22AR27-27

( - previous issue - / - next issue - )

pdf = www.bit.ly/3cV5T0w

chimp = bit.ly/3BHr7cF

AR 27:27 - Two great additions to the field of Christian apologetics

In this issue:

CHRISTIANITY - how Jesus' teachings transformed the world and "continue to underpin the way we think of life, worth, and meaning"

+ engaging some of "the best contemporary arguments against Christianity"

WOKEISM - "You cannot outsource your church or your ministry's conscience to the digital swarm"

Apologia Report 27:27 (1,580)
August 4, 2022

CHRISTIANITY

Why Believe?: A Reasoned Approach to Christianity, by Neil Shenvi (who's been featured in AR <www.bit.ly/3RuAKAR> more than a few times).

Crossway says: "For centuries, skeptics have disputed the claims of Christianity - such as belief in an eternal God and the resurrection of Jesus Christ - arguing that they simply cannot be accepted by reasonable individuals. Furthermore, efforts to demonstrate the evidence and rational basis for Christianity through apologetics are often deemed too simplistic to be taken seriously in intellectual circles. Apologist and theoretical chemist Neil Shenvi engages some of the best contemporary arguments against Christianity, presenting compelling evidence for the identity of Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels, his death and resurrection, the existence of God, and the unique message of the gospel." Shenvi "calls readers from all backgrounds not only to accept Christianity as true, but also to entrust their lives to Christ and worship him alone."

Author, reviewer, blogger, and pastor Tim Challies promotes this title as a "new and notable" resource. <www.bit.ly/3nYcwl1>

Publishers Weekly (Apr 18 '22) finds: "This lucid debut by theoretical chemist Shenvi draws on history, math, philosophy, and a variety of other fields to rebut common objections to Christianity. In supporting the faith's key tenets, Shenvi argues for the historical reality of Jesus and finds proof of the gospels' accuracy in first-century Roman historians' writings and such archeological discoveries as the pool of Bethesda. The author also suggests that the big bang theory confirms the Bible's account of a finitely old universe, and posits that intelligent design reveals itself in the fact that 'the same beautiful mathematical equations apply uniformly across all time and space.' Drawing on the work of psychologists Steven Pinker and Stanley Milgram, Shenvi claims that humans are 'radically corrupt' and concludes that this, too, points to Christianity's veracity because Christianity alone among religions recognizes this fact. Shenvi's rigorous syllogistic reasoning and multidisciplinary approach make for an outstanding volume in the crowded field of apologetics. This has the power to change minds." <www.bit.ly/3APKkbS>

Challies (noted in AR <www.bit.ly/3aCAtLy> since 2019) was also impressed with The Air We Breathe: How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality, by Glen Scrivener -- publisher Good Book Company tells us: "Today in the west, many consider the church to be dead or dying. Christianity is seen as outdated, bigoted and responsible for many of society's problems. This leaves many believers embarrassed about their faith and many outsiders wary of religion. But what if the Christian message is not the enemy of our modern Western values, but the very thing that makes sense of them? ... Scrivener takes readers on a journey to discover how the teachings of Jesus not only turned the ancient world upside down, but continue to underpin the way we think of life, worth, and meaning. Far from being a relic from the past, the distinctive ideas of Christianity, such as freedom, kindness, progress and equality, are a crucial part of the air that we breathe." As Scrivener says in his introduction: "The extraordinary impact of Christianity is seen in the fact that we don't notice it." <www.bit.ly/3o1rh6x>

---

WOKEISM

"It's a Mistake to Take Online Populist Movements Very Seriously: The digital swarm can only harm, not help, institutions and ministries" by Samuel D. James (Jun 28 '22). James begins by referring to the recent work of Ryan Grim, D.C. Bureau Chief of The Intercept <www.bit.ly/3aGMP5y> ("one of the more illuminating pieces I've read this year"). At first glance "it looks like an intriguing but predictable profile of a phenomenon most conservatives know: the way that woke, progressive institutions tend to eat themselves from the inside out. But I think it could be something more meaningful. What Grim captures is not just the cannibalistic impulse of much social-justice liberalism, but the way that institutions destroy themselves by putting a lot of value on the threats and complaints of their most activist constituencies/employees."

Grim offers an example: "In August 2017, when a rising 'alt-right' organized a white-nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, the ACLU went to court to defend the right to march on First Amendment grounds, as it had famously done for generations. ... Internally, staff at the ACLU, concentrated among the younger people there, condemned the decision to defend the rally. Veteran lawyers at the ACLU complained to the New York Times <www.nyti.ms/3bwsHDo> that the new generation 'placed less value on free speech, making it uncomfortable for them to express views internally that diverged from progressive orthodoxy.'"

James - who serves as Communications Specialist for the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention - responds that the vignette "captures all the main ingredients of the systemic issues that Grim considers. There's an established institution that takes some kind of stand, usually a stand consistent with their history and mission and often with strong unity from the executive leadership. Then, a younger, more online group within that institution becomes offended at that stance, and they (privately, or increasingly often, publicly) criticize it, not only on the grounds that it is incorrect but that it ignores the beliefs and preferences of those within the institution who should be consulted and honored. Fearing reprisals, the institution often backtracks, perhaps even betraying their mission in the process. ...

"The world of the online age is entirely responsive to our will; whether we will continue to see something that challenges or confronts us depends on whether we will continue to scroll. We can stop the challenge by stopping the scrolling. This, I believe, has created a profound epistemological condition: an expectation that a properly functioning world is one in which I can see only what I choose to see.

"The tension between the way that older generations see the world and the way that Millennials and Gen-Z see it is evident in this piece. ... The emerging generation of activists [who are earning a bully's reputation] are arriving at these organizations with two things: incredible amounts of leverage over their employers (thanks to the Internet), and incredibly low amounts of personal investment in groups or networks outside themselves. ...

"In many evangelical organizations in America, there is a palpable fear of being labeled 'woke' or liberal. ...

"Both the young progressive activists and the anti- 'Big Eva' movement within conservative evangelicalism strongly resemble what philosopher Byung-Chul Han [Universität der Künste Berlin] calls 'the digital swarm.'" Han's "description of outrage as a social currency [finds that] 'their fluidity and volatility make them unsuited to shaping public discourse or public space [in which] ...

"Waves of outrage often occur in response to events of only meager social or political relevance: 'What is more, the world of Homo digitalis evinces an entirely different topology. Spaces such as sports arenas and amphitheaters - that is, sites where masses meet - are foreign to this world. The digital inhabitants of the Net do not assemble.'" Han discusses these contrasts in greater detail.

James adds that "Han articulates something Ryan Grim doesn't. Whereas Grim's essay is wholly concerned with the ideological combustion of young activists inside established organizations, Han identifies the very form of the Web as antithetical to the kind of cohesion that institutions demand."

James asks: "So what's the cash value of all this? Put simply, I think it's that leaders need to be extremely cautious in assessing the importance and value of online movements. ... The Web-shaped activism from the right or the left is designed to disable cohesion. You cannot outsource your church or your ministry's conscience to the digital swarm.

"The only real way to assess the strength of an idea is the test of time. ... The alternative [to becoming] immersed in the digital swarm is patience and the long game." <www.bit.ly/3PaAvcM>

( - previous issue - / - next issue - )