These words ended the opening paragraph of J. Gresham Machen’s 1923 classic Christianity and Liberalism. Fighting may be defensive or it may involve attack. When today’s news media wish to portray political rhetoric or reactions in a negative light, they often say that one side or group (nearly always the conservative side) has pounced on some person, thing, or issue. An Associated Press story from 1932 shows that neither the shallow sensationalizing of “religious” news nor the pejorative use of the term “fundamentalist” is anything new. They may as well have said MACHEN POUNCES:

“Stirs Churchmen”…and the pot?

DENVER, May 30, (A.P.) … An attack on policies and government of the Presbyterian Church of the U.S.A. by one of its outstanding leaders exploded a bombshell today in the ranks of the churchmen gathered here.
The attack was made by Dr. J. Gresham Machen of Philadelphia, recognized as the guiding spirit of the church’s fundamentalist faction.
Speaking before the congregation of First Avenue Presbyterian Church in Denver yesterday, Dr. Machen said “the present condition of the Presbyterian Church is an offense against God.”
(Philadelphia Inquirer, Tues. May 31. 1932)
There’s little context to show why Machen felt put upon by a decade of liberalizing declension1 in the northern mainline church. A casual reader might have assumed Machen was just some angry crank. That a sermon preached in the run-up to a presbyterian general assembly could make national news shows how much things have changed in the USA—the mainline still seemed to run the “Christian” nation of America in 1932.
Well, Machen did feel put upon and so “put it on” the moderate-liberal elites who ran the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. You may, like us, question the advisability of (church) political sermons on the Lord’s Day, but times were different. Apparently, such things were more usual 90-100 years ago. There were “really important things” about which men were most definitely fighting. Here’s how the local paper gleefully covered the pugilistic pastor:
The chief event of Sunday, however, was the appearance of Dr. Machen in the pulpit of the First Avenue Presbyterian Church of Denver, whose pastor is Dr. Thomas Murray, Dr. Machen preached two powerful sermons. He was quoted in Monday morning’s Rocky Mountain News under the following headlines: “Presbyterian Heads Flayed by Churchman … Dr. J. Gresham Machen Fiercely Assails Attitude of Modernists … Directs Suspicion … Asserts Unfaithfulness Is Being Concealed in Reign of Secrecy … Bitter Attack on the Presbyterian Church … “ One of the paragraphs of the news Item read: “Scarcely any branch of the church’s administrative bodies escaped the withering fire of his criticism. In harsh language he assailed the actions of men high in the Councils of the Church.” The whole effect of the manner in which this story was handled was to make it appear that Dr. Machen’s message was other in spirit and content than it was. It was not bitter-unless the truth is bitter. It certainly was not harsh, but it was unpleasant to many because it brought out into public view the very dangerous condition of the Church, which many people want to ignore, ostrich-like. His words were a needful and salutary purgative. In order that the readers of CHRISTIANITY TODAY may know the exact form in which quotations of Dr. Machen’s sermon were handed to the press, the text is reproduced on Page 4. It is an undeniable fact that, on Monday morning as newsboys at the door of the Auditorium shouted out “Dr. Machen makes bitter attack on Presbyterian Church,” a number of tempers went up to the boiling point.2
Major ecclesial figures sometimes called press conferences in 1932…and reporters even came. Sermon summaries were provided to the papers, and we have a friendlier and fuller picture from a publication with which Machen was associated—the “old” Christianity Today (as referenced in the above quote):
Dr. Machen’s Denver Sermon
FOR the information of my readers we are reproducing the exact text of news-summary of Dr. Machen’s sermon in the First A venue Presbyterian Church of Denver, during the recent assembly. This is the only form in which the sermon was released to the press.

If the church has hurt you, or if Christians have hurt you, that is bad news indeed. And I am sorry that has happened. But Christ is in a different category altogether. His love for you is constant, His support of you is unending, and His fulsome commitment to you is unwavering.

It is quite common for those who reject Christianity to point to scandals, abuses and the like among Christians, or in the churches, or in Christian cultures or societies. They will point to such things and say they want nothing to do with Christianity.
These folks can be atheists or secularists who look at the faith from without, or they can be those from within — those who once claimed to be believers themselves, but who have now opted out, because of whatever thing, real or imagined, that has offended them, disturbed them, or turned them off about Christianity.
Personal Disappointments
Several things can be said about all this. First, let me explain more fully what I mean by “real or imagined.” Yes, real abuses, real scandals, and real corruption can be found in churches and in individual believers. But sometimes a person may — for whatever reason — be bitter or angry or upset with the faith for rather dubious reasons.
Any number of reasons might be raised here. Perhaps a young person was attending a church, not so much out of devotion to God or concern for religion, but as a way of finding a partner to form a relationship with. Maybe he finds a nice gal there, but the relationship breaks down after a while. He gets hurt and upset, and ends up taking all this out on God or the church.
So that is the first thing that can be said about rejecting the faith: what are your reasons for doing so? Are they valid reasons? Or are you just bearing grudges or taking offence, when God or the faith itself has nothing really to do with it?
Weeds Among the Wheat; Wolves Among the Sheep
And yes, some real bad things can happen: a trusted church leader may have been found out to have been abusing or molesting children in his care. That is a much better reason to want to lash out at the church. But even here, we need to take some care in this.
It is always terrible when any adult abuses a person in his or her care. But should that mean then that the entire edifice must be rejected as well? We all know that abusive schoolteachers exist. Does that mean we should reject all schools and all forms of education as a result? Most people would not think so.
We all know that abusive policemen exist. So should we ditch the police entirely because of them? Should we tar and feather every police officer because of a few bad apples? Should we therefore argue that law enforcement is inherently evil in itself and must be eliminated? Most people would not think so.
We all know that abuse, scandals, corruption and criminal activities can take place anywhere — be it in a childcare centre, a hospital, a library, a grocery store, or a petrol station. Should we therefore reject all of these entirely and want nothing to do with them?
I think you get the message. Yes, whenever someone claiming to be a Christian does some decidedly unchristian or anti-Christian things, that is always a real problem. But throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not usually the wisest way to proceed here.
Read More

They came before not just Moses and Eleazar the prophet and priest of the people of God but all the chiefs of the clans as well. These were the men who led God’s people, acted as judges in arguments, and made judicial decisions. This was an auspicious group of people, and these women stepped up to the challenge of speaking before this governing body. These women spoke their mind before this court, and God would bless their courage.

Have you ever heard of the five daughters of Zelophehad? Perhaps I can jog your memory: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. No? Well, it’s probably not a surprise. These women are mentioned several times in the book of Numbers—not the most popular Old Testament book—and they just aren’t as famous as Mary and Martha in the New Testament. Yet, I find their story to be one that is an example of the traits of a Christian woman: The daughters of Zelophehad are courageous and bold, they desire the things of the Lord, and they are humble. We learn of their story in Numbers 27:

Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad the son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, from the clans of Manasseh the son of Joseph. The names of his daughters were: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. And they stood before Moses and before Eleazar the priest and before the chiefs and all the congregation, at the entrance of the tent of meeting, saying, “Our father died in the wilderness. He was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah, but died for his own sin. And he had no sons. Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father’s brothers.” (Num. 27:1-4)

The daughters of Zelophehad courageously stood before the leaders of their people for a just request—to have an inheritance among God’s people.
First, I would like to highlight the courage these women demonstrated. The text states that the daughters of Zelophehad stood before the leaders of their people: they came before not just Moses and Eleazar the prophet and priest of the people of God but all the chiefs of the clans as well. These were the men who led God’s people, acted as judges in arguments, and made judicial decisions. This was an auspicious group of people, and these women stepped up to the challenge of speaking before this governing body.
Read More
Related Posts: