> Matthew 11:25: 'At that time Jesus said, I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.'

Critics claim that Jesus openly admitted the absurdity of his teaching here, pointing to the 'little children' phrase as evidence that Christianity favors ignorance. However, the 'little children' phrase has nothing to do with being ignorant like a child; it has to do with being humble like one. The context of such teachings (e.g., Matthew 18:3) shows Jesus using children as a counter to inquiries about who is greatest, emphasizing humility rather than a lack of reason.

Critics sometimes argue that Christianity promotes a hatred of reason and the intellect, citing various verses as evidence. However, a contextual and historical reading reveals a different picture:

Genesis 3:22: The use of the word "know" (yada) here means "knowing" in the sense of familiarity -- not critical or intellectual apprehension.

Mark 4:11-12: The goal of this and other types of ancient/Oriental teaching styles (like that of Socrates) is to cause the hearer to think and consider, with the specific design that if they are unwilling to "get the point" they will reject what the teaching implies and go away. But if you want to know more, you ask for an explanation, and a dialogue ensues. Ancient methods of teaching featured and encouraged interaction between teacher and student, encouraging the student to "work out" the lesson themselves.

Matthew 11:25 & Matthew 18:3: The "little children" phrase has nothing to do with being ignorant like a child; it has to do with being humble like one. Jesus brings in the child as a counter to the disciples' inquiry about great people in heaven. They didn't ask, "Who's the smartest in heaven?" and Jesus didn't reply, "Whoever is as trusting as this ignorant child is greatest."

Colossians 2:8: In context, this is Paul's attack on a specific heresy at Colosse that is anything but "knowledge-loving." While it is generally recognized as a group that mixed Judaism with mystical, perhaps proto-Gnostic, speculations, it is clear that their stance was grounded in anti-intellectual suppositions. The "basic principles of this world" refers to the spirits thought to represent stars and planets. The word "philosophy" in this time had a broader meaning that included groups as diverse as the Essenes, the Pharisees, the Stoics, and even magicians. The phrase "human tradition" clearly modifies only "hollow and deceptive philosophy" and is intended to stress that this philosophy in particular does not come from any divine source.

Romans 3:7: Paul is in the middle of an extended "diatribe" with an imagined opponent, and is here presenting an argument he supposes might be made in light of his previous ones.

Not one of these passages promotes a hatred of reason or knowledge. They are either irrelevant to the topic or are misinterpreted when read outside their historical and literary context.