The Three Most Heinous Men - Vol 1 No 4

The Three Most Heinous    

As Mike entered the classroom, the professor had written three phrases on the board…19^th century-Slavery, 20^th  century-Himmler/Hitler, 18^th century-Jonathan Edwards/ ”Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”. 

The professor began, “Today we will discuss a portion of Philip Hallie’s book on the viciousness of human beings in history. Hallie reveals what he believes to be the three most heinous examples of 'institutional cruelty' to have been perpetrated in the last three hundred years.”  

Mike's jaw had already hit the ground as he surveyed the list.

Slavery     

"The first is 'slavery.'” The professor encouraged the class to talk about the evils of slavery mainly exemplified by Tom Sawyer, the young, white boy viewing Jim, the wise, elderly black man, as being of lesser worth and existing for Tom's utility.  This was what Hallie said was the Southern view of how the whites viewed their slaves in the War Between the States.  He talked about the cruelty inflicted on slaves, and how it is dehumanizing and humiliating, yet tolerated even to this day in countries like China, Pakistan and many others.  It wasn’t long before the class was pretty riled up about the evils of slavery.  

Hitler/Himmler 

On the heels of that discussion, he moved to “Himmler/Hitler.”  The class watched a six-minute video of Heinrich Himmler’s speech at Posen, Poland where he coldly instructed SS brutes to harden their hearts and carry out the "Final Solution."  Himmler, the architect of Hitler’s "Final Solution," is the one who ran with Hitler’s ideas and made them a reality.  Himmler is on record as boasting that he was responsible for the killing of millions of Jews in the cruelest fashion.  He talked about how proud it made him feel to walk over a thousand dead bodies because Jews, Gypsies, and the mentally and physically infirm were "vermin" of society, but admitted having moments of having to overcome revulsion.  

The Most Evil Man of All      

BUT...the most evil was saved for last.  Hallie joins with philosopher Jonathan Bennett in purporting that  ”Heinrich Himmler, who was responsible for the deaths of millions of defenseless people during the Third Reich, was a more moral person than the American theologian Jonathan Edwards, who killed no one and who wanted to kill no one.”  

The reason?  Because “Himmler was a little sorry for his victims while Edwards felt no pity for the sinners who would be eternally tortured alive in the hands of an angry God…The morally commendable person is the one who feels at least a little sorry for others.”  Jonathan Edwards was then maligned as being “joyful” that God would send sinners to burn in hell forever without any escape and as one preaching with glee that God enjoys terrifying people by holding them by threads thinner than a spider's web over the fires of hell before dropping them in.  Thus Jonathan Edwards was the most evil man of the past three centuries because he enjoyed the idea of inescapable torment of others.      

"Can you imagine how evil it is and what kind of person you must be to want someone to be tortured forever!" grieved the professor.

Do you agree?      

One student said, “I would rather be in Hitler’s hands than in Jonathan Edwards'!”     

Another said, “Hitler might kill me but Jonathan Edwards would joyfully throw me into hell!”     

Still another, “I would rather be owned as a slave than in Jonathan Edward’s church!”   

The Professor asked, “Of these three, who do you think is the most evil?  Do you agree with Hallie?“     

Most agreed.       

“Yes!  Jonathan Edwards is the most evil because he had no remorse.”

Le Chambon    

Before Mike could enter the fray, the professor continued.  Ironically and in contrast, he went on to briefly introduce a personal story described by Phillip Hallie in his book, a story of sublime good against this backdrop of excessive evil.

Hallie writes that he was brought up in a Jewish ghetto in Chicago and was drafted in WWII as an US Army artilleryman.  When the War ended, he stayed in Europe for another year to observe and write about the viciousness of war as a student of philosophy.  The gross carnage was depressing, and  the shroud of the ramifications of evil was palpable as he saw what men would and could do to other men.  

In contrast, however, Hallie  was greatly  and positively affected by his time with a loving group of people in Le Chambon, a small town on the border of Switzerland and Germany.  This town was mainly populated by a group of Christians descended from French Hugenots. Throughout the War they had provided Jews with food, shelter, protection and means of escape at great peril to their own lives.  As a result, Hallie says, “Le Chambon became the safest place for Jews in Europe”.

Over a period of about four years during the War, the church rescued nearly 2500 Jews.  When caught, many townsmen had been tortured or shot.  Hallie said when he met these people, he was overwhelmed by their goodness and kindness, moved that they would give from their very substance and risk their very lives for those whom they had never met. He records that the people of Le Chambon said they did it because of their love for God and because they understood what it was to be persecuted.  They were directly descended from a band of French Hugenots who had escaped from France during the persecution of Protestants.  They remembered the Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre when many thousands were slaughtered in the streets of Paris for the crime of believing that salvation was through faith in Christ alone.     Hallie had come upon a church of true Christians living out biblical Christianity, and it made quite an impression. 

They're the same!    

"Do you realize that the people of Le Chambon believed and practiced the same things as Jonathan Edwards?"  Mike exclaimed. "That which motivated the people of Le Chambon to do what they did is the same thing that motivated Jonathan Edwards to preach that sermon to his congregation!"      

“What do you mean it’s the same?" The professor and the class were shocked.  "How do you know that?"     

“I am very familiar with the theology and lives of the French Hugenots being descended from them myself, and I have read Jonathan Edward's books and papers.  I think I may have read all he has in print."      

The professor seemed taken aback.     

"His most famous and most widely read book is Charity and Its Fruits and was considered by his congregation and congregations today who have read him as an example of what real and active love should look like.  He was a loving pastor who gave of his substance to care for others.   

Mike continued. "What Hallie and Bennett did was cherry-pick phrases from Jonathan Edward's sermon and, I am sorry to say, have misrepresented him significantly.  May I ask, has anyone here read all of the sermon,  'Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God?'"      

No hands went up. Not even that of the professor.  Mike was the sole person in the room who had ever read it.      

“Can you prove that the people of Le Chambon believed and practiced what Jonathan Edwards believed and practiced?" the professor queried.  "Because If this is true, then Hallie and Bennett were wrong.”       

Mike said, “Yes I can.”      

Mike went on to describe the theology of Jonathan Edwards and that of the French Hugenots, who both believed that the Bible was God's Holy Word and was to be believed and practiced. He explained that the Bible revealed the truth of the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man, and man's separation from God because of sin.  Both believed in the justice of God to find man guilty of sin and to mete out the punishment deserved unless that sin was removed.  They both rejoiced in and had faith in the fact that God sent His own Son to pay for the sin of man, but with the caveat that sin is only forgiven if the individual believes these truths and trusts the work of Christ alone to be the remedy. Mike explained that Edward's motivation in the sermon was to show the mercy of God in sending His own son, as His Son took the punishment we deserve. Both taught that once a person believes that Christ took the punishment they deserved, then they were called to follow God through His Word, the Bible, for the rest of their lives. That results in acts of love like those of the people of Le Chambon sheltering the Jews and that of Edwards leading endangered sinners from their deserved punishment.  They both believed that man was made in God's image and was therefore, to be cared for, loved, respected and provided for, even if that brought danger on themselves and their families. The French Hugenots ministered to the Jews at their own peril and Jonathan Edwards ministered to the American Indians of Maine at his own peril.  Both would have had concern for people's souls as well as their bodies.  If you read Jonathan Edward's sermons as well as his other books, you will find that he said and preached what he did out of LOVE for those to whom he ministered, just like those of Le Chambon did what they did out of LOVE for the Jews to whom they ministered.  They have the same God, the same moral standards, and the same motivation. 

A Change of Mind     

By the end of the class, almost everyone but one girl had to some degree backed off on their position of seeing Jonathan Edwards as evil at all much less the most evil man of the last three centuries. And they had heard the truth about the God of the dear people of Le Chambon and Jonathan Edwards.  After class some of the students gathered around Mike's desk and some even walked with him to his car. 

In the Eye of the Hurricane: Tales of Good and Evil, Help and Harm by Philip Hallie

<Previous Post Next Post>