Intellectual superiority

[DialecticSkeptic]

I was going to reply to your response, but you deleted it.

 

[StillGods]

I couldnt get it to quote how I wanted it to as I was on my phone so was more cumbersome so I tried to start over but lost the draft so gave up. I cant remember what I said now I'm sorry.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

No worries.

 

[Don Maurer]

I agree that Calvinism does not require being intellectually superior. That sort of language seems more like a personal attack.

On the other hand, I also hear people with pietistic presuppositions making similar accusations. How many doctrinal statements are as detailed and extensive as the Westminster or 1689? Reformed people focus on doctrine and become quite detailed. They also can be interested in the history of doctrines.

While I would not support this becoming an erudite expression of arrogance, I do think the focus on doctrinal aspects of our faith is needed to maintain our worldview. 17th century Pietism was followed by 18 century deism. Pietism without doctrine will work no better than doctrine without a resulting piety.

 

[The Righterzpen]

3. I can not help but think of intellectually challenged people who have no way of working through the concepts needed to understand what Calvinists believe, and then there does seem to be a barrier there and out of reach.

I've worked most of my adult life with developmentally disabled people. I have a young adult son who has epilepsy and his seizures cause severe memory issues.

Yet in certain of these individuals; I've seen great faith. Greater than the intellectual capacity of any genius level theologian I've ever read. Which goes to prove that we are not saved by what we know; we are saved by God's sovereign will!

Personally, I'm a person "prone to" intense Bible study. I do a lot of studying and a lot of research into various related subjects. Am I "smarter than the average bear"? I have no idea. I do have a good memory, good organizational skills and I can communicate well both verbally and in writing. Are those "signs of higher intelligence"? Sociologically speaking; they say it is; yet I've come to understand that any truth I've gleaned from studying the Bible, is because of the power of God and His willingness to reveal that. None of that is dependent on what number I could score on an IQ test. (God hides truth from the proud.)

Now my son's "over all IQ" scores in the low to mid 80's. Yet some quite profound Biblical truths have popped out of his mouth that he would never be able to "support" by quoting Scripture; because he literally can't remember squat! Yet I could explain to him with Scripture, why and how he's right. Which again, wisdom and solid faith isn't based on "recite(able) knowledge".

Does my son believe the principles expressed in TULIP? (Yes he does.) Can he explain to you what that means? (No he can't.) And I have run into other developmentally disabled people who "fit that bill".

Now are there a lot of "intellectual reformation snobs" in this community. Most certainly yes. Yet as others have pointed out; you see that in any faith community.

And the irony is; (I've seen this too); that the "intellectual reformation snobs" remain snobs even when I "win" the Biblical exegetical argument. (And more often than not they will turn around and accuse me of being arrogant, simply because they lost the argument!) Most people have difficulty dealing with "knowledgable pharisees" because they get frustrated. "Knowledgable pharisees" are infamous at not listening to what the person is saying. They use a lot of manipulative and gaslighting tactics. And if the person on the other end of the discussion doesn't recognize this; it's easy to "fall for the trap".

So yes, all of these are common. But they are common issues in human communication; not just those of a particular doctrinal set of perimeters.

Personally, I like to do "deep dives" with people who like to learn. I learn a lot that way too; despite the fact that I already know a lot. Teachableness (on both sides) is the biggest factor in being able to have productive conversations with people. Though yes, I'm also quite skilled at "winning an argument" if that is the challenge that presents itself.

Takes wisdom to know which direction it's going though too, because the intent of a stranger isn't always easy to parse out on a public forum like this one. Skilled (trained) and emotionally pragmatic people pick up more on cues by body language than words; which of course can't be seen on a computer screen.

 

[Brother-Mike]

I've worked most of my adult life with developmentally disabled people. I have a young adult son who has epilepsy and his seizures cause severe memory issues.

Yet in certain of these individuals; I've seen great faith. Greater than the intellectual capacity of any genius level theologian I've ever read. Which goes to prove that we are not saved by what we know; we are saved by God's sovereign will!

Personally, I'm a person "prone to" intense Bible study. I do a lot of studying and a lot of research into various related subjects. Am I "smarter than the average bear"? I have no idea. I do have a good memory, good organizational skills and I can communicate well both verbally and in writing. Are those "signs of higher intelligence"? Sociologically speaking; they say it is; yet I've come to understand that any truth I've gleaned from studying the Bible, is because of the power of God and His willingness to reveal that. None of that is dependent on what number I could score on an IQ test. (God hides truth from the proud.)

Now my son's "over all IQ" scores in the low to mid 80's. Yet some quite profound Biblical truths have popped out of his mouth that he would never be able to "support" by quoting Scripture; because he literally can't remember squat! Yet I could explain to him with Scripture, why and how he's right. Which again, wisdom and solid faith isn't based on "recite(able) knowledge".

Does my son believe the principles expressed in TULIP? (Yes he does.) Can he explain to you what that means? (No he can't.) And I have run into other developmentally disabled people who "fit that bill".

Now are there a lot of "intellectual reformation snobs" in this community. Most certainly yes. Yet as others have pointed out; you see that in any faith community.

And the irony is; (I've seen this too); that the "intellectual reformation snobs" remain snobs even when I "win" the Biblical exegetical argument. (And more often than not they will turn around and accuse me of being arrogant, simply because they lost the argument!) Most people have difficulty dealing with "knowledgable pharisees" because they get frustrated. "Knowledgable pharisees" are infamous at not listening to what the person is saying. They use a lot of manipulative and gaslighting tactics. And if the person on the other end of the discussion doesn't recognize this; it's easy to "fall for the trap".

So yes, all of these are common. But they are common issues in human communication; not just those of a particular doctrinal set of perimeters.

Personally, I like to do "deep dives" with people who like to learn. I learn a lot that way too; despite the fact that I already know a lot. Teachableness (on both sides) is the biggest factor in being able to have productive conversations with people. Though yes, I'm also quite skilled at "winning an argument" if that is the challenge that presents itself.

Takes wisdom to know which direction it's going though too, because the intent of a stranger isn't always easy to parse out on a public forum like this one. Skilled (trained) and emotionally pragmatic people pick up more on cues by body language than words; which of course can't be seen on a computer screen.

Thanks for this insightful post Righterzpen, especially the wonderful and warming insight into your son.

I'm with you on the differences and deficiencies of writing versus face-to-face communication. Add to that anonymity and the general woes and foibles of social media in this time of general hostility and it's easy to wind up with meandering threads running pages and pages of posturing and talking past one another. And I am guilty as the next person of getting sucked into the fan blades.

There's more than a bit of me that suspects that doctrinal mismatch and endless bickering among Christians may well be a feature and not a bug, something like a self-correcting, always-evaluating mechanism designed to prune and shape the community.

Next time you're up for one of your "deep dives", be it public or private conversation, do let me know and I'll get into my scuba gear.

Brother Mike

 

[The Righterzpen]

Thanks for this insightful post Righterzpen, especially the wonderful and warming insight into your son.

I'm with you on the differences and deficiencies of writing versus face-to-face communication. Add to that anonymity and the general woes and foibles of social media in this time of general hostility and it's easy to wind up with meandering threads running pages and pages of posturing and talking past one another. And I am guilty as the next person of getting sucked into the fan blades.

There's more than a bit of me that suspects that doctrinal mismatch and endless bickering among Christians may well be a feature and not a bug, something like a self-correcting, always-evaluating mechanism designed to prune and shape the community.

Next time you're up for one of your "deep dives", be it public or private conversation, do let me know and I'll get into my scuba gear.

Brother Mike

Hey! Got a subject you want to deep dive on; let me know. I'm game for any ocean!

 

[Don Maurer]

Yet in certain of these individuals; I've seen great faith. Greater than the intellectual capacity of any genius level theologian I've ever read. Which goes to prove that we are not saved by what we know; we are saved by God's sovereign will!
......

Now my son's "over all IQ" scores in the low to mid 80's. Yet some quite profound Biblical truths have popped out of his mouth that he would never be able to "support" by quoting Scripture; because he literally can't remember squat! Yet I could explain to him with Scripture, why and how he's right. Which again, wisdom and solid faith isn't based on "recite(able) knowledge".

Does my son believe the principles expressed in TULIP? (Yes he does.) Can he explain to you what that means? (No he can't.) And I have run into other developmentally disabled people who "fit that bill".

It would be interesting to get to know your son. There are two intellectually disabled people in our congregation. 1-- I believe one is Down's syndrome but I never actually asked, but this person has the features. She seems very high functioning and I guess her IQ in the high 60s, but I do not know. She freely takes part in an adult bible study and can verbally express herself on many issues, including Calvinism. 2-- The second person is autistic (a guess on my part) and is far more hard to read because of very low expressive language skills. I do not observe him articulating anything.... ever. His receptive language skills seem adequate. I see his parents giving him instruction and he follows their directions. I also observe him freely and independently walking around the Church not directly supervised by his parents At times, he walks into Church and picks the pew that the family sits in, and then 2 minutes later the family will come into the sanctuary. I think his parents can grasp body language and other forms of communication but I do not know the non verbal cues. Due to his lack of verbal skills, I am not able to grasp how much he understands of SS lessons, sermons, etc. I observe a smile on his face and that is about all I can see. -- I have never thought that hard about how Intellectually disabled people fit into our congregation. In case #1 above, that person is close to being "mainstreamed" in the programs of the Church. In case #2, that person is not "mainstreamed." But it is complex with this person. The are more needs this person might have that I do not wish to discuss in a public forum. In any case, thanks for writing and making me think a little about this issue.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Hey! Got a subject you want to deep dive on; let me know. I'm game for any ocean!

@Brother-Mike



Here's one. Maybe you can express it better than I can.

Where do we Reformed/Calvinists draw the line between saying we are right in our doctrine, yet unable to understand the depth of it, (nevermind to be able to convey it to others)?

Those that teach and preach, or in other ways convey God's truths, are responsible to do so accurately and clearly, yet we are unable —because the subject matter is beyond us— and so we depend on God's mercy, forbearance and help to get us through.

Lately I've been caught on the irony of those of us who "have it right" knowing we are unable to have it quite right, and that, according to our own teaching that God is so far beyond us!

I've tried to tell how even the Reformed and Calvinists who believe in the Sovereignty of God find themselves also reverting to the will of man, almost as if our doctrine was just theory, and the only way to make the theory work is by brute will of our own!

One of the subjects discussed in this thread made me think of this, that one rather fortunate/unfortunate side effect of "being right" is that it gives one a certain confidence that can come across as arrogance; but it also lends itself to pride. For some of us, that isn't very becoming, when we look down on those who just don't 'see it' yet, but are probably better at walking with God than we are. (I keep it second person here, so that I can keep talking...



As a sort of 'aside' or tangent to this subject is the satisfaction and joy of knowing God uses us fools to talk to those who might pick up on something we say wrong, so that they will perhaps begin to understand something Scriptural they would not get from hearing pure truth from Scripture. It's kind of humorous in a way, but also does not give us any liberty to misuse Scripture, or to teach anything false. (Sorry if this offends anyone, but I find myself almost careless sometimes because God is SO merciful, much more gentle on me than I am in my own self-deprecation, and because with God nothing goes to waste —particularly in to whatever degree what we say is Scriptural.)

 

[Mark Quayle]

your reply in itself shows that Calvinism is only for those who are well versed in the works of those two theologians...is that not in itself an intellectually superior reply.

Not at all. He was just giving two examples of theologians that are not of an arrogant mindset.

 

[Brother-Mike]

Evening Mark, and broadly agreed with your comments here. I can stumble around in the dark with a few additional points of my own:

First, this is worth contemplating for two or three hours before reading on:

"Each is deceived by the sense of finality peculiar to the stage of development at which he stands." - Carl Jung, Modern Man in Search of a Soul​

Those that teach and preach, or in other ways convey God's truths, are responsible to do so accurately and clearly, yet we are unable —because the subject matter is beyond us— and so we depend on God's mercy, forbearance and help to get us through.

Agreed. All teachers, religious or not, must contend with the fact that they don't know the complete nature of reality. They can only describe the parts of reality that they believe they have assurance in. We all seem pretty well designed to accept this unknowingness and yet still build on it structures of objective truth, be they personal observations, facts or beliefs.

I've tried to tell how even the Reformed and Calvinists who believe in the Sovereignty of God find themselves also reverting to the will of man, almost as if our doctrine was just theory, and the only way to make the theory work is by brute will of our own!

To me the Bible is clear about both God's Sovereignty over all things and at the same time man's creaturely-freedom in acting and being held responsible for such. They are both true, without contradiction.

As a sort of 'aside' or tangent to this subject is the satisfaction and joy of knowing God uses us fools to talk to those who might pick up on something we say wrong, so that they will perhaps begin to understand something Scriptural they would not get from hearing pure truth from Scripture. It's kind of humorous in a way, but also does not give us any liberty to misuse Scripture, or to teach anything false. (Sorry if this offends anyone, but I find myself almost careless sometimes because God is SO merciful, much more gentle on me than I am in my own self-deprecation, and because with God nothing goes to waste —particularly in to whatever degree what we say is Scriptural.)

Agreed. A Calvinist teacher is called to educate in the best of their ability, but knows that ultimately it's God's job to call. Yet the teacher strives still.

 

[Mark Quayle]

"Each is deceived by the sense of finality peculiar to the stage of development at which he stands." - Carl Jung, Modern Man in Search of a Soul

Wondering why you put that there, considering the subject matter. I can only guess: Because it deals with one's growing understanding.

I assume "Each" refers to 'each person', and "he" also refers to that same person. While I can agree to the statement (as I understand it) as I have experienced the phenomenon myself, and its apparent unavoidability, I wouldn't know if that applies to everyone. Couldn't tell you how often I find myself laughing at myself, at thinking I'm so much smarter today than I used to be, and know so much more! Every time I hear someone 'give their testimony' I'm wondering how much different it will sound ten or twenty years from now. They think they are through the worst of it, and have got the method of life straight.

Agreed. All teachers, religious or not, must contend with the fact that they don't know the complete nature of reality. They can only describe the parts of reality that they believe they have assurance in. We all seem pretty well designed to accept this unknowingness and yet still build on it structures of objective truth, be they personal observations, facts or beliefs.

Nicely put. I wish it was that clear, in their teaching, that they themselves understand themselves to not know the complete nature of reality. If pressed, they will all agree it is so, but in practice, their mindset is that they (sometimes even they alone) have 'got it down'.

It is both a bit humbling and a lot of fun, to realize as I'm writing, that I'm organizing my thinking and developing my understanding, as I go.

To me the Bible is clear about both God's Sovereignty over all things and at the same time man's creaturely-freedom in acting and being held responsible for such. They are both true, without contradiction.

Creaturely-freedom, yes! But even the Calvinist clings desperately, sometimes without even knowing that he is doing so, to self-determination. I hear from some that the two are true but that it is a mystery how it is so. To me there is no mystery to it. To me, in fact, the mystery would be how it is NOT so, if it were not so. It is God's decree that establishes the reality of the creature's choices. And for the believer, it is the Spirit of God within that establishes the integrity of their decisions —e.g. the reality of their repentance, submission, obedience, etc.

And to me that is obvious not only from Scripture, but even from experience and reason. Reason, because of the simple chain of causation. Experience, because of the silly weakness of the flesh.

Agreed. A Calvinist teacher is called to educate in the best of their ability, but knows that ultimately it's God's job to call. Yet the teacher strives still.

Yet, there's the rub. The words of God are absolutely true, and the arrangements of doctrine are 'true enough' to lend one all sorts of confidence in the truth —specially over other doctrines that fall short of truth, presupposing all sorts of [usually self-deterministic] things. For myself, just as an example, I have supreme confidence in the fact that omnipotent God exists and is first cause, because it makes more sense that it be so, than that I should exist; yet, here I am. So how do I get that confidence across while making it plain that my thoughts are, as CS Lewis put it, the "babble that we think we mean."

Sometimes I thank God for stumbling words, and I almost always go out of my way to keep my speech simple, trying to avoid the appearance of cold erudition. But it doesn't matter —I still come across as arrogant, proud, even boastful, because of my doctrine.