Saving the World from Fundamentalism…Three Teenagers at a Time

As I was leaving work today, I noted with amusement a friend of mine from the political science department being questioned by three teenagers who couldn’t have been more than 14 or 15 years old. They were questioning him about his faith (he’s a good Catholic) and salvation and what happens when we die. I listened to the conversation with equal parts horror and amusement as these kids continued to spout rhetoric they had heard from others, even in the face of someone who was intellectually gifted enough to refute their views pretty easily.

Once they left, I asked my friend what that conversation was all about. He handed me the pamphlet they had given him, from an organization called Worldview Academy (their website says they are “a non-denominational organization dedicated to helping Christians to think and live in accord with a biblical worldview so that they will serve Christ and lead the culture.”)

This pamphlet was a step by step manual on what to say to people given their various answers to the question “What happens when you die?” He and I, as well as a friend of his, continued to talk for a while when more of these kids approached. They asked if they could have a few minutes of our time to which I readily agreed. Knowing what was coming, I had an answer to their first question: “Do you know what happens when you die?” My answer: “No. And neither do you.”

Of course, they took exception to me saying that and assured me that they did, in fact, know the answer because the Bible told them. “The Bible,” I said. “Huh. So, whose Bible? And whose interpretation of the Bible?” They informed me, pagan that I am, that there was only one Bible and one interpretation, because the Bible is the infallible word of God. “So who wrote the Bible?” I asked. “And why should I believe them?”

Lots of people wrote parts of the Bible, I was told. “Okay, so let’s start small. Who wrote the Pentateuch?” Moses. Moses wrote the Pentateuch. Even, apparently the parts written after his death. That Moses was a pretty talented dude. Imagine these kids’ surprise when I suggested that there might be four authors of Genesis alone. But to their credit, that didn’t phase these kids much. The force was strong with these, I could tell.

So then we moved back to the idea of whose Biblical interpretation we were talking about. I pointed to my friend, the Catholic. “What about his interpretation of the Bible? Is it legit?” Well, of course not. He thinks that works are required for salvation. They then quoted me Ephesians 2:8-9. Naturally, they neglected verse 10 which certainly points to the idea that works are an integral part of the regenerative experience. Oops. “So who’s right? Which one of us is telling the truth?” They weren’t sure, having admitted that none of them were God.

Then I took the argument a step further. “The Bible’s a pretty small book, right?” Yes, yes. They agreed to that. “And God is really big. Infinitely big, even.” No problem there. “So can God really fit into the Bible?” Nope. All three of them agreed that God is probably bigger than the Bible.

So I upped the stakes. “So let’s consider more holy books. Stack the Bible, the Qu’ran, Hindu scriptures, Confucianism, Taoism all together. God still bigger than that stack of books?” Yep, yep. They agreed. God can’t fit into all of those books put together. So we were back to the beginning. Who knows what is true? After all, if none of us is God, then none of us can say for sure that we have all the answers.

I threw in some stuff about other religions too. “What about Islam? Muslims have their own opinion of what is true. After all, the Qu’ran was a corrective to the Jewish and Christian scriptures that had strayed from Allah’s original message.” They weren’t sure. They hadn’t studied Islam much. But by God, they knew that they were right and Muslims were wrong.

So as they got ready to leave, probably to pray for my soul, I let them in on the joke. “In the interest of full disclosure,” I told them. “You should know that some of your friends came by earlier, so we knew what to expect from you. Also, I have a master’s degree in religion.” This was, I explained to them, an exercise in questioning conventional wisdom. Religion is an imprecise science, because if there is an absolute truth, surely no one but God can fathom it. Because of that, it’s important to remember that no one has the market cornered on truth, and anyone who tells you they do is surely a liar.

As they walked away, my friend asked if I thought anything I told those kids would sink in. My honest answer was “I don’t know.” But if anything I said makes them think and question and examine what they really believe versus what they’ve been taught, then I did some good—and at the same time, did my part to save the world from fundamentalism…three teenagers at a time.

Reports of My Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Okay, so it’s been almost six months since I’ve updated this thing, which means…I have a lot to say. I just won’t say it all now. I’d like to enjoy my first night of freedom after the semester ended. So, let’s talk about…Iraq. Hmm…now there’s a shocker.

General Petraeus is telling us to wait till September before we judge this troop surge. Funny…we’ve been told to wait before only to be told to wait again. Anyone else seeing a pattern here? We’ve got some serious problems in Iraq, and General Petraeus know it. He is, after all, the man who literally wrote the book on counter-insurgency.

The Army's counter-insurgency strategy, co-written by Gen. Petraeus (Army Field Manual 3-24 if anyone's interested) calls for 25 troops per every 1000 civilians to stabilize a country. For most of the Iraq War, we've been operating at 7:1000 (see Thomas Hammes, The Sling and the Stone: On War in the 21st Century.)

Furthermore, FM 3-24 states that the military operations should only account for 20% of the activity in counter-insurgency done right. The other 80% should be economic and political reform, rebuilding infrastructure, etc. On this, we have screwed the pooch.

We've been told over and over again that we can't win the war on terror militarily, yet that's all we've tried. It's all we've tried because it's really all we have to try. Without adequate troop support to stabilize Iraq, none of these other things can happen.

In On War, Clausewitz said that the most important decision a commander or policy maker had to make was to determine the kind of war they were fighting and not try to make it something that it was not. From the beginning, the Bush administration tried to make the war in Iraq something it was not. It was never a war that could be won quickly and with a small number of troops. Rebuilding a country that has been so devastated by tyranny and despotism does not happen overnight, yet that is what they believed and tried to do.

Honestly, at this point, I'm not sure that the situation in Iraq will be any different if we leave five months from now or five years from now. Four years of mistakes and miscaluclations and porous borders may be too much for the military to overcome. The only way it could work would be to reimplement the draft, dramatically inflate the numbers of the mlitary and send another 200,000 troops to Iraq to do what it takes to secure the country. And we all know that won't happen. At this point, I think withdrawal is our only option if we want to reduce troop casualties.