Are Christians as anti-intellectual as ever?

Today's younger Christians (under-40) are are more educated than ever in history. The vast majority are college educated (many through graduate school), and because of their tech savviness, are more exposed to different philosophies, worldviews, and political and religious thought than any generation past. In fact, most of these younger Christians have come to believe that they are more educated, objective, and intellectually superior to their parents' generation and their grandparents' generation. Particularly in America, many think that they are certainly superior to the generations before the Enlightenment.

Previous generations of Christians have been characterized as anti-intellectual, unwilling to enter the academic arena or read books challenging Christian suppositions. They eschewed serious discussion over competing worldviews and took a dim view of higher education in the liberal arts and sciences. They thought that real spiritual history began with the Pilgrims (slight sarcasm there).

But younger Christians are better now. Why? Because we know so much more, that's why.

But is this true? Even with all these degree letters swirling around our names like some badge of honor, ask most young Christians how well they actually know their own convictions compared to previous generations. Ask how much Scripture they actually read on a regular basis. Ask how many books they have read.

Have they read books by G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis, Alister McGrath, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon? I could go on ad infinitum, but I'll stop there for brevity's sake.

Most have not. More than most have not. At the end of the day, while we believe that we have more intellectually distinguished knowledge of the world and of faith, I fear that we do not. Most of us can name the companies that have dropped their ads using Tiger Woods (and the ones that haven't). But most of us cannot name the 10 Commandments nor articulate an objective reason why the Christian faith should be believed among religions of the world.

If asked why not, most young people would say that they haven't the time nor the interest. That excuse doesn't sound much different today than it did in yesteryear. So has anything really changed?

Review: A New Earth (Eckhart Tolle)

Full title:
A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life’s PurposeCopyright 2005
ISBN 978-0-452-28996-3

I. Intro
As Dr. Phil got his big break by rubbing elbows with Oprah Winfrey, so has Eckhart Tolle, one of the nation’s superstar spiritual gurus in the latest (re)incarnation of the New Age Movement. A New Earth (ANE) is Tolle’s latest book, first released in 2005 but only receiving enormous attention last January via Oprah’s Book Club. Because of her promotion, it skyrocketed onto the New York Times bestseller list and remained there for double-digit weeks.

Are you looking for happiness in life? Do you want to end suffering both personally and globally? Do you want to start now? Like any self-help and/or pop inspirational manual, ANE claims that anyone can achieve happiness and banish suffering beginning the moment you read and comprehend Tolle’s message.

II. Chapters and Summary
The book contains nine chapters and an excessive number of subchapters all explaining why Tolle’s view of the universe is better than yours and how his propositions are the key to finding happiness.

Tolle lays out his view of the ego, the emotive part of a person responsible for negativity and negative emotions. Specifically, the ego is the drive to preserve a greater opinion of ourselves than we ought to have. He describes the “pain-body” that each person possesses. The pain-body is a kind of glutton for punishment that causes us to repeat cycles of emotional pain in an attempt to seek revenge for personal slights.

Using a generous sprinkling of Zen philosophical terms, he describes how people can divest themselves of personal pain, resentment, and conflict by changing one’s perspective on your involvement and attachment to the material life most people embroil themselves in. He says that you must gain awareness and understanding of your self, remove yourself emotionally from all your life’s situations (to a degree), and take peace from your existence, not your circumstances.

The result of gaining such awareness is that today we can begin living life anew with fresh eyes and a more mature confidence in ourselves, his version of a new heaven and a new earth (hence the title of the book).

So see that this unhealthy behavior is bad for you, the world, the universe. Now you know, 'and knowing is half the battle.' The end?

III. Analysis
To his credit, he is less Shirley MacLaine-ney in articulating Eastern principles and couches them in language more conventional to American ears, which I believe contributes to the popularity of his books.

So why is ANE so popular?  As such, I believe ANE has set a new standard for Eastern philosophy in America. Far from droning on about cosmic eudaemonia and so much self-absorbed navel gazing that has dominated the public’s impression of New Age thinking, ANE taps human psychoanalysis to explain the sources of suffering and the misplaced human drive for fulfillment found in everyday behavior. The use of the terms “ego,” “pain-body,” and “dysfunction” is a step up from many traditional purveyors of Eastern religions who refer to karma, auras, and psychic energies to explain the more metaphysical side of human life.

I can’t really object to the self-help portions of ANE. Western traditions have similarly taught that “consciousness,” “space,” and “inner alignment” are needed to address the difficulties of life, except that we’ve used words such as maturity, objectivity, and patience. If one were to read ANE simply for the insight on how to control negativity and behave more rationally, then this book offers decent advice.

There’s a bit of pretentiousness to the book. On page 6, he states, “This book’s main purpose is not to add new information or beliefs to your mind or to try to convince you of anything…” Oh, but it is. Otherwise, why write a book? “…but to bring about a shift in consciousness, that is to say, to awaken….It will change your state of consciousness or it will be meaningless.” See?

The biggest criticism I do have about ANE is not the self-help advice but the undercurrent of anti-Christian platitudes, which serve to keep his views obviously more enlightened-sounding than those of “the religious”. As a Christian, I find nothing more striking about Tolle than his presumption to know Christianity (you know, before it was misunderstood by the church) better than Christians. He redefines sin, salvation, and the very name of God, and frequently misinterprets reinterprets the words and teachings of Jesus to conveniently fit his views that border on blasphemy. Just check out pages 69, 71, 79, 116, 227, and 245 to name several.

A few examples:
“The history of Christianity is, of course, a prime example of how the belief that you are in sole possession of the truth, that is to say, right, can corrupt your actions and behavior to the point of insanity….The Truth was considered more important than human life. And what was the Truth? A story you had to believe in; which means, a bundle of thoughts.” (p. 69) Unless I miss my guess, ANE is full of propositions and moral absolutes/directives, which are, it seems, also a bundle of thoughts.

Next, “When forms around you die or death approaches, your sense of Beingness, of I Am, is freed from its entanglement with form: Spirit is released from its imprisonment in matter. You realize your essential identity as formless, as an all-pervasive Presence, of Being prior to all forms, all identifications. You realize your true identity as consciousness itself, rather than what consciousness has identified with. That’s the peace of God. The Ultimate truth of who you are is not I am this or I am that, but I Am.” (p. 57) Ahem, I believe the problem here is self-evident.

Last, “When you hear of inner space, you may start seeking it, and, because you are seeking it as if you were looking for an object for an experience, you cannot find it. This is the dilemma of all those who are seeking spiritual realization or enlightenment. Hence, Jesus said, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, ‘Lo, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.” (p. 233-234) “Hence, Jesus?” I’ll tell you what is bliss: blithely mutating the meaning and application of the words of Christ for the sake of the readers’ potential flowering of consciousness. It certainly is a new world, isn’t it?

How magnanimous of Mr. Tolle to tell me my life’s purpose. Like a lot of preachers of Eastern religious thought, everything boils down to a “just so” argument. There is no defense of the One Life to which all of us supposedly belong. For a man who spouts the oft-repeated mantra about how truth is relative, he is adamant about how his teachings are necessarily transformative. The overarching posture of ANE is that Tolle is right and all other beliefs that he contradicts are wrong.

IV. Conclusion
In all, Tolle might not be that far from the truth. He recognizes that humanity’s deep spiritual problem necessitates some internal change in order to resolve. At issue is whether or not his teachings actually address the heart of the problem, which, with his many words about egos and pain-bodies and consciousnesses, seems to fall short. Tolle would say that we need to be like him. I would say that we need Jesus instead.

Addendum: There is something about this book that sounds so familiar...could it be that
is
Gaius Baltar?

Other reviews:
"A Review of Eckhart Tolle's A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life's Purpose," by Mary Jo Sharp (Confident Christianity)

"A New Earth and The Spiritually Elite," by Marcia Montenegro (Christian Answers For the New Age)

Christian Superstition

This post is in response to a series on the Next Gener.Asian blog about how Asian Christians have commonly adopted Eastern religious ideas and practices into their Christian faith. In particular, I am responding to the post about Shamanism in the Asian church. As with the other religions (Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism), David (and Rodger Nishioka) asks "How has [this belief system] influenced practices in Asian American churches?"

He posts three ways:

1. A ready acceptance of the Holy Spirit and belief in its power in our daily lives combined with a sense of evil spirits opposing the Holy Spirit leads to lots of attribution to Satan.
2. Significant reliance on the Holy Spirit and spiritual experiences that are often highly emotive and emotion charged.
3. Congregations look at the preacher as the shaman and may expect him or her to be closer to God and to act as an intermediary or intercessor in some way.

The post ends asking "What's the alternative look like?"

My family is not Korean, and my Chinese Baptist church experience is more naturalistic than how Nishioka describes the Korean church. However, it is not without its occasions. Trying to nail down specific hangovers from Asian religious culture is a little like catching flies with chopsticks.

Point #1 has a lot of hidden problems, I think. No one would dispute that awareness of the Holy Spirit in daily life is a good thing. This point doesn't get into specifics as to what people believe evil spirits are opposing. But we should pause to ask: to what are Asian Christians ultimately attributing to Satan? Common complaints always include illness and hardship. What about negative emotions, financial difficulty, and personality conflict? What about the 30 year-old son who seems unable to find a wife? How much should we attribute to Satanic activity versus our own human failing? Not only that, should we even consider problems like these Satanic in origin?

A more foundational question would be "why do we think that God owes us a comfortable life?"

One superstition I suspect we have embraced at this point is that the Christian life is about fulfilled values and gratification and that gratification is what Satan wants to prevent in our daily life. Generally, gratification is the experience of everything you desire in life and believe God should send your way (marriage, children, grandchildren, financial gain, the respect of others). This superstition has perhaps replaced the language of "lucky" in many Chinese households. Instead of attributing job loss, for example, to unluckiness, many now often attribute it to some form of Satanic oppression perhaps.

The typical reaction to such a situation is very telling. Traditionally, an unlucky Chinese person would seek to turn his fortune around through shamanistic appeals. A Christian, similarly moved, might feel tempted to pray down the demon causing such suffering in his life. I find this disturbing, but only slightly less disturbing than the fact that Asians are not alone in practicing this type of "Christian shamanism."

I call it manipulation, which is perhaps a second superstition working its way through the minds of many Asians. The result is that we believe that God responds to such appeals. I see this as the theological foundation for the "sin of divination" spoken of in 1 Sam. 15:22. Relating to the God of the Bible the same way one would relate to a demigod in any Eastern religion shows a failing of wholistic theology on the part of the church. Or, to say it another way, for anyone to think that circumstances can or should be changed by appealing to some vain formula or method of prayer designed to manipulate either God or the spiritual world into alignment with one's own desires is clearly opposite to Biblical Christianity.

I have encountered something somewhat similar. Two friends I know once shared an apartment, and when they moved in, they made it a point to walk through all the rooms and pray over each room for God to 'sanctify'(?) it and provide protection from demonic activity. Now, I am not given to such proclivities, and the whole proposition seemed suspiciously superstitious to me. BUT, I can see an important distinction. Some Christians need to exercise their prayers in a visible way (such as walking through and praying for each room in an apartment) in order to assure themselves that they have been thoughtful in dedicating certain aspects of their lives to God. If some need this as a psychological comfort, I don't have a problem with it per se. However, if some rely on such activity in order to bring about God's protection or supernatural intervention (where it would be absent if they did not), then I think they risk enslavement to a defective theology that is more akin to shamanism than Christianity.

The Gospel is a complete 180. In Christ, we have God revealed and His promises made explicit. God, who made Himself human and lived among us, died for us, and promises us a life that is truly free. In the Gospel, we have the freedom to experience God not through spells, incantations, or rituals crafted to merely grasp vainly at the divine, we have God Himself in Jesus who 'fills our cup to overflowing' with His presence and Holy Spirit. Human beings are constantly trying to find a bridge and cross it from the natural world to the supernatural. In Christ, He not only is the bridge, He comes to us to make that connection with us that all other methods fail miserably.

What's the alternative? Emphatically, the Bible speaks of spiritual freedom and victory as a present accomplishment in Christ that most believers have yet to realize. My pastor has said a number of times that we are living below our priviledge in the Kingdom of God. True, the victorious Christian life is not experienced without struggle to cast off the baggage of past hurt, present sin, and our own cynicism of our circumstances present and future. We must repent of such thinking, he says. Whenever you are tempted to think that you have accomplished something out of your own strength, repent. Whenever you think that you deserve better than what life dishes out at you, repent. Our priviledge is a life enveloped in the saving grace of Jesus, to focus not on ourselves but on others and ultimately on God. Love God and love people. His grace frees us to live to love, not just to survive and have pleasant things happen to us. Surely we should express the assurance of Psalm 23 a little more confidently than we do.

Comments?

"Mormons!"

Dan Phillips from TeamPyro has written a cute account of his most recent encounter with Mormon (LDS) missionaries at his doorstep. Though he admits not knowing much about LDS teaching, I'd say that he hit on the right questions with the right tack, proving that you don't need to know much about Mormonism to have a successful dialogue with their missionaries. You just need to know how to ask good questions (and know the answers to your own questions as well).

I count all the households with thoughtful Christian people that get visits from Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses providentially blessed indeed. Do note I said "thoughtful." I mean, don't we Christians regularly pray for opportunities to share the gospel? What better opportunity is there when they literally appear on our front door?!?

Hats off to Dan for a job well done. The TeamPyro blog kicks my ire once in a while, but they've proven that old doggs can learn new tricks. ;-)
(disclaimer: The Damsel is neither calling TeamPyro "old" nor "dogs." Gotta keep those i's dotted...)

The question I have is this: can you handle it?

2007: The Year of the Unfriendly Atheist

In the late 1970's, philosopher William Rowe termed himself a "friendly atheist" after assessing the Christian theist position as rational, even though he believes that God does not, in fact, exist. Former atheist Antony Flew, although not a Christian, has become a theist after his assessment of arguments for the existence of God as well. From the mid-1990s through today, Christian philosophers have been making great strides in all areas of philosophy and have gained much respect for their academic prowess.

But just when Christian/theist philosophers seemed to have finally gained a measure of respect from their atheist philosopher counterparts, 2007 has seen a retroaction in attitude toward all things God. Correction--all things Christian. This year, more than any in our decade so far, has seen the prominence of the unfriendly atheist. I refer to this year's popularized books, including Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, Christopher Hitchens' God Is Not Great, and Sam Harris' Letters To a Christian Nation. Add in the just-released movie The Golden Compass, based on one novel in a trilogy by Phillip Pullman intended to "kill God," atheists have been quite active in 2007 making their case that all Christians are idiots for believing in God.

But what are they saying? I admit, I haven't had time to read the books from cover to cover (but I'll get there eventually), so the reviews and/or exerpts from Amazon.com will have to do. Here's the breakdown:

Richard Dawkins - the core of his argument (found in Chapter 3) goes something like God isn't necessary to explain the existence of the universe; the existence of the universe can be explained without the need for a God; therefore, God does not exist. (The God Delusion)

For further detailed analysis of Dawkins' book, please read Alvin Plantinga's rebuttal at christianitytoday.com.

Sam Harris - kind, virtuous, and patriotic is one who does NOT earnestly believe in God and the Christian faith. His intro states “Thousands of people have written to tell me that I am wrong not to believe in God. The most hostile of these communications have come from Christians. This is ironic, as Christians generally imagine that no faith imparts the virtues of love and forgiveness more effectively than their own. The truth is that many who claim to be transformed by Christ’s love are deeply, even murderously, intolerant of criticism. While we may want to ascribe this to human nature, it is clear that such hatred draws considerable support from the Bible. How do I know this? The most disturbed of my correspondents always cite chapter and verse.”

So begins Letter to a Christian Nation…"

Christopher Hitchens - Despite my take that his disbelief is rooted in silly Christians saying silly things to him as a child, he contends that "There still remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum of servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ulimately grounded on wish-thinking." (God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, p. 4)

In the end, their arguments are the same tired rantings of bitter aging men who act as though they've been deprived of something over which the Christian church needs dismantling. I've heard many such complaints in my short life, so nothing they've said comes as much surprise. My best guess is that they are still pouting over having been subject to "dangerous sexual repression" in being told to wait until marriage to have sex, or something similarly as grievous. Oh, the humanity. This is the commmon thread among our above authors: it's not the academic arguments on the existence of God, the teachings of Jesus about himself, nor the historical evidence supporting Jesus' resurrection that they spend the most time railing against. Their incessant jabs at the Christian faith center by far on the behavior and attitudes of Christians they have experienced. How interesting...and concerning at the same time.

On one level, I look at their collective attacks on the Christian faith and think, "how obnoxious! If I'm not allowed to be unPC and insult the faith of others, why should these snobs get away with publishing their offensive whining?" On another level, I'm reminded how much our words and deeds as Christians can have enormous impact on even school-aged children (as in Hitchens' case). As Michael Newdow marches his way to the U.S. Supreme Court again trying to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance, Christians should keep in mind that we walk a fine, perilous road that demands a higher standard of behavior and conduct. We have to be the best of everything: integrity, kindness, intelligence and wit. It is unfair, but what about the Atonement is fair?

Atheists have banked atheism on sneering Christianity to death (really, is that all they have?). They should be met with the deflating of all their stereotypes of Christians by Christians. Three of my favorite Christians who do this well are Francis Beckwith, Alvin Plantinga, and William Lane Craig. In my opinion, every believer should become familiar with their books and papers and learn how to effectively think about the Christian/atheist/agnostic debate.

What Ever Happened to the New Age Movement?

Does anyone remember this?

"The New Age Movement consists of an incredibly huge and well organized network consisting of thousands of groups, trusts, foundations, clubs, lodges, and religious groups whose goal and purpose is to prepare the world to enter the coming "Age Of Aquarius." " (full article)

Some time ago, many avid Christian watchdogs considered the New Age Movement (NAM) to be the biggest threat to Christianity in America. Many feared that "New Agery" had infiltrated its views into all that seemed innocent and straightforward, from Barney to the Bibles in church pews. I sought out the most extreme example I could find, with little difficulty. The caption under the book Ravaged by the New Age by Texe Marrs, published in 1989, contains the following sensational remarks:

"... a shocking expose of the New Age occultism that is...snatching up our innocent children in its rotten net....It also reveals the hidden plan of New Age leaders to bring our teenagers into hideous bondage through Satan worship and witchcraft. Texe Marrs....thoroughly documents the dangerous, secret messages in kid's TV shows, cartoons, movies, comic books, fantasy games, toys and even coloring books. You'll also discover the demonic designs behind Rock and Roll and the hidden, subliminal messages in Satan's New Age "mood" music".

At the height of Christian hype against the NAM in the late '80s, some Christians had even gone so far as to accuse certain Bible translations of being tainted by New Age language and thus spurred on the oh-so-riveting King James only debate.

But it's been a while since anyone was last caught lambasting the NAM. When did the alarms go silent? And why?

First, in 1991, Saddam Hussein at last revealed himself as the long awaited Antichrist he is (pardon, was) that would rebuild Babylon and initiate Armageddon. Of course, the Antichrist wasn't supposed to die already, but Saddam did invade a tiny oil-rich country which tipped off the new era of war in the middle east and terrorism. Suddenly, the NAM, a.k.a. "Satan's Plan to Destroy Our Kids" (subtitle to Marrs' book), took a seat at the back of the church van. Ken Starr and a blue dress also provided added distraction, but who finally pushed NAM out the back doors of the church van was not-such-a-New Ager named Osama bin Laden.

Second, postmodernism has literally eaten the life out of any NAM conspiracy that Christian watchdogs previously hyped over. I find it interesting that at the height of the NAM-versy, Christians focused so much on the NAM and so little on postmodern thinking, particularly since postmodernism had a heavy hand in New Age acceptance in the 1970's. Now--stick with me here--while the two may have been friends in the past, they're not as close anymore, and postmodernism might just be starting to bite the hand it previously held.

How? While many Christians think the New Age mentality as relativistic, it does have a codifiable set of doctrines and prides itself on principled living. And wherever one of those exists, postmodernism will bleed it out sooner or later.

Last, we live in an age of Halo, American Idol, and dog fighting football stars. We want to win; we want singers that are really good; we want to tsk-tsk what Whoopi says they do there in the South. In particular, our age shows that we may think postmodernly now, but we sure don't live it.

Consider super-rage contests shows such as American Idol and America's Got Talent. They're hot hot hot, and everyone loves to evaluate the poor souls on stage pining for fame and a million dollars. Similar to "The Family" TV show in the book Fahrenheit 451, the audience, everyday Americans, is thrust into the judgment seat. The results? When we are put into the position of judge, we do become remarkably judgmental. So long, practical postmodernism.

Bottom line: aura cleansing and blathering about the astral plane used to be, and still is, activity for whom the majority of Americans find just a little nutty. Even some New Agers themselves admit to a decline in NAM popularity, as evidenced by this quote by a New Age guy named Michael (no other identification found on his website):

"New Age has not traveled to the end of the road yet. It is reaching a stage of maturity in which wheat is being separated from the corn. Yet, it still comprises a broad spectrum of activities from the commercial rip-off to unselfish dedication to serve mankind spiritually. Many do not wish to be associated with the name because it reminds them of the turbulence associated with the uprising of the younger generation in the late sixties and the lamentable drug excrescences [sic]. One may pray that the movement will sustain its original purity and raise high the spirit of new generations, giving it an immense vista of life and a purpose to live for."

Oh, I can't wait.

But why point this out, you may ask. Simply, I wish to send a tidbit reminder that, just like weight loss fads, the New Age Movement is another fad of spiritual expression that has come and is now all but forgotten as many others in the history of mankind. Oh, it may come back, like the Atkins Diet. But did churchgoers in America deserve the Christian freak out it received over the NAM? Maybe not so much.

Let me put it this way. Hardly a day goes by that we aren't losing sleep over what "New Age Bible translations" are doing to our kids, right?

Right.