The sword is, as it were, consecrated to God; and the art of war becomes a part of our religion.” –Samuel Davies

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

McClure the Apologist

Today I thought I’d continue with more excerpts from the journal of David McClure.


Oct.  4. [1772] This day they seemed more disposed to noise & merriment, and to ramble about, than usual. With taking pains, I got about 40 to assemble in the afternoon, and spake with freedom and great plainness on some of the most important truths of the gospel, particularly on a new heart, repentence [sic], faith and a life of religion, as necessary to happiness after death.
       Some were affected and wept. In my discourse yesterday, I mentioned the necessity of their receiving the word of God, to their present and future happiness. After I had done preaching today, the Speaker, who apppears to be a very sensible and thoughtful person, said to me, "you have told us that we must receive what is in the book (meaning the bible). We believe there is one Almighty Monetho,  who made all things; he is the father of the Indians and of the White people. He loves one as well as the other. You say, he sent you that book a great while ago. He has not sent it to us. If he intended it for us, he would have let us know it, at the same time that he let you know it. We don't deny that the book is good and intended for you, and no doubt, when you want to know what you should do, you must look into that book; but the Great Monetho has given us knowledge here, (pointing to his forehead) & when we are at a loss what to do, we must think."  The king was present and all seemed waiting for an answer. It was a deistical objection, founded in the pride of erring reason, and more than I expected from an uncultivated heathen. I spoke to him of the sovereignty of God in his gifts to nations, and to individuals.  That he was under no obligations to shew favor to any of his offending creatures. That the will of God revealed in the bible, teaching men their duty and the way to endless happiness, was a favor that none could claim: but in his great mercy to lost sinners, he had been pleased to communicate it to one nation in former ages, and commanded them to make it known to others. That the English were one of the last of the nations, to whom it was communicated ; and that we now knowing and rejoicing in the light which that holy book, let into our minds, in all our duty, and guiding us to heaven, were desirous that our brethren in the wilderness, should know the good news which it reveals. And God had commanded us, to convey to them the knowledge of it. To this he made no reply, but immediately started another objection, as follows, 1

But before we look at the other objection, let’s examine this interchange first.  Isn’t it neat to look at apologetics 18th century style?  The Speaker’s objection essentially boils down to an argument that man’s reason is sufficient to teach him how to live in a way that is pleasing to God.  In a word, it’s just plain humanism.  Notice McClure’s immediate response is to direct the attention of those assembled to God, not man.  God is not obligated to show any mercy at all to man, and certainly the revelation of His Word (written Word and Living Word, Jesus Christ) is the pinnacle of His mercy displayed to fallen man.  There is only one way to heaven and that is through repentance and faith in the finished work of the very Son of God.  I think McClure succinctly and thoroughly redirects the Speaker to the self-attesting authority of the Bible.  McClure is essentially saying “God has preserved His Word through the ages.  It has been delivered to us and He has commanded that we should share it with you.”
Now, let’s look at the next objection.  
  
       "If we take your religion, we must leave off war, and become as women, and then we shall be easily subdued by our enemies." Having answered him, that we who embraced this religion were not subdued by our enemies, but were free and powerful; and that by embracing & practicing the duties which the bible commands, they would be the same &c.
       He again objected, "The white people, with whom we are acquainted, are worse, or more wicked than we are, and we think it better to be such as we are than such as they are." 2

Aren’t these the same objections to the Gospel that we hear today?  The first is essentially the excuse that Christians are “weak” or they are people who “need a crutch.”  McClure answers the objection well, and he relies on his interpreter to answer the second objection more fully.  “Pepee” is actually Joseph Pepeesetout, a Delaware Indian who had been a member of the late David Brainerd’s congregation and was now on old man.  His response to the Speaker’s objection is revealing.

       I gave Pepee some directions in answer, knowing him capable of it. He enlarged with great zeal and ability. Among other observations, he said, "the white people, whom you are acquainted with, (meaning the traders) are no Christians; they do not know or do the things which God has told them in the Bible. No, Christians will not receive them into their society. If you want to see christians you must go to Philadelphia. There you will see good people, who love the word of the Great God, and mind it."
        He then spake very solemnly & affectionately, on their deplorable state, and told them, unless they reformed, their ruin would speedily come.
       "We remember, said he, that our fathers told us, how numerous the Indians were in their days, & in the days of their fathers. Great towns of Indians were all along the sea shore, and on the Rivers, and now, if you travel through that country, you will scarcely see an Indian ; but you will see great and flourishing towns of white people, who possess the land of our fathers. And we are cut off, and fall back upon these distant rivers, and are reduced to a small number. The white people increase, and we Indians decrease. I can tell you, my countrymen, the reason of this. The white people worship the true God, and please him, and God blesses and prospers them. We and our fathers worshiped Devils, or them that are no Gods, and therefore God frowns upon us. And if you continue ignorant of him, when you have opportunity to know God and worship him, he will cut you off, & give this good country to a people that shall serve him. And if it shall be asked what has become of the Indians that lived here? none will be able to tell. You will be cut off, and your children as a great many powerful Indian nations have been, and none of them are left." The above is the substance of a lengthy prophetic kind of speech of good Joseph. I observed that it took hold of them. King, Councillors & warriors, who were present, hung down their heads and made no reply. A similar conversation he held yesterday after sermon. Yesterday one of the Chiefs returned from the neighboring towns, where he had gone to collect their minds, relative to my continuing among them, & this evening a Council was held on the subject. 3

Every man, woman and child who is without Christ in this world is literally hanging on the precipice of eternal judgment with every breath they take.  Pepee points out to the assembled Indians that the destruction of their cultures was the direct result of God’s judgment upon their wickedness and rejection of Him.  God in his mercy was offering to them salvation through Christ Jesus and true worship of the Father and if the Indians should reject God, their doom would come swiftly in this world and then the next to come.  It’s remarkable that the body language of those assembled shows that they knew their guilt and no objection was raised to Pepee’s discourse.  The Bible tells us that “godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.” (2 Cor. 7:10)  Were the Indians truly repentant?  Or were some of them only exhibiting the sorrow of the world?  Only eternity will tell, but we’ll pick up the story in another post.

Christ, not man, is King!
Dale

1)      Franklin B. Dexter, ed., Diary of David McClure (New York, NY: Knickerbocker Press, 1899), p. 80-1.
2)      Ibid., p. 81.
3)      Ibid., p. 81-2.

No comments:

Post a Comment