Exploring the historical and future trajectory of intellectual engagement within evangelical circles, touching on the evolution of thought from figures like Jonathan Edwards to modern challenges in balancing academic rigor with popular beliefs. The chapter discusses the role of institutions, media impact on church practices, and the delicate balance between tradition and innovation within evangelical intellectualism.
Transcript
chevron_right
Play full episode
chevron_right
Transcript
Episode notes
“The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind” (opening sentence of chapter one)
It’s no secret that modern Evangelicalism is not noted for its intellectualism. In fact, with groups in our midst like Young Earth Creationists, Flat Earthers, anti-vaxxers, and climate change deniers, and the constant criticism coming from within our ranks directed at cultural changes and scientific advances, Christianity in general and Evangelicalism in particular have gained a reputation for being quite anti-intellectual. We heard about this in spades when we talked to Frankie Schaeffer a year back.
Over the past four years, this podcast has often referred to a particular book — The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind — which explores that Evangelical anti-intellectualism in detail. In 1995, Christianity Today declared it the winner of the Book of the Year Award, and in 2004 they claimed that it had “arguably shaped the evangelical world (or at least its institutions) more than any other book published in the last decade.” Today, on the 30th anniversary of its printing, we brought in its author: Dr. Mark Noll, a premier historian of American and Canadian Christian history. He is an Evangelical himself, and has impeccable credentials within Evangelical academia, even though he has often been critical of Evangelicalism.
We first needed to talk about the label “Evangelical,” since that has broad dimensions demographically and theologically, and the movement has become quite wrapped up with politics and partisanship. In the process, it was important to distinguish “Evangelical” from “Fundamentalist.”
Then we talked about the anti-intellectual aspect of this movement, as seen in their shunning of philosophy, culture, science and so many other dimensions of modern society. Progress has been made: we now have world intellectual leaders like Francis Collins, Kathryn Hayhoe, and Biologos. Unfortunately, those are not household names, and yet Ken Ham and AiG are widely recognized!? There is now an ever-increasing level of sophistication in Evangelical theology and scientific literacy (again, Ken Ham and AiG notwithstanding), and yet there is also an increasing separation between a minority of university-trained Evangelicals and a majority of those who are not. Another major problem: how Evangelicalism has become so closely tied to Republicanism and Trumpism, and there is a major racial division within Evangelicalism (white Evangelicals are predominantly pro-Republican, black Evangelicals pro-Democrat).
We explored why Evangelicals tend to shun intellectualism. Historically, it began as a reaction against secular intellectuals in the late 19th century speaking against the authority of the Bible (evolution; textual criticism, etc). It didn’t help that some scriptural passages devalue “the wisdom of man” and praise “the simplicity of children”; the resistance to scholarly authority was exacerbated by an emphasis on the “personal relationship” and “the priesthood of every believer.” Churches/institutions who start to lean away from conservative thinking find their funding sources start to dry up, while leaders and thinkers who dare to push on theological boundaries are fired (Peter Enns is one example of this).
Despite this negative summary, our guest expert is optimistic about the future. We’re curious what you have to say … leave a comment at our web-site or our Facebook page.
