My professional life has been committed to Christian education and ministry, both in academic and church contexts. I have high regard for both contexts and believe they, at their best, complement each other. There is, and always has been, some tension between some of the advocates relating themselves to each context. If the situations were sifted out for many advocates they would not be exclusive to a preferred context. Scripture advocates education on both the level of nature (creation, either from God or mystery evolvement) and super-nature (also from God or mystery evolvement). We begin with sources, and gather evidence that leads to understanding, with understanding leading to wisdom. Wisdom is, in the final analysis, that which leads to problem solving for imperfect mankind in the imperfect context of nature. The best education in the natural world for the humanist in us is to find ways (research and application) to hold and advance the gains of human history. For the supernatural factor we find ways (research and faith application) so to meet the best hope of mankind. It deals with faith and quality of life that reaches beyond death. On the humanistic level this refers to legacy. On the spiritual it refers to immortality.
I have taken courses and read rather widely in the fields of anthropology (social and physical) and in archaeology (social and physical). They are fields that deal with mankind, and mankind is my primary secular interest. All the disciplines addressing human life contexts in our era are fraught with considerable disagreement, but there are some matters that appear to be clear. One of the most exciting of the improvements is relief from lower and dangerous contexts of life to higher and safer ones. Some may not be higher and safer, but they seem so to us. Archaeology is highly repetitive in recordings of findings: burial grounds, battlefields, village/city ruins, churches/mosques, skeletons, pottery, jewelry, weapons, scripting, caves and the like. A major archaeological finding in 2013 was that of King Richard III, of England – he of Shakespearean fame and two years as King of England to warfare and death. In all of this primary achievement for the year, as noted in Archaeology, January/February, 2014: Of course what we can’t do is say anything about his character . . . . that’s what everybody always wants to know. I do.
What has history and research taught about character? Learning character is more important for the individual than moon landings. Many of the educational disciplines, even in research, deal with verification of the written and oral information that has come down to us, but we don’t use that well to improve life. Having just finished Robert Asprey’s tome, Frederick the Great, I am deeply moved by the improvement under democracy for the advancement of life context. The utter miseries of the soldiers and fatherless homes, the prevailing warfare here and there, were always a threat. Peasant life was hard. Towns were ravaged, and the savagery of life with poverty, illnesses, and lack of human services was common. Power persons, usually related to royalty, were taken by their wealth, graft, culture, mistresses and excesses, offering little to the people. Frederick was a man of culture, loved following academic and artistic interests, was accomplished in music, and perceptive of government improvement. He was well directed in Christian doctrine, even if not always in practice. All of this and more provide evidence for belief in human depravity and a need to find a faith that meets the needs of mankind. Frederick in Prussia was active at the same time as Washington was in the British colonies – an ocean away. Frederick in Prussia, Catherine in Russia, and Maria Teresa in Austria were designated as Great – at the same time period. They muddled the spiritual concepts of mission for service to mankind – a mission truth that characterizes biblical teaching, one followed by Washington and many others in the colonies. England and France were in constant competition. Russia, Austria, Sweden, Holland, Turkey, Spain and Italy were engaged with the Greats noted above in warfare, jealousy, excess, power and the like. The follies of persons became tragic – celebrities (including Voltaire, friend to Frederick), militarists, religionists, and others. We understand better how 3,000 or so troops under Washington could defeat England, embroiled in Europe’s intrigues so sending too few soldiers to the colonies to take care of their own Tory people. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020