Discussion Questions

Josh roots the value of the humanities in the doctrine of *Imago Dei* and Dorothy Sayers’ claim that the only contextual “clue” in Genesis is that God is creating—so humans, made in God’s image, create; what does this suggest about God’s character and intentions for human culture, and where do you feel resistance to that idea in your own instincts? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If humans create because we’re made in God’s image, what does that say about what God is like and what he wants for human culture? Where do you feel yourself push back against that idea?

Josh cites Psalm 111 (“Great are the works of the Lord, studied by all who delight in them”) and applies it beyond Israel’s history to “the stuff of human culture”; what might it look like to “delight” in God’s works in a way that includes serious study of human artifacts without sliding into admiration of humanity itself? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What would it look like to enjoy and study God’s works by also seriously studying human art and culture? How can we do that without turning it into worship of humans?

The transcript presents “incarnational humanism” (Clausen/Zimmerman) as a recovery of humanism made possible by the incarnation; how does the incarnation change what Christians are allowed to say about human dignity, nature, and truth, and what do you think early Christians would have found natural—or dangerous—about that framing? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does Jesus becoming human (the incarnation) change what Christians can say about human worth, human nature, and truth? What about this idea do you think early Christians would have welcomed, and what might have worried them?

Josh argues postmodern critiques help expose Enlightenment “disembodied rational knowledge,” insisting knowledge is mediated through texts, bodies, and traditions; how does that challenge common evangelical habits of “just me, my Bible, and my conclusions,” and what would an Anabaptist, communal approach to knowing truth require in practice? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If knowledge is shaped by our bodies, texts, and traditions, how does that challenge the “just me and my Bible” way of thinking? What would it take to seek truth more as a church community, not just as individuals?

He contrasts “understanding” (as a posture of submission/standing under) with “perceiving/apprehending” (grasping/taking hold), and says true understanding has an element of worship, mystery, and humility; where has your pursuit of certainty functioned more like control than worship, and how would your study habits change if mystery were treated as faithful rather than threatening? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where has your need to be certain been more about control than trust and worship? How would your studying change if you treated mystery as something faithful, not something scary?

Josh critiques two common Anabaptist approaches to Western popular culture: “against culture” (dangerous/irrelevant) versus “complete acculturation” (uncritical consumption), using examples like movies and Harry Potter; what specific patterns in your church/community reveal one of these extremes, and what would “deliberate participation” actually look like beyond slogans? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In your church, what shows the extremes of either rejecting popular culture or accepting it without thinking? What would careful, intentional involvement look like in real life (not just a slogan)?

He says Anabaptists often work hard to understand *international* cultures but don’t make the same effort to understand *Western* popular culture; what do you think that reveals about our assumptions regarding mission, holiness, and who counts as “the other” we need to understand? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Why do you think Anabaptists often try harder to understand other countries’ cultures than Western pop culture? What does that say about how we think about mission, holiness, and who we see as “outsiders”?

Josh describes a “cultural gap” with his first-year writing students who were deeply shaped by Harry Potter and Avengers, and he worries we “reject instead of trying to at least understand”; how can a community discern the difference between (a) understanding for love and communication and (b) understanding that becomes curiosity-driven assimilation? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can a church tell the difference between learning about culture to love and communicate well and learning about it in a way that slowly pulls us in? What signs would show each one?

Using Daniel’s education in “the language and literature of the Chaldeans” and Paul quoting pagan poets on Mars Hill (“In him we live and move and have our being…”), Josh argues this isn’t mere pragmatism but faithful use of real wisdom outside the covenant community; what guardrails did Daniel/Paul seem to have, and what would equivalent guardrails be for us without turning them into fear-based rules? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Daniel and Paul learned from non-Christian sources but stayed faithful—what boundaries seemed to guide them? What similar boundaries could help us today without making a bunch of fear-based rules?

Josh recommends rooting yourself in a faithful community, avoiding “God’s Not Dead” culture-war caricatures, and learning to state opponents’ arguments better than they do—while also keeping Proverbs 4 (“Get wisdom…”) in tension with Ecclesiastes 1 (“he who increases knowledge increases sorrow”); where do you personally need more “get wisdom” urgency, where do you need more Ecclesiastes sobriety, and how would you build a communal plan that holds both without drifting into pride or withdrawal? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where do you need more drive to “get wisdom,” and where do you need the reminder that more knowledge can bring sorrow? What plan could your community make to hold both together without becoming proud or giving up?