Part 1: The Scope of Biblical Stewardship
Part 2: Stewards in Biblical History Part 3: Steward of Stewards Note: Throughout this series, I am using the English Standard Version (ESV) unless noted otherwise. If you are looking up texts in your own Bible as you read, you may notice differences in key words and phrases. Sometimes this just means the underlying Greek text can be translated more than one way. I will discuss one such term in the following paragraphs. Other times, differences may arise from variant readings in the Greek. Such variants affect two of the verses I will cite. If you are reading from the KJV or NKJV, you will not find a word equivalent to steward or stewardship in these two verses. In both cases, the Textus Receptus used by the KJV translators has a different word than most Greek manuscripts (the Textus Receptus is usually close to the majority text, but these are two of the exceptions). In each case I will add a footnote with a more detailed explanation. If you prefer the TR/KJV reading, that’s fine. The rest of the passages cited are more than enough to support my main points. In Part 3 we saw how Jesus uses the language of stewardship for both Himself and the people He entrusts with spiritual leadership. He is the Chief Steward, opening the door of salvation. We are His understewards, distributing spiritual food by proclaiming the Word of God. Paul picks up this motif in his letters, eloquently describing and synthesizing both roles.
This installment will focus on how the New Testament epistles use the words oikonomos and oikonomia, introduced in Part 2. Oikonomia had a wide range of meanings in antiquity and acquired more over time. Its basic meaning had to do with household management, but ancient writers expanded its usage to include an orderly arrangement of parts of a system, the administration of a city-state, and even divine regulation of the universe.[1] As a result, while stewardship is often a good translation of oikonomia, it is not the only one, and in some contexts not even the best one.
Other words English Bible translators sometimes choose to translate oikonomia include plan, administration, and dispensation. The last term merits a little more attention. Dispensation, related to the verb dispense, came into English from Latin. The Vulgate used dispensatio to translate oikonomia, which no doubt influenced early English translators to use dispensation. Dispensation occurs four times in the KJV, accounting for about half the uses of oikonomia. It’s not a bad choice, as long as we take care to distinguish which meanings of dispensation make sense in context and not to read back into the text other ways the word is used today.
One meaning of dispensation is simply “the act of dispensing”.[2] This overlaps with aspects of a household manager’s job, which involves “dispensing” food and other necessities to the members of the household—or, in the spiritual sense we’ve been discussing, “dispensing” the word of God to other people. This meaning works well in several of the stewardship texts we will read. Another relevant definition is “a general state or ordering of things”,[3] which is probably closer to the intended meaning in some other texts. Throughout church history, both oikonomia and dispensation have picked up additional theological meanings.[4] While studying those historical developments is useful, this article will focus on New Testament usage.
Enough preamble; let’s look at the texts!
0 Comments
Part 1: The Scope of Biblical Stewardship Part 2: Stewards in Biblical History Part 4: Stewards of the Mysteries of God In Part 2 of this series I suggested that the Old Testament talks less about the theology of stewardship than the New Testament does. This does not mean the Old Testament cannot help us develop that theology, however. In fact, not only do the Old Testament stories provide valuable background information, as shown in the last article, but a key New Testament reference to stewardship only becomes visible when seen as a hyperlink to the Hebrew Bible. Despite its obscurity—I don’t remember ever hearing a sermon on Shebna and Eliakim—Isaiah 22 provides an important reference point for the topic of biblical stewardship. Recall from last time that this passage describes how “this steward, … Shebna, who is over the household” (verse 15) has been unfaithful, so God through Isaiah prophesies his destruction and appoints Eliakim to take his place. The rest of the passage details how God will honor Eliakim: In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David. He shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father's house. And they will hang on him the whole honor of his father's house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. In that day, declares the LORD of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way, and it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will be cut off, for the LORD has spoken. God describes Eliakim’s position as royal steward in almost dynastic terms. While the end of the passage ominously hints that Eliakim’s elevation will not last (or it may refer back to Shebna, an interpretation some commentators take but that seems strained to me), for the time being, at least, he is destined for a tremendous level of honor and responsibility. Not only that, but his role foreshadows that of Christ. Part 1: The Scope of Biblical Stewardship Part 3: Steward of Stewards Part 4: Stewards of the Mysteries of God When Jesus and the New Testament authors discuss stewardship as a spiritual concept, they are making an analogy from the work of literal human stewards. In order to understand the significance of this metaphor, it will help to review what stewards actually do. This post will look at several examples of stewards throughout the Bible. This survey from Abraham to Paul covers a vast stretch of time, encompassing many cultural, political, and economic upheavals. But while the details of a steward’s role may have adapted to different contexts, we will observe several common themes that remain true throughout ancient history. It will be helpful to keep in mind the meaning of the modern English word steward. Here’s the full definition of the noun from Merriam-Webster: 1 : one employed in a large household or estate to manage domestic concerns (such as the supervision of servants, collection of rents, and keeping of accounts) Keeping the meaning in mind will help us recognize instances of stewardship even if the word does not appear in an English translation (although it will in many cases). Eliezer of Damascus I wasn’t sure at first whether to include Abraham’s servant Eliezer in this list. While the KJV has Abraham calling him “the steward of my house” in Genesis 15:2, the Hebrew phrase is obscure and most modern translations render it as “the heir of my house”, which makes good sense in context. Genesis 24:2, however, refers to the servant Abraham sent to find a wife for Isaac as the one “who had charge of all that he had”, indicating a stewardship role. I will assume the traditional identification of this servant as Eliezer, although most of the following observations do not rely on that conclusion.
As the oldest servant of Abraham’s household (24:2), Eliezer has spent a lifetime building his track record. The level of trust Abraham has in him shows clearly in the mission he sends him on. The way Eliezer conducts himself as Abraham’s representative will reflect on his master’s reputation, for good or bad. The mission itself has several layers of importance. Of course, the bride he selects will have an impact on Isaac’s well-being, as well as that of Abraham. The choice also matters for the preservation of the family line, a high priority in ancient cultures. Even more critical, however, is what the continuation of this line means in particular: the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham, not only that his own descendants would multiply, but that through the promised seed “all the nations of the earth [shall] be blessed” (Genesis 22:18). This story highlights the deep trust and family-like intimacy between Abraham and Eliezer. Given what Eliezer proved himself worthy of, it is no wonder that Abraham chose him to be in charge of all his possessions. It is also easy to see why, before Abraham had a son of his own, Eliezer was the one to whom he had planned to entrust his legacy (Genesis 15:2–3). As other examples will show, not all stewards enjoyed quite the same level of trust and closeness that Eliezer did. But his relationship with Abraham clearly gave him unique qualification for the role and helped ensure his success in it. Part 2: Stewards in Biblical History Part 3: Steward of Stewards Part 4: Stewards of the Mysteries of God Most lifelong Christians have probably encountered numerous sermons, articles, and Bible lessons about stewardship. I know I have. And based on the content of most such material, I came to associate the term stewardship with money. Stewardship seemed to be primarily about recognizing that our money was really God’s money and applying Christian principles to managing it. This was typically discussed in terms of budgeting, not wasting money, staying out of debt, giving tithes and offerings to the church, and estate planning. All of these are good things! Biblical principles should inform every aspect of our lives, including money management. But is this really the essence of Christian stewardship? Some expand it beyond money to talk about management of other resources, such as in the official Adventist statement of Fundamental Belief #21: Belief 21: Stewardship Despite the wide-ranging scope of this statement, however, much of Adventist discourse on stewardship still centers around stewardship of financial resources. A recent example of this is the Adult Sabbath School Bible Study Guide for the first quarter of 2023. This quarter’s lesson, titled “Managing for the Master: Till He Comes”, was written by G. Edward Reid, former director of Stewardship Ministries of the North American Division. The lesson has focused heavily on money management, at times feeling more like a financial health seminar than a Bible study. Why this hyperfocus on one aspect of stewardship, when even the denomination’s official belief statement hints at much more? The article accompanying the belief statement on the church’s website attempts to answer this very question. Why is the emphasis in stewardship so often money-related? While this partly explains the emphasis on money, it does not address the neglect of other aspects of stewardship. The importance of one aspect does not excuse ignoring the rest.
I think a large part of the reason for this one-sided treatment of stewardship is that we have not been careful to first define stewardship in biblical terms. Most discussions of Christian stewardship seem to assume a definition—whether spending money responsibly, exercising good time management, or caring for the earth—and find Bible passages discussing that topic, rather than starting with what the Bible actually says about stewards and stewardship. Somewhat surprisingly, of the ten Bible passages listed in support of Adventist Fundamental Belief #21, not a single one uses the term steward or stewardship. This doesn’t mean the verses are irrelevant; all of them discuss topics related to stewardship. But it seems to me that if a term under discussion appears in scripture, a proper treatment of the subject should consider how the Bible uses the term. One often-cited verse does use it: 1 Corinthians 4:2. “Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found faithful” (unless otherwise noted, all scripture references are from the ESV). This verse rightly emphasizes the fidelity demanded of anyone holding a stewardship position. But stewards of what? Money? Time? The earth’s resources? Don’t skip verse 1! “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.” Stewards of the mysteries of God! As we will see, this is not the only passage that links Christian stewardship to something far beyond material possessions. Other texts speak of stewarding the gospel, the plan of salvation, and the grace of God. Jesus even refers to Himself with language indicative of a stewardship role. At the most fundamental level, Christian stewardship is not about money; it is about the eternal riches of God. This series will attempt to refocus the discussion of Christian stewardship by examining passages that explicitly discuss it. Part 2 will look at several biblical examples of literal stewards of earthly estates, with the goal of understanding the scope of a steward’s role in the ancient world. Part 3 will show how Jesus refers to Himself as a steward and extract theological principles of stewardship from His teachings. Part 4 will trace how Paul and Peter apply those principles to our role as stewards of the things of God, and propose a definition of Christian stewardship based on biblical usage. Part 2: Stewards in Biblical History Part 3: Steward of Stewards Part 4: Stewards of the Mysteries of God The covert operative known as Father Christmas has provided support to the nascent rebellion against the Narnian government, intelligence officials confirmed this morning. At a rendezvous with three enemy combatants and their Beaver guides, Father Christmas supplied them with weapons, communications equipment, and medical supplies. The three invaders consist of a boy aged 13 and two girls aged 12 and 8, according to a fourth member of their party who defected to the Queen's palace. The four children belong to the radical group Sons of Adam. They are believed to be en route to join forces with another rebel leader whose name has not been released due to security concerns.
A tree nymph, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Narnia Times she further overheard the spy conspiring with the Beavers to improve their fortifications and industrial capabilities. She says he also "bragged to them about his spy skills and said that 'Locks and bolts make no difference to me'!" Father Christmas is known to conduct operations internationally under several aliases, including Santa Claus and Kris Kringle. In other worlds his activities are generally confined to propaganda, espionage, and bribery. In Narnia, however, the extent of his antigovernment activities led to his banishment by Her Majesty to ensure the safety of the kingdom. "The Queen was right to banish him, as shown by his eagerness to aid and abet the enemies of Narnia," Chief of Police Maugrim told the Times. Anyone having information on the whereabouts of Father Christmas or the three juvenile insurgents is encouraged to report immediately to authorities. "Don't even think about helping them," says Maugrim, "or the consequences will be petrifying."
Special thanks to Natasha, whose feedback, insights, and edits made this article better.
“The Spirit of Prophecy says…”
“Can you share any Bible or SOP references on this topic?” “We need to pay more attention to the Spirit of Prophecy!” Anyone who has been an Adventist long enough has heard these or similar phrases hundreds of times. Their meaning may seem opaque to the uninitiated, but to lifelong Adventists the intent is crystal clear: with few exceptions, when Adventists refer to the “Spirit of Prophecy”, they mean the writings of Ellen White. This phrase, of course, reflects our recognition that Ellen White had the gift of prophecy. But more precisely, it reflects our sense of identity as God’s remnant church. At most traditional Adventist prophecy seminars, one will at some point hear these two verses cited: And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. (Revelation 12:17, KJV)
The chain of logic then follows: God’s remnant people have the testimony of Jesus; the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy; therefore, God’s remnant people have the spirit of prophecy. Thus, the fact that Ellen White had the gift of prophecy helps identify the Seventh-day Adventist church as God’s remnant.
I affirm the Adventist church’s belief that the gift of prophecy “is an identifying mark of the remnant church and … was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White.”[2] The way we often defend this teaching, however, has several detrimental side effects: it models proof-texting rather than contextual study, it treats the Bible more as a cipher to solve than as a revelation to meditate on, and it obscures the meanings the author intended the words and phrases to have in context. This post will mainly focus on treating the third side effect by exploring what John meant by testimony of Jesus and spirit of prophecy. The testimony of Jesus is much more than a code word for the spirit of prophecy, which in turn is not a synonym for Ellen White.
This post was originally published on the author's personal Facebook page.
One of the most frustrating parts of watching the many societal debates over the last several months has been seeing people on all sides abandon rational thought in their knee-jerk defense of whatever position they're predisposed to believe. Productive discourse requires both sides of an argument to tone down their emotional reactions and consider the facts in a logical fashion. Acknowledging—or even recognizing—the flaws in an argument supporting one's own position can be difficult, but it's a must for anyone who wants to do more than just tear down the other side and widen the division. If you truly care about other people and about making the world a better place, then in a spirit of charity and intellectual honesty be careful what lines of reasoning you embrace. Below are just a few examples of faulty reasoning I've seen repeatedly in my news feed and elsewhere. I've picked examples from both sides of a couple of hot topics. Note that while these are not exact quotes, they do match the tone and (il)logical form of statements I've seen and heard from multiple people. Definitions of the fallacies are adapted from https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/, a helpful introduction to several common informal fallacies. ******************** On COVID-19: "People pushing for reopening care more about the stock market than people's lives!!!!!!" This is an example of the strawman fallacy: misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack. Those who want to reopen the economy think that way because of a combination of a belief that the lethality of the virus has been exaggerated and a concern that the shutdown will ultimately prove even deadlier.* But this position is more complex and actually takes some effort to argue against, and nuance is hard to fit in a meme. Whether an argument is right or wrong, oversimplifying it in order to attack it often results in missing the point entirely. "My friend is a nurse and thinks this whole COVID thing is nonsense, so it's crazy that anyone thinks it's a big deal. " This is an appeal to authority: saying that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true. For starters, a nurse is not a doctor, though I've heard a few people make a similar argument using their MD friends. In any case, medical training does not magically confer correct opinions on anyone. If it did, everyone with medical training would think the same thing—but it turns out there are actually doctors and nurses on both sides of this issue. It is true that medical professionals have the background to form more educated opinions than most about medical issues; that's why we have them! But a degree does not an argument make.** Doctors and nurses can make mistakes too, so pay attention to the reasoning behind their opinions, not just their credentials. This applies to both sides. ******************** On racism: "Systemic racism is a myth. After all, we had a black president!" Welcome to the anecdotal fallacy: using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence. The claims being made about the existence of systemic racism apply to society at large, and single examples can neither prove nor disprove them. A variation of this fallacy is some form, usually implied, of "I don't see racism in this country; therefore it must not exist." Your personal experience is only a small part of reality. If other people are reporting experiences and facts that appear to contradict your experience, it may be worth listening to understand what they're really talking about before you dismiss them out of hand. (See also the straw man fallacy above.) "If you don't support #BlackLivesMatter, you're on the wrong side of history!" The phrase "wrong side of history" carries considerable philosophical baggage, but to a first-order approximation we can consider this a form of the bandwagon fallacy: appealing to popularity (or in this case, assumed future popularity) or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation. Sometimes correct ideas are popular. Sometimes they aren't. The popularity of an idea should not be used as either a positive or negative measurement of its validity. If a movement is worth supporting, one should be able to find better reasons for doing so than its level of approval. Bonus: Watch out for the fallacy of equivocation. The statement that black lives matter is distinct from the organization that chose the phrase as its name, and there is no contradiction in someone wholeheartedly agreeing with the former while having reservations about the latter. ******************** As you think and dialogue about contemporary issues, be careful to examine your rhetoric for logical coherence. At the same time, beware of the fallacy fallacy: presuming that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, the claim itself must be wrong. Happy truth-seeking! ******************** * Some have even pointed out that most rhetoric surrounding the shutdown has ignored poorer countries whose inhabitants were barely surviving as it was, and who are now facing starvation as the global economy remains stymied. ** It's also worth noting that just as nurses are not doctors, not all doctors and nurses are public health experts. The fields overlap, but have different emphases. I recently spent two weeks in Cuba with other staff and students from Weimar Academy. Our team split into three groups, each going to a different town to conduct evangelistic meetings in partnership with a local Bible worker family. I went with two students, Jonathan and Joey, to the town of Pilotos in the Pinar del Rio province. I could elaborate on many themes from the two-week experience: seeing firsthand the effects of decades of communism; trying to resurrect my high school Spanish enough to understand at least some of the conversation around me—and occasionally surprise people by saying something—all while fighting the urge to revert to the last foreign language I learned; enjoying delicious (and technically illegally obtained) food; comparing Cuban climate, culture, and cuisine with that of the Philippines; contrasting the warm hearts of the people with the dreary state of their government and economy; seeing the value of the trip in spite of my own cynicism about short-term missions. But the focus of this post will be on how we got to witness God at work in Pilotos, even in the face of our human hesitation. Starting from our first full day in Pilotos, our team gathered each morning for united prayer. We prayed for our nightly meetings, both for presenters and attendees—we were getting around 20 adult visitors every night, plus 30 or so children. We prayed for the visitations we made during the day, and for specific people and situations we knew about. As the days progressed, we saw our prayers answered through God's work in the lives of the people we were praying for. But not everyone was satisfied. One evening as we were preparing for bed, Joey shared something that had been weighing on his mind. "I think our prayers are too small," he said. "Are we limiting God by asking for too little?" He was referring to our prayers for decisions to be made for Christ, particularly during the baptismal appeals later in the series. While we had prayed earnestly for souls, we had not set a specific number to ask for. Joey suggested that we do so, and that we set the number high. "How about we pray for 20 people to make decisions for baptism by the end of the series?" "Why only 20?" Jonathan asked. "Why not 30?" "Sure," Joey agreed, "Let's ask for 30." I agreed that our requests should be big. Joey and I both recalled the account given in 2 Kings 13 of the limited victory Joash obtained because "he smote thrice, and stayed." But the kind of prayer Joey was suggesting was not one I was used to. I often pray specific prayers for individuals or for groups, but rarely do I make quantitative requests like this. But I couldn't think of any good reason not to, and so, not wanting to dampen their enthusiasm, I supported the idea. The next morning while the entire team was gathered, we presented our suggestion. Jesús, one of our translators, relayed it to the Cuban team members. To our surprise, they seemed skeptical. They seemed to think that asking for thirty decisions was far beyond what was reasonable. Looking back, the reaction may have been at least partly a function of something being lost in translation. Nonetheless, we came away from the meeting with the idea that setting such a goal was not something the Cuban team was ready to get behind. That afternoon, Joey approached me again. He had spent all day thinking about the situation, and couldn't shake the idea that we should be praying for a specific goal. We began to discuss the various issues involved. Of course a request of 30 decisions was not realistic, but then that was the point. A miracle is by definition unrealistic. We decided to draw a distinction between possible, realistic, and appropriate for the purposes of our discussion: "all things are possible" with God, and some things are unrealistic without God, but some requests might be not only unrealistic but inappropriate—we wouldn't ask, for example, for a million residents of Pilotos to be baptized, as not that many people live there. But where would we find the balance between a goal high enough to be unrealistic (i.e., something beyond what could be ascribed to our own effort alone) and yet not so high as to be inappropriate to the situation? (These are the kinds of things discussed when two highly analytical people have a conversation like this.) Also at issue was the question of free will. Of course God would not forcibly compel anyone to stand up and request baptism. And if we asked for 30 and didn't see results of that magnitude because not enough people chose to respond to the Spirit's promptings, what would we say then about the power of prayer? At one point I remarked that someone listening in on our conversation might think we didn't have much faith. And maybe we didn't. But we prayed for God to show us what to pray for, and continued talking about the Biblical principles involved and how they should be applied. After over two hours, we had covered a lot of theory but had not come much closer to an answer (again, two analyticals being too analytical). We finally concluded that whatever we chose to ask for, the entire team should be united on it. We decided to try talking with the rest of the group again and see if we could reach a consensus. We called Jesús over and explained our thoughts again. He seemed to have a clearer picture of what we meant than he had that morning, and we sensed he was more on board with the idea. We gathered the rest of the team together and Jesús summarized our conversation for them. The response stood in stark contrast to that of the morning. Wilfredo, the local pastor/Bible worker, suggested that even 30 was too small. By the end of the meeting, the entire team had agreed that we would pray for at least 30 people to make decisions for baptism by the end of the series. So we did. In both our private and corporate prayers, we added the request for at least 30 to the petitions we had already been bringing. As the days passed, we saw God touching hearts through each night's presentation. Still, it was sometimes hard to see how the goal could be reached. But we kept praying for it anyway, right up until the night when the topic presented was baptism. It was Joey's turn to speak. As he presented the message from the Word, I prayed for the attendees and for their decisions. Then came time for the appeal. Before Joey had even finished asking for those who wanted to make a commitment for baptism, people were already streaming forward. And though I couldn't see it at the moment, there was also a response to Jonathan's appeal in the children's meetings. Altogether, 39 people that night expressed a desire to be baptized. "O ye of little faith," I could almost hear Christ saying. How easily He seemed to accomplish what we had spent the better part of an afternoon wavering over. Would it have weakened my faith not to have seen the results we prayed for? No, because my faith is not based on signs and wonders. But the experience served as a reminder that we must not be afraid to present our requests to God, no matter how unreasonable they may seem, no matter what theoretical considerations might make us question the outcome. The story is not over yet. Wilfredo and his family will be busy over the next several months studying with those 39, preparing them for baptism, and baptizing them—and continuing the work in the rest of the town. I look forward to seeing what other prayers God will answer. ************************ Read more stories from the trip: http://weimaracademy.org/where-theory-meets-reality-pilotos-cuba-update/ http://weimaracademy.org/certainly-i-am-with-you-pons-cuba-update/ Most of the photos below were taken, and all were edited, by Joey Shiu. I am sharing them here with his permission. "Someone told me there's a math problem that if you solve it, you'll get a million dollars. Is that true?" I smiled, thinking how much more motivated my Algebra 1 class might be if I offered them such an incentive. I told them that not only is it true, but there's a whole list of such problems—the Millennium Prize problems. "Can you solve them?" they asked. "If I could, I'd be a millionaire!" "Are they … word problems?" Well … yes, they are, but not like any word problems these kids have ever seen. I looked up the list and read one of the problem statements out loud. They quickly realized this was a different kind of "hard" than factoring polynomials. But their curiosity remained, and soon they were asking questions that gave more insight into the way many students view mathematics. "Who came up with these problems? If they came up with them, shouldn't they know the answers? If they don't know the answers, how will they know when someone gets them right?" These questions are symptomatic of how schools have taught math for far too many years. Students have a limited view of what it means to "do math"—and who can blame them? Formulaically applying a memorized set of algorithms to get an answer the teacher can look up in his book is what gets them good grades. Nor are teachers entirely to blame (though we are partly), so great is the pressure to push through all the material kids need to know to prepare them for standardized tests and college gen-ed math. It can be challenging to find time to teach kids how to be mathematicians—that is, how to enjoy the process of mathematical discovery for its own sake. In a broader sense, I want my students to learn to enjoy learning for its own sake. Some of them already do. Others see little point in absorbing any knowledge that won't be on the test. As a teacher, I have both the joy of working with the first group and the challenge of motivating the latter. And since I'm not a millionaire, I need to find cheaper ways to motivate them. Most of them may never use algebra after they finish school, and at most a handful will ever study enough mathematics to even understand what the Millennium Prize problems are about. But if they all can develop intrinsic motivation to be lifelong learners, if they can cultivate the curiosity that drives mathematicians to ask million-dollar questions, I'll be happy. Getting them there is easier said than done, but it's a worthy challenge. Now, off to finish class preps… |
AuthorMichael is an engineer in Indianapolis, Indiana. Read more on the About page. Archives
July 2023
Categories |