Why education seems to directly correlate with atheism

Dang it, Saige - why couldn't I have gotten a fraction of that incredible Dean memory? What a funny and timely quotation. Thanks :)

Though I've had to read it one comment at a time, with each read being separated by long intervals, I've enjoyed reading this discussion. When I first saw your question, I couldn't help but think of one of my favorite lines from one of my favorite movies, so matter-of-fact-ly delivered by Dame Judi Dench.

I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone.

Every time I hear her say this in The Importance of Being Earnest, it cracks me up. Anyway, just thought I'd share that. Now you guys can get back to the discussion. ;)

"Humble little geniuses" - sounds like a great title for a homeschooling mom's blog! :)

My question is, do modern Christians settle too soon on just enough knowledge to get by (unless you’re automatically gifted in academic skills)?


Sadly, this is often the case. And the lack of attention to learning is often spiritualized. Daniel and I have talked about this a lot--we know several big homeschooling families who don't have a single college graduate amongst the children, and that attitude looks like retreat, not dominion. That's why it's up to gifted folks with a kingdom mindset to create a culture that values learning AND humility, and then to have lots of humble little geniuses and send them out into the world.

Enjoyed your references to the education of young ladies back in the day--makes me want to get off this ol' thing and dust off the pianoforte.

Josh,
Interesting distinctions you made there. I really wonder, though, if strength of faith plays the decisive role in whether one is tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine; I know some of the people you're talking about, and their faith in God is as strong as - or stronger than - that of the other believers you mentioned. I really think the more important thing is having a solid framework of the faith, in which I regard hermeneutics and proper to be particularly crucial (maybe even primary). How do we define strength of faith? Their ability to walk out the Christian ethic? As long as he has good intentions and does try to honor God, should someone be given a pass for being an utter loon with bad doctrine? Maybe so, but contenting oneself with lunacy can't be helpful for the faith of others. Should we regard someone's strength of faith as adequate if he is a completely devout evangelical living out the faith, but denies the Trinity? Is a charismatic/cessationist?

Leah,
What matters is the return.
-Good comment.

On the other hand, if God calls her to be a stay-at-home mom who never even goes to college, and in doing so she rears godly children who rear godly children who rear godly children, ad infinitum, who am I to say she wasted her time?
-I know what you mean, but perhaps this isn't the best illustration. It begs the question of whether stay-at-home moms are exempt from knowing as much as they can so that they can help pass it on to their charge. If the operation of the Kingdom indeed places a nonnegotiable premium on education and learning, then raising children should be one of the most useful and least dispensable applications for knowledge acquisition.

If our God is big and we are small, knowledge is simply a tool in his hands, like anything else.
-Wholeheartedly agreed. Knowledge as a thing in itself can be a distraction, which is something I was trying to get at with my OP: maybe there's such a high number of atheists who are so well-educated (if it really is so inordinately high - see Steve M's comment) because they only got to be so educated because they were pursuing self-aggrandizement and self-reliance.

On this note, let me redefine my original question a bit more. We acknowledge that the pursuit of learning can be a pitfall and a distraction. But what of its necessity? Postmillennialists and preterists are agreed that Christianity has a whole lot of ground to cover in influencing the world in every aspect of society. Looking at history it seems clear that any time the world has been changed for the better, be it medicine, industry, or humanitarian aid, the advance was not formulated and enacted by just any Joe Treat-his-neighbor-right or Jane Teaches-Sunday-school, but by people who were humanists in the Renaissance sense; in short, people who wanted to be the best humans they could be in all areas of life and so maximize their potential. Young women seeking to become the sort of stay-at-home moms you described should not be content to just know how to clean the house and discipline their children, but should seek out understanding of all kinds to pass on to their children.

My question is, do modern Christians settle too soon on just enough knowledge to get by (unless you're automatically gifted in academic skills)? In the Victorian Age, as I'm sure you're aware from Jane Austen, etc., all young ladies of any means were expected to learn at least one other language and play an instrument to a surprising skill level, with little regard to natural gifting. I know, I know, we can focus too much on those sorts of things and ignore the people in the neighborhood a couple blocks over living in squalor, but are we not selling our God short by not being the best we can be in all things? I just don't think it's an either-or proposition.

The dangers of losing focus aside, I believe it is a worthy ideal for the Church to maximize its effectivity and relevance by enjoining its constituency, "Be all you can be in God's army." :) :roll:

Who cares if he knows what I think he should know if he loves God and neighbor, if he serves with his whole heart?
-I am seriously asking what you asked rhetorically: who cares? Does God care? Remember, the love for God that Jesus insisted upon was total: heart, soul, mind, and strength. That's humanism. If Mr. One-talent is only using all his available resources and not seeking to develop new ones, he is in effect burying his talent. I suggest that he is perhaps not fully acting like a participant of redeemed humanity. The Christian is Man as he was always intended to be.

"But that's not my gifting!" This seems to be a cop-out. Paul told the Corinthians not to settle for tongues or one of the other gifts, but to earnestly seek prophecy for the good it would do the Body. Why not extend this principle elsewhere?

The key is in teaching them to value wisdom above knowledge, and the King and his glory above all.
-Well said! Of course, this leads me to something else. Wisdom is, as I understand it, practical knowledge for living in ways that honor God. Now, this sort of wisdom would exhort its seekers to honor God to the fullest extent possible. If, as I am suggesting, every Christian should seek to honor God by living up to his full potential, not settling for the exposed diamonds but digging in to mine for more, all for the augmentation of God's Kingdom, then the pursuit of education, especially for those to whom it does not come naturally, results in the glorification of our Creator.

Well I have come across all types of christians, those who are very educated (e.g. R.C. Sproul) and those who are just happy to be saved (e.g. some people I go to church with).   Now among the latter group I think I can categorize the folks in one of two ways: those who are ignorant of the more high-minded aspects of Christian doctrine, but who have an unshakable faith and then those who are ignorant of higher points of theology and have a shaky faith are tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.
The question comes down in large part to how strong is the faith of the "ignorant" person in question?

I think we can apply the parable of the talents to answer this question. We're all given a measure of resources by the Master. What matters is the return.

If my brilliant child can accomplish more for the Kingdom by becoming a brain surgeon, then she should seek to have the greatest return on her talents that she can. On the other hand, if God calls her to be a stay-at-home mom who never even goes to college, and in doing so she rears godly children who rear godly children who rear godly children, ad infinitum, who am I to say she wasted her time?

It isn't intellectual pursits in themselves that nudge God out, but the idolization of knowledge. When we pursue it to have our eyes opened, or because the Tree of Life isn't enough, we cannot help but fall. If our God is big and we are small, knowledge is simply a tool in his hands, like anything else.

Substitute any idol you want--fame, business prowess, musical ability, beauty. Are fame and faith enemies? Success and faith? Skill and faith? Attractiveness and faith? No. But when they become IT, God gets smaller and smaller and our own answers to life's questions seem so much more attractive than the words of Life.

Ignorance is dangerous too, when it's willful. The wicked servant chose to be ignorant of the master's ways and refused even to invest what he had. But if Mr. One-talent is doing his best to glorify God with the gifts he has, who am I to judge him for his intellectual simplicity? Who cares if he knows what I think he should know if he loves God and neighbor, if he serves with his whole heart?

Is ignorance AS dangerous? Probably not, but it's certainly nothing to preserve and protect in one's children. The key is in teaching them to value wisdom above knowledge, and the King and his glory above all.

Hi Steve,
I guess when speaking of ignorance, we need to define "ignorant of what?". It is clear that sharing the gospel is required because people will not figure this out naturally. It is very difficult to have faith in a God you know nothing about.
On the other hand, i think faith is pretty independent of education in general. There are lots of well-educated & lots of uneducated among both the ranks of the faithful & the faithless.
Somewhat related to this topic is a post on scienceblogs ... see:
http://tinyurl.com/65l4rh

[Steve D's note: I truncated the URL, but it points to the same location]

I hope this doesn't make me sound too simple. But when you said "Do you think there’s an equal and opposite danger for ignorance? I think not..." did you mean does ignorance move people closer to God or does ignorance likewise move folks away?  I just didn't want to launch into an opinion and be talking about the wrong thing.
 
 
My apologies to those who understood the question the first time. :)