Great post Nate! It's probably just because I've been writing about it recently, but 1 Thessalonians Chapter 4 comes to mind... as a stark contrast to "making a name for ourselves" à la Babel, St. Paul writes that we should "make it our ambition to lead a quiet life". It seems that those two goals would be mutually exclusive of one another...
Also, cheers for the Lord of Spirits reference 🍻 Love Fr. Andrew + Fr. Stephen!
Have you ever read Josephus' account of Babel? Here is an excerpt from his "Antiquities of the Jews", from book one, chapter four.
"Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach! and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers !"
I think it's an interesting point. Making people overly dependent on their fellow man has a way of making them forget about their need of God.
I picked up the complete works of Josephus at a Christian bookstore years ago. This was one of the stories that has stuck with me throughout the years. The whole concept of turning man from God by making him dependent on the government for his needs has stuck with me.
One thought came to mind as I read: the various intentional communities in the Anabaptist traditions, who are not anti-technology specifically, but as a community consider each new tool innovation from the point of view of how it affects the community's social fabric and relationship with God. Thus, from the outside, the decisions made on what is allowed or not can seem random, but they very much are not! It's, at the core, this same division in type that you're describing that they are using to decide what is allowed, although the language used is different.
It seems like the smartest way to go about things. Not antagonistic, but not enthusiastic either. A measured consideration of what the effects might be and whether the juice is worth the squeeze.
Just by choosing to be a "late adopter" can help, too. I never had to learn T9 texting, for example. Many got very fast at texting with a numerical keypad on those old flip phones, a skill which is as useless now as gas lamp repairman.
Great post Nate! It's probably just because I've been writing about it recently, but 1 Thessalonians Chapter 4 comes to mind... as a stark contrast to "making a name for ourselves" à la Babel, St. Paul writes that we should "make it our ambition to lead a quiet life". It seems that those two goals would be mutually exclusive of one another...
Also, cheers for the Lord of Spirits reference 🍻 Love Fr. Andrew + Fr. Stephen!
You are absolutely on to something there. And cheers 🍻
Have you ever read Josephus' account of Babel? Here is an excerpt from his "Antiquities of the Jews", from book one, chapter four.
"Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach! and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers !"
I think it's an interesting point. Making people overly dependent on their fellow man has a way of making them forget about their need of God.
That was a really good article, thank you.
I never had! Thanks for quoting that passage. Fascinating.
I picked up the complete works of Josephus at a Christian bookstore years ago. This was one of the stories that has stuck with me throughout the years. The whole concept of turning man from God by making him dependent on the government for his needs has stuck with me.
So much good food for thought here.
One thought came to mind as I read: the various intentional communities in the Anabaptist traditions, who are not anti-technology specifically, but as a community consider each new tool innovation from the point of view of how it affects the community's social fabric and relationship with God. Thus, from the outside, the decisions made on what is allowed or not can seem random, but they very much are not! It's, at the core, this same division in type that you're describing that they are using to decide what is allowed, although the language used is different.
It seems like the smartest way to go about things. Not antagonistic, but not enthusiastic either. A measured consideration of what the effects might be and whether the juice is worth the squeeze.
Just by choosing to be a "late adopter" can help, too. I never had to learn T9 texting, for example. Many got very fast at texting with a numerical keypad on those old flip phones, a skill which is as useless now as gas lamp repairman.
Wendell Berry’s rules for adopting a new tool are inspired by the Amish vision on the same topic. I found them to be very useful.
Giving everything away for improved UI/UX that everyone can use? We're so back, Babelbros. Gen AI super optimists/pessimists are the same thing.
https://argomend.substack.com/p/the-church-of-ai