Arrogance, Intellectual Elitism, Rejection of Scripture, Karl Giberson

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 1 Cor. 1:19

The four items above go together.  Dr. Karl Giberson is no longer a professor at my old school, Eastern Nazarene College, but he now has a colleague there who is apparently carrying on the Giberson tradition.  What would that tradition be?  The Giberson tradition is to disparage, insult, and otherwise look down on anyone- anyone at all- who…

- Dares to believe in the Christian fundamentals (especially biblical inerrancy)

- Dares to challenge the myth of evolution and the global warming religion

- Dares to accept the biblical account of a historical Adam and Eve

- Dares to believe homosexuality is sin, or opposes homosexual “marriage”

- Dares to disagree with him in any way in regards to science and the Bible

I am not criticizing his right to have an opinion, or in making an honest argument to support his opinion.  But frankly, I am sick and tired of Dr. Giberson’s continually belittling attitude towards those who believe that God created Adam and Eve as He said he did; that God did create the world as He said he did; and that the sin of homosexuality is clearly condemned by God’s word.  He looks down on evangelicals that do not match his brand of “evangelicalism”, which is the type that insists that we verify the Bible with our intellectual reasoning and scientific theories, instead of believing the Bible for what it actually says is true.  He “professes to be wise”, but…

So last week, he and Dr. Randall J. Stephens, a professor at ENC, wrote a piece that rips apart anyone who apparently does not have the level of elitist understanding that they have.  Dr. Giberson clearly is one of the most arrogant people on this planet, and I am thankful he is no longer associated with ENC.  Only God knows how many students have had their faith shaken or shipwrecked because of his unbiblical teachings.  Sadly, it seems Dr. Stephens has taken up his mantle at the school and will continue to propagate false notions of the Bible to our students there.  Since they co-wrote this attack on fundamental Bible believers, it goes without saying that they share the same basic contempt for us.  It is a piece brimming with intellectual snobbery, in my opinion.

You can read the entire article and come to your own conclusions here: The Evangelical Rejection of Reason.  Just reading the title got things off on the wrong foot.  When man cannot to his own satisfaction explain facts that are stated plainly in Scripture, he then often resorts to his own reason and intellect to fit his preferred worldview.

Following are a few of the comments they made, and my reaction:

 “The two candidates who espouse the greatest support for science, Mitt Romney and Jon M. Huntsman Jr., happen to be Mormons, a faith regarded with mistrust by many Christians.”

Dr Giberson, you don’t believe that the Mormon faith is actually part of true Christianity, do you?  I would think ANY discerning, Bible believing Christian would not only distrust Mormonism altogether, but would not consider a professing Mormon to be a brother in Christ!  Do you feel the same way about those who “mistrust” the Jehovah’s Witness religion?  Or perhaps the Buddhist or Muslim religions?

And then there are the examples of the amazingly condescending, arrogant, elitist attitude towards Christian fundamentalists who dare to trust what Holy Scripture says:

“unyielding ignorance on the part of the religious”

evangelical Christianity need not be defined by the simplistic theology, cultural isolationism and stubborn anti-intellectualism

“fundamentalism is literalistic, overconfident and reactionary.”

“Fundamentalism appeals to evangelicals who have become convinced that their country has been overrun by a vast secular conspiracy; denial is the simplest and most attractive response to change.

 “They have been scarred by the elimination of prayer in schools; the removal of nativity scenes from public places; the increasing legitimacy of abortion and homosexuality; the persistence of pornography and drug abuse; and acceptance of other religions and of atheism.”

Again, no substantive argument, nothing legitimate to say, just false assumptions.

Here are a few more quotes:

“Mr. Ham built his organization, Answers in Genesis, on the premise that biblical truth trumps all other knowledge.”

I believe the difference with your statement is that Dr. Ham would say, as I would, that it is a fact that biblical truth trumps all other knowledge- not a premise.  Since God is the only source of truth, then my conclusion is that all of God’s truth trumps man’s knowledge, including yours.

In an NPR interview on Oct. 20 related to the same article, Giberson said:  “I mean, there’s just a handful of proof text scattered throughout the Bible about homosexuality. Jesus said absolutely nothing about it.”

Dr. Giberson apparently disagrees with the orthodox Christian and current Nazarene stance on homosexuality, and rejects or chooses to ignore what the Bible teaches.  It’s quite interesting that with this kind of view, he taught at a Nazarene university for years, yet Bible believing ministers in the denomination are denied ordination.  I guess if you are an academic,you’re allowed to teach heresy with impunity and indoctrinate impressionable students with it.   How the Christian world is turned upside down!

Dr. Giberson is a member of Evolutionary Christianity, a group filled with heretics such as Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, Spencer Burke, Richard Rohr, Matthew Fox, and John Shelby Spong, who believes that our Lord was buried in a shallow grave and was eaten by wild dogs!  He is also a big promoter of Open Theism, the teaching that God does not know the future.  To me, this is in indication of his ignorance, not mine or anyone else who can read the Bible for what it plainly teaches, in spite of not having the many degrees he has.  This is intellectual snobbery.  I guess if he does not like it, it can’t be true, or it can’t really mean what it says, can it?

Finally, Dr. Giberson points this out about Ken Ham:  (In a recent blog post, Mr. Ham called us “wolves” in sheep’s clothing, masquerading as Christians while secretly trying to destroy faith in the Bible.)”

 Yes, Dr. Giberson, I completely agree with Ken Ham, who has also commented on your article (Shot Taken at Aig by Nazarene Professor in New York Times Op-ed).  You sir, are truly a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and I join with Dr. Ham, Dr. Al Mohler, and any other Bible believing Christian who is willing to stand up against those who dare to say that human intellect can trump the Bible, which we know to be God’s word- all of it.  Sadly you do not.  You may be a nice guy in person, but I pray that you never teach in another Christian school again, spreading the kind of Bible doubting evolutionary faith that you call Christian faith.  However, I will continue to pray for you and that you will come to truly trust all of God’s word.

The following email response to Dr. Stephens is from Dr. David A. Reagan of Lamb & Lion Ministries:

Oct. 21, 2011

Dr. Stephens:

Your recent opinion article in the New York Times about the Evangelical rejection of reason is a perfect example of why the term, Evangelical, has completely lost its meaning. How can it have any meaning when you claim to be an Evangelical and yet reject what the Bible teaches about Creation, the origin of Man, and homosexuality?

I was also turned off by your arrogance in dismissing those who disagree with you as being persons who have rejected reason. I happen to have a doctorate in International Law and Politics from a Harvard graduate school. The vice chairman of the board of trustees of the ministry I represent is a research scientist who is a graduate of Cal Tech and holds a doctorate in nuclear physics from Stanford. Yet, he believes in a 6,000 year earth and totally rejects the concept of evolution. In fact, he was an atheist when he entered Stanford University and became a Christian because he concluded that the best explanation of what he could observe in the natural universe was special creation.

I do not understand how anyone who claims to operate from reason could conclude that life evolved. It’s like standing in front of Mount Rushmore and exclaiming, “Wow! Isn’t it amazing what can be created accidentally from erosion!”

You are welcome to your unbiblical viewpoints, but don’t have the audacity to call yourself an “Evangelical.” And don’t be so arrogant as to write-off those who disagree with you as being Neanderthals who have rejected reason.

Yours in Jesus,

Dave Reagan

Dr. David R. Reagan
Lamb & Lion Ministries


Additional Resources:  “Evangelicals” Despising Evangelicals (Denny Burk)

About these ads

12 responses to “Arrogance, Intellectual Elitism, Rejection of Scripture, Karl Giberson

  1. What about Giberson and Stephens comment “we accept the centrality of faith in Jesus Christ and look to the Bible as our sacred book” How can they possibly consider it sacred when they are so willing to set aside so much of it, and insist we all should follow suit? And if they were truly evangelical and Jesus central to their faith, wouldn’t they be about proclaiming the good news of salvation thorough the death and resurrection of Christ rather than promoting man’s wisdom and social justice (with special emphasis on homosexual rights)?

  2. Is your analysis based ONLY on the recent NYT op-ed? The purpose of an op-ed is to state your case and support it, not enter into discourse. In matters of public discourse, Dr. Giberson has proven himself humble, gracious, and willing to listen.

  3. Not it is not, it is based on an extensive record of his writings. Dr. Giberson tends to run away from “discourse” that strongly refutes his ideology. He’s more comfortable with those who agree with him. I doubt if he would take me up for a public debate, much less someone like Ken Ham or Albert Mohler.

  4. From what I can tell over at this site (http://www.createdforheaven.com/debate_ham_vs_giberson.htm), both gentlemen were pretty well behaved and quite reasonable when they got together virtually. Too often in our modern culture what we call debate ends up as people screaming their positions rather than having a reasonable discourse. Would indeed be nice to see more of this.

    Quote from Ken Ham’s Blog

    “I appreciate the fact that Karl Giberson is engaging me in a gracious and respectful debate” – Ken Ham

    Quote from a Karl Giberson Resoponse

    “Dear Ken, Thanks for a most civil and constructive response” – Karl Giberson

  5. That’s all well and good. What I have said here, and others have said also and agree with me, I will stick with. And that is that Giberson and Stephens are a serious danger to biblical Christianity, they are deceiving many from the true gospel, and we are told in Scripture to EXPOSE the false teachers and wolves- not to have pleasant dialogue with them.

    If exposing these false prophets translates to be called uncivil, I have no problem with that.

  6. Whether or not someone is “pleasant” or “agreeable” in discourse does not change the facts. Giberson and Stephens are in serious error, and worse may lead others into serious error. Why is it that people become so enamored with poise and charm and entirely overlook the real issues, You can bet that Satan was perfectly charming and agreeable when he temped Eve in the garden. As Manny said, they are wolves — wolves in sheep’s clothing. They appear as one thing on the outside, but within are something entirely different. This is so simple.

  7. Manny:

    I think that many who believe in evolution and try and use Scripture to validate their belief like Dr. Giberson is only fooling themself. In an article by Karl Giberson on April 10, 2011 titled “My Take: Jesus would Believe in Evolution and So Should You.”

    He started by quoting Jesus said; “I am the truth.” and ends his article with this question. “What would Jesus believe about origins? And his answer is, “Evolution of course, He cares for the truth.” How absurd to quote Jesus out of context to try and prove a point by putting words into the mouth of our Lord. He is on dangerous ground in my opinion. It also show a lack of respect for the word of God to treat it so shabbily.

  8. I have a few words for the scientifically uninformed geniuses Giberson and Stephens: DOCTOR Grady S. McMurtry.

  9. Thanks for the link, Manny. I had the pleasure of seeing the good Dr. in person a few weeks back. A gifted man.

  10. Wow! Dr. McMurtry has some very impressive credentials:

    • B S, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture
    • M S, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science
    • D D, School of Theology, Columbus, Georgia
    • Past Regent of the School of Theology, Columbus, Georgia
    • 10 Years a Teacher of Evolution
    • 1 1/2 Years a Theistic Evolutionist
    • 37 Years a Biblical Scientific Creationist
    • Ordained Minister
    • Mensa – Life Member (Mensa welcomes people from every walk of life whose IQ is in the top 2% of the population.)
    • Intertel – Member (Intertel is a high-IQ society that has only one qualification for membership: a score at or above the 99th percentile on a standardized IQ test.)

  11. I mean, there’s just a handful of proof text scattered throughout the Bible about homosexuality. Jesus said absolutely nothing about it.” Thats just shows that Karl does not understand or comprehend scripture. Jesus did speak about this through His words on what marriage was meant to be.jesus quotes in Matt 19:3- 6 3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

    4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

    5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

    6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

    So Jesus quotes Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24 putting all of Karls opinion to shame. Karl doesn’t disagree with us or our group. Karl doesn’t agree with what Jesus says. Jesus believed that Adam and Eve were real people. Karl disagrees. Who are you going to believe?

Comments are closed.