Musings From Motor City
Detroit will fit better into Michigan than Michigan into Detroit. The figure 1000 is more likely to contain the figure 100 than the other way around. The outside box of a child's set of interplaced boxes will be more capable of accommodating the innermost box than will this latter be capable of accommodating the former. The sin of unbelief is big enough to include all other sins: the sin of bearing false witness is always, in the last analysis, the sin of unbelief; but the sin of unbelief may be committed in other ways than by lying.
So which? So this: Biblical ideas of non-resistance to evil fit in with, and accommodate themselves better to, the idea of organizing ourselves for mutual protection, which the Word blesses men in doing (see Romans 13) than to ideas for the security of the community fit in with teaching that swagmen of all degrees should be merely invited to a higher plane of conduct. >From the Christian, men need expect nothing but good will and the moving of heaven and earth to the removing of causes of friction between neighbor and neighbor: but there is, and must be, a limit to the use of pacific means for settling differences. We appeal unto Caesar! We, the organized members of society, in this day play the role of Caesar for purposes of self-protection. Our enemy has no excuse for moving against us; we weary not in exploring every pacific means of producing a settlement; but if that's not enough--apply Romans 13.
* * * *
This great brotherhood of ours has been plagued with one "P"--premillennialism--long enough; look we for yet another pacifism? Is the new order in the church to be guided by a set of cheek-turning fuehrers, and must it henceforth revolve on the Louisville-Birmingham axis?
* * * *
Go to, now. We've heard enough about the A.A.A. Let's turn our attention to the A.A.A.A. These letters represent four reasons, which some have termed "weighty," for lining up with the premillennialists among us.
First comes AGE. It is alleged that premillennialism is no new wrinkle, but was widely accepted by the so-called "fathers" of the second and third centuries. But there was a strong tendency towards Catholicism in those days as well. Should we therefore endorse it?
Next comes ACCEPTANCE, the argument running something like this: "Look at the number of good and great men who believe this way. There's Bro. Bee, Bro. Jay, Bro. Oh, Bro. See, and Bro. Doubleyou." But there's a whole presbytery full of morally upright men who are endorsing Calvinism, a complete vestry of Episcopalians, and a full regiment of Salvationists who respectively embrace the positions suggested.
Next in line is AUTHORITY. "Both Brethren D. See Jay and E. El Jay proclaim this way as the key to understanding all truth. Who am I to withstand such?" Who are you, indeed! You are the one to stand alone--like Elijah and like Paul, if need be. One and God are a majority in any argument. Otherwise you are of a peace with those who accept things simply because one Signor Pacelli avers them.
Last comes ACTIVITY. "Here is a list of things they are doing. They have this school and that class. They run this paper and generously support the other orphanage. They have meetings five afternoons and six evenings out of every week." Okay. Okay. I get it. I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but-well, you can look up Romans 10:2 if you can't recall it right-off.
There are umpteen variations of these arguments, but however thin it's sliced or however well the bread is buttered: it's still a popular lunch meat.