When followers of a worldview are presented with logical contradictions that expose the system as actually being disgraceful toward what it is trying to exalt, they often try to deflect and claim no culpability because the discipline's elements are being perpetrated by the worldview's teachers. Arnobius points out that there is little likelihood that a thinking person inventing something that brings disdain on the worldview being communicated. And even if that was true, the followers' guilt remains because nothing has been done to repel or denounce what is insulting. Just the opposite, the teaching is being repeated broadly as true, and those outsiders denouncing the faults are being slandered for being correct.
"But all these things," they say, "are the fictions of poets, and games arranged for pleasure."
It is certainly not credible that men by no means thoughtless, who sought to trace out the character of the remotest antiquity, either did not insert in their poems the fables which survived in the minds of men and common conversation; or that they would have assumed to themselves so great license as to foolishly feign what was almost sheer madness, and might give them reason to be afraid of the gods, and bring them into danger with men.
But let us grant that the poets are, as you say, the inventors and authors of tales so disgraceful. You are not, however, even thus free from the guilt of dishonoring the gods, who either are remiss in punishing such offenses, or have not, by passing laws, and by severity of punishments, opposed such indiscretion; and it has not been established by you that no man should henceforth say that which was very near to disgrace or was unworthy of the glory of the gods. For whoever allows the wrongdoer to sin, strengthens his audacity; and it is more insulting to brand and mark anyone with false accusations, than to bring forward and upbraid their real offenses. For to be called what you are, and what you feel yourself to be, is less offensive, because your resentment has less bite, being weakened by the testimony of silent reviewing; but that wounds very keenly which brands the innocent, and defames a man’s honorable name and reputation.
Sadly, the church, both local and universal, has sometimes taken the same stance regarding those trying to correct improprieties and what defames Christ from within. Historical and present times afford multiple examples of practices, teachings, and movements put forward in the name of Christ which were contrary to divine revelation. Those sounding alarms were exiled, castigated, reviled, and in the past even tortured or killed so the promoters of error should not face the facts of their ways.
When a new movement or teaching arises, it is incumbent on the local church to ascertain the facts, not the motivation, behind it. Promoters are by nature sincere and passionate in what they are promoting. Discerning church bodies, especially the leaders, must wrestle with the issue or issues presented and compare with Scripture. Reaction by a promoter may be negative, vociferous, and possibly vicious, but the agenda of men is not our standard of conduct or practice. We answer to the Lord of all—holding his name high and defending his honor to the utmost.
"But all these things," they say, "are the fictions of poets, and games arranged for pleasure."
It is certainly not credible that men by no means thoughtless, who sought to trace out the character of the remotest antiquity, either did not insert in their poems the fables which survived in the minds of men and common conversation; or that they would have assumed to themselves so great license as to foolishly feign what was almost sheer madness, and might give them reason to be afraid of the gods, and bring them into danger with men.
But let us grant that the poets are, as you say, the inventors and authors of tales so disgraceful. You are not, however, even thus free from the guilt of dishonoring the gods, who either are remiss in punishing such offenses, or have not, by passing laws, and by severity of punishments, opposed such indiscretion; and it has not been established by you that no man should henceforth say that which was very near to disgrace or was unworthy of the glory of the gods. For whoever allows the wrongdoer to sin, strengthens his audacity; and it is more insulting to brand and mark anyone with false accusations, than to bring forward and upbraid their real offenses. For to be called what you are, and what you feel yourself to be, is less offensive, because your resentment has less bite, being weakened by the testimony of silent reviewing; but that wounds very keenly which brands the innocent, and defames a man’s honorable name and reputation.
Arnobius of Sicca, The Case against the Pagans, Book IV, cap. 32
Sadly, the church, both local and universal, has sometimes taken the same stance regarding those trying to correct improprieties and what defames Christ from within. Historical and present times afford multiple examples of practices, teachings, and movements put forward in the name of Christ which were contrary to divine revelation. Those sounding alarms were exiled, castigated, reviled, and in the past even tortured or killed so the promoters of error should not face the facts of their ways.
When a new movement or teaching arises, it is incumbent on the local church to ascertain the facts, not the motivation, behind it. Promoters are by nature sincere and passionate in what they are promoting. Discerning church bodies, especially the leaders, must wrestle with the issue or issues presented and compare with Scripture. Reaction by a promoter may be negative, vociferous, and possibly vicious, but the agenda of men is not our standard of conduct or practice. We answer to the Lord of all—holding his name high and defending his honor to the utmost.
No comments:
Post a Comment