Blowing in the wind about academic freedom

First, read Tom’s piece at The Bible and Interpretation.

Got it? Are you reading the comments Blowers is putting out there? Over here, a post was written to which Blowers flocked too (hey, Paul!) to defend himself.

I posed a question:

“@paulblowers – Are you considering disciplinary action?”

The commentator removed it at the request of Blowers:

Per the request of parties named in one comment, I have removed it.

It was nice of Nathan to email me this:

I do apologize for removing your comment at www.christianhumanist.org, but I cannot allow inquiries into the internal workings of institutions not my own to become material for that conversation.  I invite you to contact ECS personnel directly and privately if you do have any further questions. – NPG

So, I posted again… because, wouldn’t you?

Screen Shot 2012-09-28 at 8.14.17 PM

But this time, I took a screen shot.

Nathan promptly removed it and sent me this email:

I repeat: please take questions about the internal workings of ECS to personnel there.

NPG

I replied:

Nathan, I was unaware that this was so much a question as it was a hope that Grace is shown.

I hope that Grace is not censored.

To which he replied,

Nobody is censoring grace; I’m asking folks not to discuss institutional policy. Everyone is welcome to talk about grace, theology, interpretation, and even what a scumbag Nate Gilmour is, but I don’t want to get into matters that are ECS’s, ethically speaking.

NPG

I am at a lost of why one aspect of institutional policy is not to be discussed but another is? In other words, it is okay to write about the imposition of academic fascism because, say your parents endowed a chair or so, but not to ask why isn’t Matthew followed as in regards to discipline of believers and the what not? Isn’t this really about theology?

Isn’t the showing of an allowance of Grace theology in practice? Can you separate what is an internal disagreement about Scripture away from Grace, Theology, and the Christian witness?

I can’t, but obviously, some do. Some forget their Christianity in the search of the control of their truth.

We are past time of an apologist expecting people to blindly follow him. If all truth is God’s truth, then the search for the truth is what matters. Academic freedom is the search for the truth. Unfortunately, it appears that Blowers is only intent on presenting his facts rather than exploring if they are true.

Post By Joel L. Watts (10,153 Posts)

Joel L. Watts holds a Masters of Arts from United Theological Seminary with a focus in literary and rhetorical criticism of the New Testament. He is currently a Ph.D. student at the University of the Free State, analyzing Paul’s model of atonement in Galatians. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013), a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013), and Praying in God's Theater, Meditations on the Book of Revelation (Wipf and Stock, 2014).

Website: → Unsettled Christianity

Connect

3 thoughts on “Blowing in the wind about academic freedom

  1. Academic freedom is a two way street and if Rollston’s employer does not like what he wrote then they are free academically to discipline him for violating any biblical or institutional rules. Freedom does not mean anarchy lives or a free-for-all where no rules apply.

    Nor does it mean that Christian employees get to break God’s rules or say that He is wrong or a sinner. ECS is certainly free to discipline or remove any professor who undermines the Bible’s message and the school’s purpose.

    If Rollston wants to continue to produce anti-christian materials then he is free to move to a secular institution where such publications do not contradict their message.

    I wonder how many of those in support of Rollston would recommend an evangelical or true believer for an academic post in a very atheistic institution and then tell the candidate he is free to publish anti-atheism materials?

    • Davy-T, obviously you do not understand the concept of Academic Freedom.

      Rollston’s article is well supported by facts, and is not anti- thing except for purposed blindness and stupidity. Rollston, if anything, produced a more Christian message than has been found in many recent articles on the Topic. After all, all truth is God’s truth – Jesus is the Truth. Rollston told the truth, God’s truth, and proclaimed Christ.

      So, evangelicals aren’t true believers?

      Um…. Seems like what you want is a cult.

      The First Church of Dave-T: Where Davy-T is God, King, Savious, and Know-it-All.

Leave a Reply, Please!