Eutychus and His Kin: January 7, 1972

THE PLEISTOCENE GAP

He came wandering into the cave out of the Pleistocene mist idly scraping the bark off a twig with a sharpened stone.

“Where have you been?” asked his mother, giving the rabbit on the spit another turn over the fire.

“Outside.”

“Outside where?”

“Just outside.”

“Doing what?” she persisted.

“Just thinking. Sitting and thinking,” he replied wearily. Then he sank onto the bearskin by the fire.

“You do too much thinking,” she said, with an edge in her voice. “There are things that need to be done. We need new arrows and spear heads. Baskets need weaving. Your father is getting a little disgusted with your lack of help.”

“Oh, Mom,” he said, flinging the twig into the fire. “What do you and Dad know? Don’t you realize we have no future? Our race is doomed.

“What good is it going to do to make better spears and arrows when the game is disappearing. Why make new baskets when the berries are giving out?

“Don’t you realize that it’s just a matter of time? There are just too many of us for the food supply. Why just the other day there were several fights over a single blackberry bush!

“And besides, with the invention of the bow and arrow, the whole race could be wiped out overnight.

“Things can’t go on like this forever. There’s just no way out. Nobody will limit his number of children. Each tribe is afraid the other will become larger and stronger and take over.

“We live with a sort of balance of terror. It’s all so pointless.

“There’s nothing to do. The council of elders just sit around the fire grunting and scratching their fleas. They won’t listen to those of us who really know what’s happening. We’ll just have to resign ourselves to the end.”

“Perhaps if you presented some alternative …”

“There is no alternative,” he snapped.

“Well,” she began hesitantly, “perhaps there’s no alternative in sight, but God could provide one. He might help us understand why some berry bushes grow larger than others so that we could make them all grow big …”

“God!” he shouted. “You dream.” And still shaking his head he rose and marched out into the mist.

SALVATION, BUT NO JUSTICE

The article “A South African Christian Confronts Apartheid” (Nov. 19) presented a good viewpoint from a white Christian with a troubled conscience about the race problem. It is refreshing to see a thoughtful Christian realizing that there are not good answers to a lot of these questions. Many others who write or talk on the subject take dogmatic, theoretical views with no evidence of considering the difficult problems involved and with a humanistic approach rather than a scriptural approach.

But let me raise some further questions. Cassidy says the division of land is unfair because it is not equally divided. This is a matter that has never, in any country, been worked out on an equal-division basis, even among whites. I am doubtful even that it should be attempted. I cannot find any statement in the Bible that indicates all land or all wealth should be divided equally.… I believe that every person should have the opportunity to accept the salvation offered us through the death and resurrection of Christ. This is true whether he is black or white, rich or poor, educated or illiterate. Would an equal division of land or wealth facilitate the acceptance of salvation? Does the attempted integration in this country facilitate that? I think not.

As a human being, I want to see justice to all; but it would be silly, in my opinion, to expect justice in a world dominated by wickedness. In this world, I may get a different kind of injustice than a black person, but I could recite a long list of what I consider personal injustices. It would be unrealistic to expect anything else in this life. And I can thank God not only for the new life in Christ but for the injustices and other trials that have come to me, knowing that tribulation works patience and that it is through troubles that we find the greater blessing of Christ.

Chairman of the Finance Committee

Genesco Apparel

Nashville, Tenn.

IN FOCUS

I have just finished reading “Big Churches—Yes! No!” (Nov. 5). This is as terse and succinct a setting forth of the pros and cons as I have seen on this rather important matter. Both Towns and Davey are to be thanked for sharpening the “focus” for us. Thanks and appreciation also to CHRISTIANITY TODAY for making the debate available to us.

First American Baptist Church

Hayward, Calif.

The defense of the “big” church on the basis that it can provide specialized or expert help, adequate buildings and transportation, in my thinking is not valid, is not patterned after the normative apostolic church, and is not helpful to the individual. The sad thing about this thing is that the little and the feeble man for whom all these services are meant is lost sight of.… I wonder what has happened to that New Testament and Reformation concept that the Church is not to become sacerdotal, but that the priesthood belongs to the entire church membership with Jesus our High Priest. For over a thousand years the Church was under the influence of the specialists, and it was “big”; but it became stagnant and failed in its mission to evangelize the world. I believe that the Church will never fulfill its God-given mission until lay members and preachers as partners unite their efforts in the work of witnessing for the power of the Gospel. The big church is not the answer.

Seventh-day Adventist Church

Niles, Mich.

I believe that the answer lies somewhere between the two positions.… It seems that every metropolitan area should have a large, full-service church. However, such a church should define well in advance its point of quantitative maturity. Once this point is reached, vertical development should give way to horizontal development. For example, “bus congregations” should become the nuclei of daughter churches.

The mother church should remain dynamic in this change of developmental direction and should continue to provide central leadership and “full service.” The daughter churches could remain within the framework of a close working relationship with each other and with the mother church, giving maximum force to the evangelistic outreach and community service of the whole.

It can be predicted with almost complete certainty that this approach will result in a greater total enlargement of the kingdom of God in the community, and this should be our real aim. Also, the leadership and influence of the pastor of the central church will be broader, deeper, and more lasting in this program than in a program of interminable vertical growth at the central locus.

(THE REV.) J. W. JEPSON

Lyons, Oreg.

SHAKY SOURCE

It was good to see “The Missionary Retreat” (Nov. 19) supported by figures gathered from reliable sources. Regrettable, however, was the indication that the sole cause of the retreat is a deluded theology—bowing to syncretism and neo-universalism. I wish you had mentioned the number of evangelicals who are tired of playing leapfrog evangelism (escape mechanism?) and tired of hearing that questionable premise “foreign (?) missionary outreach is a primary sign of a denomination’s spiritual health.” From what source did you get your premise?

Baptist Church of the edeemer

Brooklyn, N. Y.

Your editorial correctly pointed out the fact that we have a cancer; the even greater tragedy is that we injected this death into our bodies by a willful act. Our leaders asked us to trust in them and to ignore God and we did; our leaders laughed at evangelism and we applauded; our leaders made fun of the Word of God and stopped using it in the curriculum and we began to die. Our leaders used God-words but those words had no meaning. We turned away from God and he in sorrow turned away from our denomination. And the cancer has kept growing. Many of us consider the preaching of the Gospel to be the task of the church. We still consider the Scriptures to be the Word of God and Jesus Christ to be the only way a person can be brought into a right relationship with God. Our denominational leaders have decided to sleep with humanism and existential theology and they have given birth to a monster.

First Baptist Church Youth Pastor

Santa Clara, Calif.

NO PROVISION

Thank you for John W. Duddington’s interesting and stimulating article “The Red Herring of a Three-Story Universe” (Nov. 5), and particularly the discussion of the spiritual status of creatures in other worlds. Concerning this latter subject, it could also be noted that some possibilities are suggested by what Scripture tells us of the angels. Some of them did not fall, hence need no redemption, whereas it would appear that in the case of those who did fall no provision was made for their redemption.

Boulder, Colo.

UP THE LADDER

The implication that Christians must choose between “elementary and secondary or higher education” is unfortunate (Editorials, “Settling Educational Priorities,” Oct. 22). It is time that Christians realize the importance of each element of the educational ladder.…

In the near future the distinctively Christian college will find significant support from those who were concerned enough to send their children to the Christian school. The colleges that communicate the distinctives of a Christian world-and-life view will be supported by Christians who were convinced regarding these values before their children entered college. Of what practical value is the Christian college to the parent whose child’s faith was destroyed before he graduated from high school?

It is misleading to suggest that a “great new volume of facilities” will be needed. Existing Sunday-school facilities are waiting to be utilized (as recently proposed in CHRISTIANITY TODAY) at little or no cost. We are hoping that the influence of CHRISTIANITY TODAY would support education that is Christian from kindergarten through university.

Executive Director

Natl. Assn. of Christian Schools

Wheaton, Ill.

EXPOSING GOSPEL MUSIC

Thank you for your news story “Bad Day for Blackwoods” (Nov. 19). Many of us here on the Canadian prairies have had very little exposure to the gospel music business in the south. Your article was most enlightening, and I hope you will continue to carry coverage of some of the major events in the field of gospel music (such as the week-long singing conventions held each year in Memphis). Many of us have wondered about some of the practices of these professional groups and are trying to decide whether they should receive the support of evangelical Christians. Articles such as the one written by Cheryl Forbes will capture the interest of many people here where gospel music has had a very limited market, but where it seems to be on the increase.

Avalon E.M.B. Church

Winnipeg, Manitoba

STRIKING AGAINST IRRESPONSIBILITY

Just a brief clarification on reading the letter to the editor (Dec. 3) by David Gill of the Christian World Liberation Front. Could I possibly have been unpleasant to such gracious people in doing my article on Revel’s Neither Marx nor Jesus (Current Religious Thought, Oct. 8)? I make it a practice never to criticize faithful disciples! Actually, I was striking at the irresponsible tendencies in the general “Jesus freak” phenomenon, not at any particular group—and certainly not at the CWLF, whose former Right On editor, Mark Albrecht, has been one of my Ararat co-explorers. Perhaps CWLF people shouldn’t be so sensitive, though! There is the story I used to tell (before the onset of Women’s Liberation) about the woman who jumped up when a speaker said, “Women wear funny hats,” and screamed, “I don’t wear a funny hat!” Is it possible I touched a raw nerve—a tendency which responsible CWLF people are themselves trying to correct?

Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

Deerfield, Ill.

CREATIVE CHRISTIANITY

My thanks to Leon Morris for his article “Conservative Evangelicals?” (Current Religious Thought, Nov. 19). For some time I have been disturbed by the kind of conservatism among evangelicals that tends to subordinate Christian belief, thought and practice to an ideology, even if it is “conservatism.” It’s time that Christians cast aside meaningless terms like “conservative” and “liberal” and went about their business—God’s business. The Christian should not weigh down the teaching of the Bible with any alien mode of thought. Rather we should do what is expressly commanded, avoid what is expressly forbidden, and apply our intelligence, reason, and creativity to that wealth of experience that remains.

Mansfield, Pa.

WHICH ‘GOSPEL’?

Samuel Mateer (“The Two Christmas Stories,” Dec. 3) offered a worthwhile suggestion to Christian parents in dealing with the Santa Claus myth. In researching for some messages on why we as Christians believe there is a God I came across the following two quotes from atheists which lend added support to Mateer’s point. In the 1967 Gallup Poll which reported on the belief in God among Americans a woman doctor was reported to have said, “If you believe in God you believe in Santa Claus, and if you believe in Santa Claus where are you then?” (L.A. Times, Dec. 31, 1971). Secondly, the National Observer featured a full-page article on a group of atheists in Washington, D.C. The article contained the following quote: “Those God-in-heaven images taught by religionists, says Mr. Curry [the leader of the group], are meant to convince people that ‘they have important friends in high places.’ He adds: ‘The man with the long beard sitting up there on a cloud—ridiculous! Children hardly get over the Santa Claus myth when they have this other one shoved down their throats’ ” (Sept. 1, 1969). Though the two questions are hardly comparable in either the evidences or the gravity, it seems that the ideas are all too often associated. The opponents of the faith have not failed to utilize this situation in spreading their “gospel.” Christian parents should consider Mr. Mateer’s suggestions seriously.

(The Rev.) TIMOTHY D. CRATER

Atlanta, Georgia

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.