Sunday, October 14, 2018

from the VCC Newsletter on 10/8: Sages in the Information Age

Last week I mentioned  you can learn virtually anything on the internet these days, there is very little that is hidden, but for us to become the sages of wisdom this generation needs requires us to be very authentic and transparent about what we do or do not actually know.

Today I want to focus on sages as role models. Having information does not automatically come with the wisdom to process the information. For example, someone who knows a lot about his or her medication should not dispense it to others. In addition, someone should not perform surgery, even an M.D., because they watched hundreds of TED talks and Youtube videos. Most of life is not as serious as surgery nor as consequential as medication, still most of us have made more than a few costly mistakes with too many zeros at the end.  We all need sages, those who have made their own share of mistakes and can help us process the information. We need teachers, not to dispense information, but to help us make sense of the myriad of information at our disposal. We still need pastors, not to tell us what the Bible says, but to help us make sense of each chapter and verse. Yet many people today do not trust the experts but are instead looking for noble sages. These persons don’t need to have all the answers. They are the people we trust because they are living the life we want to live; we trust the way they process the information we bring to them. Sometimes they are our parents, and sometimes they are just trusted persons we perceive as being thoughtful, intentional, genuine, and full of peace and joy.  In other words, they reflect the fruit of the Spirit.

In that same spirit, Sages avoid the trap of comparison. When they need to compare or contrast things in life they pick lessons from nature, old stories, fables, and parables to avoid pitting persons against one another. In doing so they rarely make statements about groups of people or assumptions about another person's motives. This unwillingness to rush to judgment gives the us confidence that there is no agenda but only an honest pursuit of truth.

So let’s talk about how that plays out in real life. Sages evaluate science, politics, religion, philosophy, justice, and wisdom, not on the basis of their own experience nor from the vantage point of their own beliefs, but from honest discussion on the merits of what is presented. They rarely make value judgments and avoid labeling persons or ideas. It’s not because they lack their own assessments or opinions, but they demonstrate the validity or invalidity based on the issue at hand. They can logically follow the reasoning and point out the strengths and weaknesses of whatever is being considered. If the discussion is evolution they do not dismiss evolutionists as stupid or evil, nor make assumptions about their agenda. Sages reason through the strengths and weaknesses of the discussion and point clearly toward alternative views without making hurtful or demeaning statements. If the topic is political they do not leap to party ideology nor dismiss people’s views on individual discussions by party affiliation. Sages consider the discussion based on the merits of people’s opinions.  Recently someone I know found himself in a conversation about abortion. He is ardently pro-life. The person he was talking to was undecided but trusted his judgment. After a long discussion about the rationale for and against abortion, the young person thanked him for not getting upset, for hearing him out, and for not making the discussion political. Later, that young person told others he was pro-life, not because of political or religious affiliation, but on logical merits. Within earshot of my friend, he proceeded to make several of the points earlier discussed. What was most impressive was how the other young people listened to their peer and thanked him for not being political, demeaning women, or being dismissive of their viewpoint. They felt heard, not lectured, and they agreed the merits of the discussion leaned pro-life.

Next week I would like to talk about how we validate the Bible without arguing or demeaning others. A hint: it doesn’t begin with just knowing what it says, but instead it begins with the collection of writings, the genres, and even methods of study. We will discuss the history as well as the content of the Bible.

No comments:

Post a Comment