The anti-intellectualism found in persons, even among some devout Christians, is embarrassment to Christian purpose. Prevalence of the belligerency stance was more common when I was a young Christian than it is today, but it remains lively. There are reasons for this attitude including: manipulations of some scientists in research; claims made beyond the indications of the evidence; disregard of the contexts of history’s changing beliefs; and, other related factors. Perhaps negative responses relate to the arrogance of many persons in the propagation of their purposes. The efforts of some researchers to gain credits, profits, and mute, or put down, opposition is taken as evidence of such arrogance. These persons are an embarrassment of scientists who are dedicated to the discovery of truth in their fields. During his visit in our home, I asked the eminent William Foxwell Albright what was the greatest danger in the advancement of knowledge in his field of archaeology? He said: The money that distracts real research, and the drive to be recognized above others. Others have repeated his summary opinion in my hearing or reading. True learning is humbling. Even search for knowledge may become the means for satisfying greed. Too many scientific claims can’t be replicated. Replication is verification.
But I am not interested here with the peccadilloes of self-centered researchers, but those of Christians who are guilty of similar negative attitudes and conducts. Why are some Christians, real or alleged, distracted from the main purpose of the Christian message to make misrepresentations, rationalizations, vituperations of intellectuals and scholars? Must we turn away from the massive good that is done in the pursuit of knowledge because of the few who try to use the processes, even in defeat for the researcher, for self, so degrade the search of others? Those who are judging anything by its lowest representation may deserve to be affronted in the marketplace of ideas. The atheist, serious, comic, George Carlin, was guilty of escape from intellectual duty when he asserted that religion (of any kind) was a scam. Search for truth is lost in disparagement from either side. What draws us together? What is threatening? What is true?
We are not to be abusive about the achievements and ideas of those who may not fit well into our defined circle? We feel we ought to shout the warning of Jude – not to speak abusively about something they [we] do not understand. Early in the period of Billy Graham’s renowned ministry, during the days when radio was at advantage over television, I was with Graham for a national broadcast by ABC on a well-known radio forum. The producer asked our group if there were any names of persons that might be in the large audience who would present questions designed to embarrass Graham in the open part of the forum. Four persons were listed. To my surprise, two of the four persons, well known Christian leaders, offered written questions designed, not to further the debate, but to find a way to distract Graham. The producer simply forestalled those questions in advance. Except for me, those called upon to present their questions had no idea about the attempt by obstreperous persons to sabotage the process. The abusers were stopped in trying to exploit a good purpose they may not have respected. Both Graham and the secular programmers were seeking to convey ideas in search for truth. Seeking and conflicting questions were asked. Truth seeking was at work. Differences were aired in a process highly commended in the Bible, and among the sincere seekers of knowledge and understanding. Differences appeared objectively for consideration. Conflict in the program would have led to shifting from cerebral considerations to emotional. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020