Anti-intellectualism

I read the whole thread, and finally found someone who understood the original anti-intellectualism of Fundamentalism! Good job, Pastor Larry! (No offense to the rest of you.) Also kudos to mnw, who gave a good example of proper anti-intellectualism.

Fundamentalism is historically anti-intellectual but not anti-scholarship, as even a cursory reading of the famous Fundamentals will tell you. I leave you with a quote from an old time anti-intellectual Fundamentalist with a Ph. D. obtained partly from Princeton: “An intellectual is not one with a brilliant intellect, but one who depends on his own puny intellect rather than the credible Word of God.”—Dr. Monroe Parker (from my own notes from the 1970’s.

In contrast, here is a quote from one of the founding fathers of New Evangelicalism: “The New Evangelical is willing to face the intellectual problems and meet them in the framework of modern learning.” Harold John Ockenga, news release on Dec. 8, 1957.

My Fundamentalist anti-intellectualism tells me I don't have to read liberal scholars and listen to their theories like so many intellectual evangelicals do. There are plenty of good conservative evangelical scholars I can read. :type:

 

My particular reason for being anti-intellectual (according to the common definition) is because apologetics often do more harm than good. I know that is going to stir up some controversy, especially to some of the intellectualy gifted ones who love to debate atheists, but from what I have read of the Bible, it seems that apologetics are uncalled for.

In the great commision, Jesus told his disciples to visit the lost sheep of Israel, and to preach the gospel of the kingdom. If the hearers rejected the message, the disciples were instructed to 'shake the dust from their feet' and to move on.

Likewise, In Romans 1 we read about every man having a knowledge of God, both from the testimony of creation and the testimony of the conscience. Thus the problem with atheists is not an intellectual question, but a moral question.

I'm certainly not advocating preachers who are uneducated, since I think it takes a good deal of education to rightly divide the Word of truth, but I am just saying that apologetics are unneccesary. If Christians are caricatured in the media and criticized in the class rooms, should we expect any less?

A Harvard Professor once said, " I can argue with an arguement, but I cant argue with a changed life." As people see Christ living through us, and see the difference in our life, that should register something in their minds. It will serve as the best apologetic.

 

I think apologetics have a place, but not as high as some would give it. I only say this because of Titus 1:9

"Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers."

May I throw this into the mix. Is it possible that with all the scientifically verified reasons to believe the Bible have we less faith than our predecessors?

For example, many years ago Christians would not have said, "Oh, I believe the Bible because of scientific evidence for Creation, archeological research, prophetical verification etc., etc.,"

Have we lost something by always given a reason for believing the Bible? We do not try to win souls to Christ by relying upon the conviction of the Word and the Holy Spirit but by PROVING God by using science and academics.

Have even the most "anti-intellectual" of us come up short on faith because we believe the Bible because science proves it rather than believing the Bible because God says it is so?

Just a thought. Shoot me down if needed.

 

To neither agree or shoot down, let me pose a question:

Is that less need for faith, or does it strengthen faith?

 

In my Bible college days, our college president attended a meeting of IFB preachers in the state. He was asked to give a presentation on the school. He made the point that the school was trying to help the students "learn how to think". After his presentation, a speaker got up and said, "We don't need colleges to teach our young people to think. In fact, I believe that such activity is delaying the return of Jesus, for the Bible says that Lord will return in such an hour that ye think not".

That is anti-intellectualism and, unfortunately, fundamentalism has an abundance of it.

 

I am not sure. I guess I wonder if faith is faith when you have a reason to believe.

Now, I do not think God does not require blind faith, and I think creation and other areas are helpful.

Do we reason and apply logic rather believe and apply faith?

 

"Faith and reason" is a topic that has spilled as much ink as attempts to interpret Hebrews 6. Opinions of the correct recipe are innumerable.

I agree that my movement is steeped in anti-intellectualism, despite the many Fundamentalists I've known who were free of that particular vice. I really suspect that there's a sort of Darwinian selection process underway. Those who can't stand it, leave. Those who like it, gravitate toward it.

I cannot say how much this vice is present in other communions, but it seems natural to my movement. We came into existence to do "battle royal" for the fundamentals. Other communions already preached the gospel, supported missions, lived holy, etc., but Fundamentalism arose for the purpose of overthrowing liberalism. Holding such a stance, I've watched way too many preachers with graduate degrees from IFB schools use the veneer of scholarship to dress up ridiculous statements regarding Greek (forget Hebrew), history, logic (illogic, actually), and what other denominations supposedly believe and practice. The goal is never the truth, it is to defeat the enemy. Point out an error and you are a liberal or a charismatic--or maybe a dead orthodox.

 

I don't really believe most fundamentalists are anti intellectual.

To many intellectuals, anyone who believes the Bible is the Word of God and seeks to obey the Word, is a fundamentalist and , by definition, stupid.

Since the fundamentalists can't be told what to think, they they are, of course, anti intellectual.

 

we don't want to blow our own horn too loud, or we become the ones who are anti.

Education and knowledge is great, but to be able to deliver that knowledge so those with less education can understand is just as important, if not more. Some brothers are very knowledgeable,yet the congregation receives nothing, because he talks above their heads so far without making a picture out of it, so they can understand. Some brethren have the gift of being able to make others see the deepest of the scripture, even though they don't have the education.

Such as:
Acts 8:

27: And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,
28: Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.
29: Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
30: And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
31: And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
32: The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:
33: In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.
34: And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35: Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
36: And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37: And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
38: And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
39: And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

 

Let's try a dictionary definition of anti-intellectual from the MS Bookshelf 98 dictionary:

"an·ti-in·tel·lec·tu·al



(àn´tê-în´tl-èk¹ch¡-el, àn´tì-) adjective

Opposed or hostile to intellectuals or intellectual views."


Now if an intellectual is one who makes the mind primary in importance, than I am certainly an anti-intellectual. The spiritual is far more important than the mental.

Here is a definition of intellectual from the same source:

"in·tel·lec·tu·al



(în´tl-èk¹ch¡-el) adjective

1. a. Of or relating to the intellect. b. Rational rather than emotional.

2. Appealing to or engaging the intellect: an intellectual book; an intellectual problem.

3.a. Having or showing intellect, especially to a high degree. See synonyms at intelligent. b. Given to exercise of the intellect; inclined toward abstract thinking about aesthetic or philosophical subjects."


Based on this, yes, I am an anti-intellectual. But let me emphasize again that Fundamental anti-intellectualism is not anti-scholarship. :type:

 

Using a dictionary is too intellectual.

We should just define the terms as the Lord leads us. raying:

That is, we should define them as the Lord leads me. :saint:

 

I'm properly rebuked, Pipedude! :laugh:

 

[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] 1 Cor 1
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, F3 lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. 22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence. 30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: 31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. [/FONT]

 

Every IFB I have been through and been part of always advocates to use Acts 17:11. It was even one of my churches theme verse that the pastor always harped on.

 

HUH??? WHAT????? what are you saying? Dumb it down?




:laugh:



Anti-intellectualism....define what INTELLECTUALISM means....I know what it means...but define it none the less.

 

Act 17:11 (Geneva Bible, 1587 Edition):
These were also more noble men then they
which were at Thessalonica, which receiued
the woorde with all readinesse, and searched
the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

IAW (in accordance with) this instruction from God
(apostolic example), I check out all scriptures which
I read on the BB (Baptist Board).
Ya'll have fun checking my quote of the Geneva Bible

Note that the antecedent of the initial 'These' is
the people at Berea. Hence such a Bible checker
is is called a Berean.

 

Some Fundamentalists preach against checkers.

 

A lot is known about people by what they say they are against.

 

I'm against posting on the Baptist Board....:saint: :tongue3: