The obligation to know stuff

Probably 10-15 times per year I receive a critical call or e-mail regarding something a prominent Baptist has said or done. In nearly every case, not all, the query comes from someone who has an uninformed opinion. He’s simply not read the comments or an authoritative account of the action he disagrees with. More often, someone has e-mailed him or called to inform him of the perceived offense.

No complaint here. It’s a simple part of my work when I can respond to easy questions, but I always wonder how far down the call list I might have been. Does the caller go back down his list to share his more complete knowledge with everyone who heard his less informed opinion? I’m often further amazed at how easy it is, even while on the phone, to search the Internet for the original source of the information. I think all of us who like to tell others what we think (who doesn’t?) have a duty to know what we’re talking about, at least a little bit. I’ve fallen into this mistake and more than once, by the way. What makes it worse is that I do so in print before mailing it to 40,000 people. The embarrassment of such mistakes reminds me of how much I hate being wrong in loud and inexcusable ways. 

Let’s extend this duty to editors of news outlets then. Many of us have noted with amusement the hoax that someone played on the SBC last month. A homosexual advocacy group went to some trouble to trick various reporters into reporting that we’d changed our corporate mind (corporate mind is not a Baptist distinctive) about same-sex marriage. I’m surprised that most news outlets didn’t fall for it. Maybe they knew something about what we’re for or what we’re against, depending on whether you’re a glass half full or half empty person. Most passed the test and did not run with the story. One important newspaper did run with it on its “faith” page. The paper is embarrassed and apologetic, of course. Imagine though, a religion reporter who didn’t know much of anything about our enormous denomination. Imagine that news apparatus failing to even do a Google search on the SBC view of marriage. The search would have easily returned a hundred results that describe our views and a thousand more from those who despise our stand. The results would not leave room for the idea that we’re of two minds on the definition of marriage. They should have checked.

Most of the time it’s easy to find information but it’s really not so easy to sort it out from the innumerable factoids that assault us during the search. That doesn’t excuse carelessness but it is a downside to the information age. The danger is the delusion that understanding accompanies the skin-deep knowledge we have about nearly every inconsequential thing that happens in the world. We talk like experts at the drop of a hat. Perhaps we should talk less, especially about things we barely know. That’s a goal of mine.

And yet we have a privilege, along with an obligation, to know what we can know about what matters most. We can listen to the people in our lives, call them, sit across the table and let them talk. Although I confess to stalking my kids on Facebook (they live in other cities), this tool is at best a conversation starter for more personal contact. I should know how they’re doing, in their own words. We see brothers and sisters each day. If we’re to be priests to them we need to know how they fare, what they need. Committing to encourage one another often seems a completely separate matter from knowing enough to actually be of use. The challenge of knowing is part of the duty family members owe one another. Our fellowship is a bit insincere if our involvement with others is not active.

And aren’t we obligated by the opportunity we have to know God? Just about anyone you ask will admit that there are big questions he’d like to ask God. In nearly every instance, God has addressed those questions in some detail. We want to understand God, his nature, his actions, his purpose, and so on. There’s really no need or excuse to depend on hearsay regarding the Lord of us all. Few of us have scratched the surface of his revelation of himself—we haven’t pursued with much enthusiasm any base of knowledge that would allow us to understand. That’s laziness.

Truly, we can listen to the Bible in several decent versions on CD, tape, video, and probably 8-track if you’re that high tech. Reading plans, chronological or traditional, that will take you through the Bible in one year or less, that are targeted to your own niche or need—all these and more are available free to anyone who asks or seeks. Bible classes and study helps are everywhere you look. I have Bible dictionaries and handbooks at work, in five rooms of my house, on my phone and often in my car or briefcase. We can know more than we do. This is the starting point of the understanding we often desire.

God’s revelation of himself is a breathtaking gift and blessing; he gave it to us because we need it and because he expects us to use it. I think it’s the ultimate expression of our obligation to know.

Maybe knowledge is like most other things we must prioritize. We can’t know everything and shouldn’t, I think. Knowing people is more important than knowing the trivia we’re force fed on the Internet. And I think knowing the portion of the world nearest to us is most pertinent to what we’re called to do.

Nothing is nearer to us than God, or more readily accessible to those who seek him. So our first priorities here seem to be as small as our homes and as broad as the maker of everything. That’s a lifetime of exploration that might not leave room for waxing eloquent about things we’ve only overheard.