Like the apostle Paul, Dr. Machen was a man dedicated to the “defense” as well as the “confirmation” of the gospel. In his sermon on “Shall we Defend the Faith?” he says, “I believe with all my soul in the necessity of Christian apologetics, the necessity of a reasoned defense of the Christian Faith, and in particular a reasoned defense of the Christian conviction that the Bible is the Word of God.” This view is in agreement with Peter’s position as well as Paul’s. Peter urges the Christian to have an “answer” (literally an apologetic, a verbal defense) when asked for a reason for the hope that is in him (I Peter 3:15). Machen used to quip: “Have you noticed that people who boast that they never make any effort to defend the gospel usually have no gospel to defend?”

In all theological matters he made his starting point from the doctrine of plenary inspiration; that is, he believed every word in Holy Writ in its original structure was, and is, God’s Word. ‘You ask me whether I believe in the verbal inspiration of the Bible. I will answer the question very plainly and quickly. Yes, I believe in the verbal inspiration of Scripture” (The Christian Faith in the Modern World, pg. 46).

In our free-wheeling theological world not a few professing evangelicals seem to be either afraid or ashamed of this stance. They prefer to fall back on terms like “Scripture is reliable,” or “authoritative,” or “trustworthy,” but carefully avoid the use of “infallible” or “inerrant.” Again and again Dr. Machen emphasized that he accepted the Bible as “the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” By “infallible” he meant very clearly the earthy, honest, homely dictionary definition, “incapable of error.” The concept that Scripture “contains” the Word of God, a view entertained by the liberals and Barthians, was utterly abhorrent to him. “What a dreadful erroneous thing it is to say merely that the Bible contains the Word of God! No, it is the Word of God when it tells us what we must do.”

His experience in the Presbyterian Church in the

U.S.A. led him to arrive at certain conclusions regarding the group of conservatives who agreed with his own views of the great Reformed doctrines but always seemed to take sides with churchmen who disavowed those doctrines. I have heard him sayan several occasions something like this: “There are three possible attitudes we may assume in the present conflict with unbelief in the church. We may preach the pure gospel of Jesus Christ in our pulpits, and consistently oppose in the church courts those who are working to subvert these doctrines. That is the best position. Second, there are ministers who week by week preach another gospel which is not another, and who consistently labor in our church courts to undermine “the faith once delivered to the saints.’ That is the second best position, wicked as it is. Third, there are preachers who do proclaim the true gospel from their pulpits on the Lord’s Day, and then on Monday go into Presbytery or General Assembly and vote right down the line with liberals. This is the worst of the three positions. It represents hypocrisy of the most vicious kind.”

It is not without significance, 1 think, that the men who especially hated Machen and fought against him fitted into this third category. He was fatally wounded in the house of men who should have been his friends.

What caused the great New Testament scholar to take such a militant, uncompromising stand for the truth? I believe it was the fact that such a passage as Galatians 1:8 was written on his soul with a pen of iron and the point of a diamond: “Though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema.” And Paul repeats the thought in the next verse.

This text, Machen argued, is not an obscure, isolated passage. Actually, it is a summary of all that the Word of God has to say about the exclusive character of the Christian Faith. Large sections of both Old and New Testaments were written to distinguish false religion from the truth of God. The patriarchs and prophets before Christ poured their “blood, toil, sweat and tears” into the message given them by the Spirit of the Lord. They placed that message over against black market theology, sometimes at the cost of their lives. Again, Machen painted out, the most sublime discussion of love, I Corinthians 13, is set squarely in the heart of a controversial subject, the use and abuse of charismatic gifts. Had Paul been a theological pacifist we would never have received that beautiful exposition.

In his famous sermon delivered to his students, The Good Fight of Faith, Dr. Machen threw out this stirring challenge: “Where are you going to stand in the great battle that now rages in the church? Are you going to curry favor with the world by standing aloof; are you going to be ‘conservative liberals’ or ‘liberal conservatives’ or ‘Christians who do not believe in controversy’ or anything else so contradictory and absurd? Are you going to be Christians, but Christians overmuch? Are you going to stand coldly aloof when God’s people fight ecclesiastical tyranny at home or abroad? Are you going to excuse yourselves by pointing out personal defects in those who contend for the faith? Are you going to be disloyal to Christ in external testimony until you can make all well within your souls? Be assured, you will never accomplish your purpose if you adopt such a program as that. Witness bravely to the Truth that you already understand, and more will be given you; but make common cause with those who deny or ignore the gospel of Christ, and the enemy will forever run riot in your life.”

It is not an overstatement to claim that because of his struggle for the Kingship of Christ he was unfrocked, cast out of the Presbyterian Church, and became the target of all kinds of abuse. He was branded as “a heresy hunter,” “a trouble maker,” “a bitter man,” “a fighting Fundamentalist,” and other caustic epithets. Ironically, prominent public figures such as H. L. Macchen, the brilliant Baltimore journalist, Walter Lippman, a Jew and a thorough humanist, and New England Unitarian news man Albert Diffenbach paid glowing tribute to his worth and his work. Said Diffenbach, “He towered above his contemporaries in strength and character and fidelity to principle.”

There was a human dimension to Dr. Machen with which the public in general is unacquainted. He was an intensely human personality, generous, humble, warm-hearted. He would frequently give parties for his students, inviting them to his apartment for games and fellowship. The refreshments were a cornucopia of good things to enjoy. He would preside at the checkerboard and take on all challengers, usually wiping them out methodically and mercilessly. Also, at om annual “stunt night” he would be called on to entertain with some of his clever and humorous readings, to the delight of all spectators.

I roomed across the hall from him at Princeton Seminary. One morning I stoppec! at his door to ask a question. I found him unmaking and remaking his bed. I said to him, “I thought the maid attended to that.” “She does,” he said. “But I can never be comfortable with the way she arranges the bedding.” “Why don‘t you speak to her about it?” I asked. He answered, “I don‘t like to hurt her feelings.”

Some day people may find out that, though resented by many of his brethren in the church, he was loved by servants and children.