Machen for Memorial Day

Leave a reply

Machen writing about a book promoting imperialism:

It is a glorification of imperialism….A very immoral purpose indeed!…Imperialism, to my mind, is satanic, whether it is German or English… I am opposed to all imperial ambitions, wherever they may be cherished and with whatever veneer of benevolent assimilation they may be disguised… The author glorifies war and ridicules efforts at the production of mutual respect and confidence among equal nations….[The book] makes me feel anew the need for Christianity,…what a need for the gospel!

Writing in 1915 about the Allies:

The alliance of Great Britain with Russia and Japan seems to me still an unholy thing – an unscrupulous effort to crush the life out of a progressive commercial rival. Gradually a coalition had to be gotten together against Germany, and the purpose of it was only too plain. An alleged war in the interest of democracy the chief result of which will be to place a splendid people at the mercy of Russia does not appeal to me.

This talk about British democracy arouses my ire as much as anything. Great Britain seems to me the least democratic of all the civilized nations of the world – with a land-system that makes great masses of the people practically serfs, and a miserable social system that is more tyrannical in the really important, emotional side of life than all the political oppression that ever was practiced. And then if there is such a thing as British democracy it has no place for any rival on the face of the earth. The British attitude towards Germany’s just effort at a place in ocean trade seems to me one of the great underlying causes of the war.

Machen on the draft:

Even temporary conscription goes against the grain with me, unless it is resorted to to repel actual invasion, but my fundamental objection is directed against compulsory service in time of peace.

The country seems to be rushing into two things to which I am more strongly opposed than anything else in the world – a permanent alliance with Great Britain, which will inevitably mean a continuance of the present vassalage, and a permanent policy of compulsory military service with all the brutal interference of the state in individual and family life which that entails, and which has caused the misery of Germany and France.

From a letter to his congressman:

Even temporary conscription goes against the grain with me, unless it is resorted to to repel actual invasion, but my fundamental objection is directed against compulsory service in time of peace.

The country seems to be rushing into two things to which I am more strongly opposed than anything else in the world – a permanent alliance with Great Britain, which will inevitably mean a continuance of the present vassalage, and a permanent policy of compulsory military service with all the brutal interference of the state in individual and family life which that entails, and which has caused the misery of Germany and France.

Hating school spirit:

Princeton is a hot-bed of patriotic enthusiasm and military ardor, which makes me feel like a man without a country.

Machen, was totally in favor of fighting to defend freedom when that was actually the case, rather than the Tisroc’s slave wars. For example:

The real indictment against the modern world is that by the modern world human liberty is being destroyed. At that point I know many modern men could only with difficulty repress a smile. The word liberty has today a very archaic sound; it suggests G.A. Henty, flag waving, the boys of ’76, and the like. Twentieth-century intellectuals, it is thought, have long ago outgrown all such childishness as that. So the modern historians are spelling “liberty,” when they are obliged to use the ridiculous word, in quotation marks: no principle, they are telling us, was involved, for example, in the American Revolution; economic causes alone produced that struggle; and Patrick Henry was engaging in cheap melodrama when he said, “Give me liberty or give me death.”

J. Gresham Machen was a conservative Presbyterian who wanted to preserve liberty against the Leviathan State who uses war in order to bring the native populace into further servitude while extending rule in foreign soil. It is a legacy worth remembering, especially for American Christians on this day.

God judges sooner than the Last Day, so statism is wrong

2 Replies

I love this post by Doug Wilson. Love!

I want to offer one minor addition to what he says to combat statism. It is true that God will judge at the Last Day, but it needs to be remembered that he also judges (and saves!) sooner than that (and I’ve learned this from Doug himself, by the way).

God promises to cut off the wicked by the third of fourth generation. We see evil and fear it will spread and destroy society. We have to trust God that he will judge the wicked and cause the righteous to flourish and grow in society.

Sinful actions are not just wrong, but they bring their own destruction. You have to appreciate God’s patience but trust that he will intervene before the sin becomes overwhelming.

I happen to be spending a lot of time in Proverbs. So this happened to be on my mind.

The Future of Jesus 9, Who inherits the Land/Earth?

2 Replies

All of Psalm 37 is amazing, but I’ll narrow my focus on a few verses toward the latter half:

I have been young, and now am old,
yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken
or his children begging for bread.
He is ever lending generously,
and his children become a blessing.

Turn away from evil and do good;
so shall you dwell forever.
For the Lord loves justice;
he will not forsake his saints.
They are preserved forever,
but the children of the wicked shall be cut off.
The righteous shall inherit the land
and dwell upon it forever.

This is not some past dispensation. Jesus appealed to this text in the sermon on the Mount:

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

And, just to be clear, Jesus is not changing “righteous” to “meek.” That was already the OT meaning. In fact, that is the meaning established earlier in Psalm 37:

Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath!
Fret not yourself; it tends only to evil.
For the evildoers shall be cut off,
but those who wait for the LORD shall inherit the land.

In just a little while, the wicked will be no more;
though you look carefully at his place, he will not be there.
But the meek shall inherit the land
and delight themselves in abundant peace.

So two questions:

1. How is it Christian to claim that the meek won’t inherit the earth?

and

2. How is it right or just to portray confidence in Jesus’ promise that the meek will inherit the earth as a form of “triumphalism”?

One tactic has been to claim that the “earth” the meek will inherit is not this earth but a future replacement planet. That rips the word out of Matthew’s context. Matthew show Jesus preaching that the meek will inherit the earth, meekly submitting to death, and then inheriting this earth in the climax of Matthew’s Gospel:

Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

It is this earth that the meek get, parceled out by the earth’s new king.

The Future of Jesus

F. A. Hayek and the Apostle Paul should do a hip hop point counterpoint together

Leave a reply

No, I don’t think Paul would disagree with Hayek’s economic theory, or even very much with his social theorizing on the rule of law…

But by some weird providence, as soon as I got done listening to The Road to Serfdom I put my recording of the Romans back in the cd player and realized I was hearing about the same issues at their point of origin.

Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations… In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to be proud of my work for God. For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to bring the Gentiles to obedience—by word and deed, by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God—so that from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named… Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ!

When you read Hayek it becomes clear that he is lamenting how history has changed directions. What should have been the flowering of Christian civilization has been traded for a bowl of red stuff.

And because he himself, despite acknowledging that Christian culture happened to be involved, is not a disciple of Jesus, Hayek can’t really call anyone back to what they had. He weeps over a cut flower and pleads with it to bloom again.

Hayek analyzed some elements of it and defended them, as much as a Darwinist could–but it was the Apostle Paul who gave us the international social order of peace, freedom, and prosperity. If you read The Road to Serfdom and then read Paul’s letter to the Romans, this basic truth will become forcefully apparent.

And just in case anyone doesn’t know what I mean by the “hip hop” reference:

YouTube – “Fear the Boom and Bust” a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem.

YouTube – Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two.

How hard is it to make an accurate scale? You are doing it every day.

Leave a reply

It would help to know something about the technology of the Ancient Near East. How hard was it to produce an accurate scale? Did it take a great deal of time and/or attention. Was it a special skill or could anyone do it.

And did the accuracy deteriorate? Did you have to pay attention to make sure that the trustworthiness of a scale did not deteriorate over time? Were people tempted to ignore the developing lopsidedness so they could use it to their advantage?

I wonder about these things when I see three verses in Proverbs in a relatively tight spread about what the LORD finds an abomination and what he delights in:

Proverbs 11:1
A false balance is an abomination to the LORD, but a just weight is his delight.

Proverbs 11:20
Those of crooked heart are an abomination to the LORD, but those of blameless ways are his delight.

Proverbs 12:22
Lying lips are an abomination to the LORD, but those who act faithfully are his delight.

Are you a just balance?

Perhaps this question isn’t quite right. Are you making yourself and keeping yourself a just balance? Or are you deteriorating into a false scale?

A modest proposal

Leave a reply

United States Government officials should not secretly reinterpret public laws and statutes in a manner that is inconsistent with the public’s understanding of these laws, and should not describe the execution of these laws in a way that misinforms or misleads the public.

via Wyden and Udall Want Obama to Admit to Secret Collection Program | Emptywheel.

This sounds like it should be part of a riddle: “When is the rule of law not the rule of law?”

So did anyone vote for Obama in order to get constitutional control over the “National Security” insanity? Looks like you picked the wrong horse

Leave a reply

Sen. Rand Paul has single-handedly stopped the extension of three key provisions of the Patriot Act until after they expire at midnight Thursday. Unless he folds.

via Sen. Rand Paul Delays Renewal of Patriot Act Provisions – Washington Wire – WSJ.

Looks like the Southern bubba is going to do it while the cool and sophisticated Harvard-educated community organizer just amasses power.

“He’s fighting for an amendment to protect the right – not of average citizens, but of terrorists – to cover up their gun. It he thinks that it’s going to be a badge of courage on his side to have held this up for a few hours, he’s made a mistake.”

— Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the Senate floor denouncing Sen. Rand Paul’s efforts to amend the PATRIOT Act.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Wednesday went beyond questioning Sen. Rand Paul’s patriotism, accusing the Kentucky freshman of trying to aid terrorists.

via Obama Dems Don’t Listen to Clinton on Debt – FoxNews.com.

I’m really curious if any blue-staters are allowing themselves to contemplate the present turn of events… and whether or not they might have been completely predictable.