[Vision2020] Reply to Ben Merkle

[Mike Lawyer]

Hello all,

I know this note from Dr. Gier came out last week, but it has been rattling
around in my mind every since. And I don't have anything bad to say about
him, but something he said and something that others have assumed brought
something to my mind that I thought I ought to share.

Dr. Gier said: "There you will find my scholarship: four books, six book
chapters, 35 articles, 20 book reviews, and 80 regional, national, and
international presentations."

There seems to be a lot of weight thrown around when someone mentions that
they have academic credentials. Someone will say, "I've spent a great number
of years working on a masters degree and..." The assumption is that
therefore you should listen to me. Now this may or may be a sound argument,
but that isn't my point.

My point is this, there is a character in the Bible (the Apostle Paul) who
had every bit as prestigious a pedigree as Dr. Gier and any other of us, but
who thought very differently about it. He said:

If anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have
more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe
of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for
zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless.
But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ.
What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing
greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all
things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him,
not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which
is through faith in Christ-- the righteousness that comes from God and is by
faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the
fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and
so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Philippians
3:4-12)

I realize I'm am nobody. I do have a couple of degrees, but instead of
jumping on the intellectual band wagon, I prefer to think of myself being
more like Paul. I too would like to consider my academic achievements as
filthy rags that I might gain Christ and be known by him and counted by him
as being righteous.

I don't know how many ways you can interpret this text. It seems pretty
straight forward to me, but it seems to me that this is one of the main
points of being a Christian. What are you doing with Christ? What is the
goal of your life?

Dr. Gier says his training is in theology, which is the study of God. I have
no doubt that he knows a lot about theology, but what about knowing God? Is
Dr. Gier a joyful, winsome man? Is he characterized by light and glory? Does
his person exhibit the fact that he knows and is loved by the wonderful God
of creation?

I don't know Dr. Gier at all. And I'm not really directing these questions
at Dr. Gier specifically, but rather to the broader audience who reads this
list. Where is your life going? Are you working at being filled with
happiness or is it coming because you know the living God? Do you have the
same attitude toward your personal wealth and accomplishments that the
Apostle Paul had? Are you willing to die for your Lord who gave his life for
you?

God tells everyone to change your mind from being self-centered to being God
centered. Understand that Jesus came into the world to save sinners. We're
all sinners in need of saving. Turn to him, love him, serve him.

Thanks again.

Mike Lawyer


 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com] On
Behalf Of Nicholas Gier
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 12:01 AM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Reply to Ben Merkle

I will be happy to answer Ben Merkle's questions in the handy Yes or No
format that he has so graciously copied from me.  I will, however, make a
few qualifications and comments in the process.  This will be a lot more
edifying than the faux sounds of torture that his father-in-law Doug Wilson
made in answering my questions.  He could easily have made some qualifying
comments as well, but I guess he always wants to be evasive and never
direct.

 Over two months ago Ben e-mailed me about the sources for my column on
Calvin and Servetus published in the Daily News on Sept. 24.  I told him
that my primary source was Laurence and Nancy Goldstones' highly acclaimed
book "Out of the Flames." Check out the book reviews on amazon.com for their
credentials.

 At first Ben said that the Goldstones' work was a good book, but then he
changed his mind and said it was a very bad book.  Initially he said that he
would hold me responsible only for my errors not the Goldstones', but now he
seems to have taken that back as well.  

 He also said that he would contact the Goldstones about their references,
but so far he has not taken that very important step.  Until he does I will
not take his attack as very credible, and I will continue to stand by my use
of this excellent book.

 For those who saw my letter in the Daily News, some of this will be a
rehash of some issues that Ben just won't let go of.

 Now, to Ben's questions:

 1. Dr Gier, do you consider this column to be a scholarly and well

researched work, written in an even handed fashion and intended to build

bridges not walls? Yes or No?

 NO. You will not find this piece or any of my many other columns on my CV.
There you will find my scholarship: four books, six book chapters, 35
articles, 20 book reviews, and 80 regional, national, and international
presentations.

 This was a column written to provoke discussion. My own pastor and other
congregants thought that it was too polemical.  Because of their hesitation,
the column went through many revisions so as to please them.  My suspicions
about bridge building were confirmed by Doug Jones' incredible attack on
Forrest Church, who came to build bridges and speak about the art of living
well.  He did not expect to be hit over the head with the Trinity and all
that nonsense about hermit theology.  So I'm glad that I kept my column the
way I intended it.

2. Or do you consider this column to be a hack job of research penned after
reading one pop book on the subject and full of the sorts of factual errors
that would make any PhD blush, written with the intent to whip the good
people of Moscow into a religious frenzy? Yes or No?

NO.  Although certainly not my specialty, I did pass my qualifying exam in
Reformation Theology.  I did keep up over the years with a special interest
in Luther. In fact, I tried to correct a mistake that Wilson made about
Luther some time ago, but he ignored me. When I learned that Wilson was now
a Calvinist (and no longer a "New Testament Christian"), I started reviewing
some material on Calvinism to prepare  for opportunities to debate my
infamous former student.

Goldstones' "good book," initially according to Ben, is now a "pop book,"
but he has failed to contact the authors or to check their references. Ben
read the book so carelessly that I had to point out the references that I
used that he said he could not find.  I will stand by the Goldstones until
Ben does his promised homework.

3. Dr. Gier, did you carefully weigh all of the facts and cheek the primary
sources for all of your factual assertions in a manner befitting to your
diploma and with the diligence of an autumn squirrel gathering his nuts? Yes
or No?

NO, because I was writing a column and trusted the Goldstones as scholars
with very good reputations. Do you check every reference of every book that
you use to teach your classes?  I didn't think so.

4. Dr. Gier, did you assert that Servetus was the first to debate the

Christian reading of Isaiah 7:14? Yes or No?

YES. I read it in the Goldstones' book.

5. Dr. Gier, did you know that if you had done more than thirty or forty

seconds of research you would have discovered that this debate is as old as
the hills and goes all the way back through the rabbinic traditions of the
great Kimhis all the way to Trypho, of "Justin Martyr's dialogue with" fame
and to credit Servetus with its introduction makes some of us get teary eyed
with snickering? Yes or No?

NO.  I wasn't present to confirm whether you and your companions were either
crying or snickering.  This is possible mistake that you should offer to the
Goldstones, but the scholarly approach to making such a point should be one
of humble correction not juvenile one-upmanship.

On this point, Ben shows unusually keen skills in historical-critical
scholarship.  Does that mean that he applies similar scholarship to the
composition of the Old and New Testaments, scholarship that shows very
clearly the very human character of the formation of religious scripture?
For example, would he affirm the same ancient rabbinic scholarship that
shows that the Christian reading of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah is
totally at odds with Jewish tradition and the straight reading of the text?

Fundamentalists such as Ben and his colleagues use historical-critical
scholarship only when it suits their purposes, but turn around and reject it
as "liberal" when it doesn't.  There is no intellectual integrity in their
biblical hermeneutic!

5. Dr. Gier, did you assert that Calvin had "absolute authority in Geneva"?
Yes or No? YES

6. Dr. Gier, did you know that even a casual reading of some of the research
done in this field would reveal to you that the man didn't even have the
right to vote until a couple of years before his death and that he never had
the right to hold any civic office? Did you know that when I tell people who
actually study Calvin about your assertion, I have to make sure that they
aren't in the middle of taking a drink of milk, because I don't want it to
come out their nose? Yes or No?

NO.  I'm glad that I was not present to witness such a disgusting sight. Who
said that the right to vote gave anyone authority over another?  The people
of Geneva once decided to send Calvin down the road because they did not
like his authoritarian manner, but, incredibly enough, they invited him to
come back.  Calvin came back only on his terms,a generous wine ration being
one of those conditions.

In my column I was speaking of Calvin's theological authority, not his
political authority. For example, one day a man challenged him during a
sermon and Calvin had him arrested.  I'm away from Moscow, so I don't have
my books or my notes, so I can't remember whether this man was severely
punished or executed outright.  Calvin's Geneva was roughly like present day
Iran: there was an elected assembly and then there were the pastors who
strictly controlled the moral and spiritual lives of the citizens. Calvin
was the head pastor and no one dared to cross him.  Many authorities have
documented that the slightest infraction were punishable by stiff fines or
imprisonment.

7. Dr. Gier, did you already have to correct the fact that you invented the
assertion about Calvin going out to pick the greenest wood in order to make
the burning of Servetus really long and painful, because it turned out that
Calvin didn't want him burned (which kinda ruins the whole theme of your
column)? Yes or No?

YES.  I made that correction in a letter to Daily News, but NO it does not
ruin the theme of my column at all.  The theme of my column was to show how
Calvin and Luther betrayed the religious freedom of the Protestant
Reformation.  Why did hundreds of thousands have to die because Catholics,
Calvinists, and Lutherans claim to know who the real Christians were?  I
also wanted to celebrate the martyrdom of Servetus and to also acknowledge
the fact that Servetus' descendents (many of the Founding Fathers were
proto-Unitarians)finally gave the world the religious freedom promised by
the Protestant Reformation.

8. Dr. Gier, did you think the previous seven questions were really,
really,really, fair and unbiased and that they were written in such a way as
to give you a chance to fully explain your position and to clear up any
ambiguities in this debate? Did you think that this would be a great venue
for you to explain yourself to an audience that was obviously willing to
hear your answers and to consider your answers in an open-minded way? Yes or
No?

 YES!!!  I thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to explain myself.  I wish
that your pastor and father-in-law had done the same. I certainly did not
say that he couldn't make comments or qualifications. Knowing how evasive
Wilson is, I thought requiring a Yes or No first would pin him down, but
alas, he just wanted to play with us.  But for future reference, please try
to restrain yourself at the end of your questions.

Thanks for the dialogue, Ben.
 
 


_____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////