in the form of philosophies or doctrines that are not centered on Christ) centers on establishing a difference between lesser and greater. Accordingly, he exposes two main types of human wisdom as less and imperfect. One type of human wisdom that Paul critiques is philosophy founded on the basic principles of the world. This is less or weak when compared with Christ by virtue of the fact that principality and power, rule and authority, death and life are all beneath Christ. By dying and then being resurrected, Christ triumphed over all principality and power. Therefore, study of anything less than Christ is inessential. The other type of human wisdom Paul critiques is philosophy based on the traditions of men. This is weak when compared to Christ, because this type of study only produces “regulations… [that] have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and asceticism, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh” (2:20-23). The regulations that stem from the traditions of men are not only weak, but of no value, because they can only limit or contain, rather than perfectly put to death the indulgence of the flesh.

            Paul then contrasts these lesser and imperfect species of human wisdom with the wisdom that exists in the knowledge of Christ. Paul preaches Christ and “teaches every man in all wisdom” that every man can be presented “perfect in Christ Jesus” (1:28). Perfect accords with the other words Paul repeatedly uses throughout the letter to describe Christ and the message of the gospel: “full, complete, and all.” When Paul contrasts the gospel of Christ with philosophy, it is a comparison of shadow to body, abstract imaginings within the mind to physical Head, appearance to reality. Everything that Christ is, philosophy is not. Philosophies based on the commandments and doctrines of men, and philosophies based upon the basic principles of the world are not full, all, or complete. They are, in fact, the exact opposite: philosophy is empty (“empty deceit”) and nothing (“of no value”).

            Liberal arts education centers on studying the very philosophies and human doctrines that Colossians describes as inferior to the wisdom found in Christ. Paul does not speak reverently of the philosophic enterprise: philosophy is being puffed up in one’s fleshly mind in supposedly profound imaginings that are, in reality, centered on rudimentary, immature principles that Christ has disarmed, triumphed over, and put to shame. Philosophy produces ascetic regulations aimed at limiting the indulgence of the flesh; yet these regulations are ineffective and useless. Much of the philosophies we study in the liberal arts fit the foregoing description. We study rule and authority (e.g. the principles upon which to base government or law or economics) and we study ascetic-regulations doctrines centering on how to do virtuous actions and abstain from vicious ones.

            Of course this is not to say that there is no value to studying human wisdom. However, the knowledge that all human wisdom and philosophy are imperfect and that something greater, higher, better, and more perfect than human study of human things exists—the knowledge that believers should “seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God”— ought to ground a Hillsdale student’s studies.

            Now to examine the third and final passage. If Colossians merely calls human wisdom (in the form of philosophy and human tradition) inferior to Christ, many other passages in the New Testament intensify this to a warning that human wisdom (in the form of false doctrines and heresies) is outright dangerous to believers. First John 5:19 claims that Satan has charge of the whole world and non-believers are under his sway. Ephesians 2:2-3 and 6:12 remind believers that “the prince of the power of the air” and “the spirit who works in the sons of disobedience” rules “the course of this world”: “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” The New Testament abounds with warnings about false teachers. Peter says they will secretly bring in destructive heresies. Paul says they “trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ” (Galatians 2:4). Many of Paul’s letters are written to his churches that had adopted the heresies of false teachers.

            If these passages show that human wisdom, in the form of false doctrines perpetuated by spiritual forces of evil, can be dangerous and pull men away from knowledge of ultimate truth in the gospel, what implications does this have for study of the liberal arts? A liberal arts education does not consider the danger of false doctrines and philosophies; rather, it calls deep study of these things good. However, can we really assume that it is not problematic or dangerous to read the ideas and wisdom of unregenerate, non-Christian men who, according to 1 John, are under the sway of the devil? Heresies, as we all know, are doctrines with half-truths in them. They may not stand out obviously as lies and evil notions and perversions of the truth. Actually, most untruths are subtle and indiscernible: Satan himself is a beautiful angel of light. Spiritual forces and the false teachers they manipulate often pull men away from belief in God by means of offering a subtly wrong idea of Him. Being exposed to human ideas of justice, goodness, and truth can result in mistakenly accepting and perpetuating the clever untruths within these ideas. And perhaps accidentally clinging to heretical human notions of justice potentially sets one up to reject God’s justice and choose hell, God’s ultimate mercy, someday.

            We have established that the Bible enforces a clear divide between human wisdom and God’s wisdom on three counts: in some cases human wisdom is downright hostile to God’s wisdom (the rulers of the world crucified Christ, and the natural man rejects the message of the cross) in some cases it is inferior to God’s wisdom (philosophy and human doctrines are less than Christ and cannot accomplish perfection), and in some cases it is dangerously heretical and backwards (false teachers’ doctrines are antithetical to the truth of the gospel). Now why should the Bible’s account that human wisdom is different from God’s wisdom correct, counterbalance, and ground our studies here?

            This is a very pro-liberal arts, pro-human wisdom, pro-philosophy, pro-inquietude and pro-intellectual striving campus; any critique, especially a biblical critique, of the liberal arts is something that is almost entirely absent. I think most students take it for granted as fact that there are no serious downsides to a liberal arts education. This is disconcerting for the following reason. If students are not aware that human wisdom can be less than, subtly heretical to, or in contradiction to God’s wisdom, then they might never be aware of a need for higher and more perfect truth that exists in the Bible’s account of the person and work of Jesus Christ. They might mistake the good for the best. I do not mean to completely discount the endeavor to study human wisdom. The good-true-and-beautiful we seek here is good. But it is not the best. 

Jonah Goldberg Reviews Movie: Groundhog Day

Everyone should see the movie Groundhog Day, starring Bill Murray. Instead of trying to explain why myself, I’ll let Jonah Goldberg speak. I have always intuitively loved the philosophical and conservative message of this movie, but Goldberg can explain what that message is better than I can. Here are some snippets from his review:

On the film’s popularity:

In the years since its release the film has been taken up by Jews, Catholics, Evangelicals, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, and followers of the oppressed Chinese Falun Gong movement. Meanwhile, the Internet brims with weighty philosophical treatises on the deep Platonist, Aristotelian, and existentialist themes providing the skin and bones beneath the film’s clown makeup.

Charles Murray, author of Human Accomplishment, has cited Groundhog Day more than once as one of the few cultural achievements of recent times that will be remembered centuries from now. He was quoted in The New Yorker declaring, “It is a brilliant moral fable offering an Aristotelian view of the world.”

On the film’s anti-postmodernity message:

Ultimately, the story is one of redemption, so it should surprise no one that it speaks to those in search of the same. But there is also a secular, even conservative, point to be made here. Connors’s metamorphosis contradicts almost everything postmodernity teaches. He doesn’t find paradise or liberation by becoming more “authentic,” by acting on his whims and urges and listening to his inner voices. That behavior is soul-killing. He does exactly the opposite: He learns to appreciate the crowd, the community, even the bourgeois hicks and their values. He determines to make himself better by reading poetry and the classics and by learning to sculpt ice and make music, and most of all by shedding his ironic detachment from the world.

On how the film conveys its theme without being preachy or tawdry:

And this is the film’s true triumph. It is a very, very funny movie, in which all of the themes are invisible to people who just want to have a good time. There’s no violence, no strong language, and the sexual content is about as tame as it gets. (Some e-mailers complained that Connors is only liberated when he has sex with Rita. Not true: They merely fall asleep together.) If this were a French film dealing with the same themes, it would be in black and white, the sex would be constant and depraved, and it would end in cold death.

Read the review; watch the movie. Ciao!

soldier surprises daughter, 6, on birthday

This reminds me of Nathaniel Hawthorne in The Scarlet Letter: "Save the long-sought regards of woman, nothing is sweeter than these marks of childish preference, accorded spontaneously by a spiritual instinct, and therefore seeming to imply in us something truly worthy to be loved."
I can't think of anything better than for a battle-toughened, exposed-to-the-evils-of-human-nature soldier to have a sweet, innocent, artless, little daughter to love him so much.

action movie humor

exam-week humor

Christmas humor

Heh heh

A lady was picking through the frozen turkeys at the grocery store, but couldn't find one big enough for her family. She asked a stock boy, "Do these turkeys get any bigger?" The stock boy replied, "No ma'am, they're dead."