Pleasant Fantasies

It seems to me that almost every child of Adam has a strange, but irresistible capacity to enjoy deception. Fiction, whether weird or realistic, strongly appeals to most people. It seems that many of our species never weary of hearing or telling of events or imaginary prospects that they call, "fantastic." They fail to realize that to call something fantastic is to say it has no actual substance or reality, but exists only in the world or form of fancy or hallucination. It is understandable that people whose indolence or lack of willpower are such that they find it much easier to sit and twiddle their thumbs and dream, rather than rise from their seats and work, would feel and act that way; but this preference for fantasies instead of facts afflicts even the most aggressive and practical as well.

Perhaps those whose aims are mostly lofty and whose efforts are most commendable are saddened by their failure to make their hopes and achievements match, so they find relief and new inspiration by taking regular excursions into fictional dreamland, to bolster their purpose and power. When our best possible use of the best facilities available only seem to worsen the picture of the painful history of the past, it helps to stimulate us for a bit, if we can convince ourselves that the throbs we hear in the hills around are the echoes of the drums and trumpets of Heaven, coming to the final triumph of Armageddon. I like to dream that way myself, if the facts of life and the truth of infallible prophecy do not disturb me with shocking contradictions.

I listened recently to a good sermon on a very practical subject, by an evangelical preacher, who obviously loves the Lord. He started by announcing his topic and then said that he would have preferred to preach about the portents of the end, the significance of events in Palestine, the wonderful prospects that await the Jewish Nation, the thrills that will accompany the secret rapture of the Church, the bringing of the world into subjection to the throne in Jerusalem, or the thousand years of prosperity, plenty and peace, in which the Kingdom of Christ and His triumph as King of kings and Lord of lords will become a reality.

Believing, as I do, that there is no validly-used Scripture to support his dispensationalistic views about the rapture, the nature of the Kingdom after our being joined forever with the Lord, or about the contrasts between Christ as He is now as King and what He will be then, I was shocked to hear the good man say that he would much prefer to preach fiction, instead of proclaiming the timely truth that God evidently had given him for me and all others there at that service. Of course, his reference to Futurism may have been for my benefit, to remind me that he preaches Scofieldism because he sincerely and fearlessly loves and believes it. He may have felt it was his duty to affirm that he accepts Dr. Scofield's notes as infallible truth and would gladly defend their interpretational accuracy before me, if the Lord had not side-tracked him to another theme that night. He followed his extensive notes so closely that one could almost say that he read his fine sermon verbatim, and did a good job of it. But as a preacher who regularly reads his messages and thus wisely chooses his words with care, he would not likely have felt free had he changed to the theme of his first love to debate with me, at the last moment. However, I am sure he would have had a wide awake and sympathetic audience, if he had invited me to discuss our divergent views on any one aspect of his favorite system, on five minutes notice. I am glad he stuck to the message which God gave him, on "Jealousy;"

but had he chosen to defend futurism in a debate with me, it would have given me a welcome opportunity to show publicly that I respect and love him as a man of God;

while humbly but firmly differing with him as an interpreter of Scripture.

Well, he did not issue the challenge; at least not in so many words, and his well-prepared sermon on "Jealousy," came to me and others with greater authority and better sanctifying power than anything he would have said on The Rapture, The Millennium Kingdom, The Judgments or The Jews.

However, the challenge did not go unheeded, but I had to debate in solo, as I travelled homeward the next morning. At least, no one needs to clean up the blood on the carpet when the debating is done that way.

I hope I am fair in my assumptions about the arguments he would present and the Scriptures he would offer, as what he accepted as God's means of serving his purpose. 1 am sure he would have advanced his proof texts as samples of unchangeable truth, even if they ran counter to God's intents. He would likely have insisted that Christ's second coming must be in two stages, since it is supposed to be like a thief in the night, who sneaks in in the darkness, grabs his loot and slips away again unnoticed. (See Matt. 24:42; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet. 3:10 & Rev. 10:15)

 

Previous Article Fall 2003 Front Page Next Article