DAVID USED THE INSTRUMENT, SO CAN WE

H. E. Phillips

All those who want to do something in wor ship for which they have no divine authority will search in both the Old and New T estament for any passage that might pr ovide the basis for an argument to approve their practice. This is true of both denominationalism and false brethren in the church who would bring us again into bondage. A typicalexample of this fact is the use of instrumental music in the wor ship to God. What may be said for the instrument inwor ship can be said for any other innovation in the wor k and worship of the church.

There are several classes of arguments for the use of the instrument in worship, one of which is that in the OldTestament David used the instrument to praise God, andsince God did not forbid it in the New Testament, we may use it today in the church. To many this appears to bethe most forceful argument of divine authority for the instrument. It naturally falls into two separate arguments:

BY GOD'S AUTHORITY

The first is that God, not David, commanded the use of the instrument in wor ship; but David, being a pr ophet of God, gave the authority for its use. The argument says that the instrument was in use before David's time. Jubal made the instruments (Gen. 4:21); Joseph used them in wor ship (Psa. 81:1-5); Moses used them (Num. 10:2); God said they were His and we should use them today. (I Chron. 16:42; II Chron. 7:6, 29:25).

By r eading Genesis 4:21 we find that Jubal did notinvent the instruments for the purpose of wor ship. Thousands of things have been invented, some of which have been used in wor ship to God, which wer e never intended for that purpose when invented. Tubalcain, the half-brother of Jubal, invented the working of iron and brass, or was the father of such just as Jubal was the father of those who used the instruments. This wor k has been used to make idols which have been used in wor ship, but they wer e never authorized by God.

Psalms 81:1-5 is not proof that Joseph used theinstrument in worship to God. It refers to the call to the feasts of Tr umpets (L ev. 23:24), which was the beginning of the Jewish year. Joseph is used to refer to his children — Israel — after they came out of Egypt, because this feast was not observed until long after Joseph was dead. The use Mosesmade of the instruments in Number s 10:2 was to call to wor ship and not a part of the wor ship.

Under the law of Moses God allowed some things which He did not command. Paul said: "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). God permitted Israel to have a king, and even gave the commandments governing the kings, yet we know it was not His command to beginwith. In fact, it was rebellion against God (I Sam. 8:5-22). God permitted divorce for every cause, but it was not Hiswill from the beginning. He granted this because of the hardness of their hearts (Mark 10:2-12). God gavecommandments governing divorce for every cause under the law, even though He did not order it to begin with. The instructions governing divorce allowed under the law are found in Deuteronomy 24:1-5. God allowed polygamy under the law, even though He commanded them to be one man and one woman from the beginning (Mark 10:6).

It is also said that God commanded the use of the instrument in wor ship in II Chr onicles 29:25: "And he(David) set the Levites in the house of the Lord with cymbals, with psalteries, and with harps, according to thecommandments of David, and of Gad the king's seer, and Nathan the prophet: for so was the commandment of the Lord by his prophets." The same thing could be said for divorce in Deuteronomy 24:1-4. God gave the command for its use, even though He did not command it to begin with, just as in the case of the kings of Israel.

DAVID THE FIRST TO USE IT

The second division of this argument concerning David is that he was the first to use the instrument, in praise to God, but he was a man after God's own heart (Acts 13:22), therefore, what he did in worship was approved by God.Since there is no condemnation of the instrument in the New Testament, we may use it today like David did.

David used the instrument, not as an AID to the singing, but to actually PRAISE God. "Moreover four thousand were porters; and four thousand praised the Lord with the instruments which I made, said David, to pr aise therewith". (I Chron. 23:5). "Praise the Lord with harp: sing unto him with the psalter y and an instrument of tenstrings" (Psa. 33:2). "Then will I go unto the altar of God,unto God my exceeding joy: yea. Upon the harp will I praise thee, O God my God (Psa. 43:4).

David invented the instrument in the wor ship to God.There is no evidence that God commanded it before David's time. Such passages as these which follow would be senseless unless David initiated the instrumental praise. "And four thousand praised the Lord with the instruments which Imade, said David, to praise therewith" (I Chron. 23:5)."And David spake to the chief of the Levites to appoint their brethren to be the singers with instruments of musick, psalteries and harps and cymbals, sounding, by lifting upthe voice with joy" (I Chron. 15:16). "The Levites also with instruments of musick of the Lord which David the king had

made to praise the Lord" (II Chron. 7:6). The "instruments of musick of the Lord" refer to those used to praise the Lord rather than those the Lord had ordained, because the record does not show that the Lord authorized them before David br ought them into the wor ship.

God ordained the singing under the law. (Deut. 31:1922). But David ordained the use of the instruments in that pr aise. "And when the builder s laid the foundation of the temple of the Lord, they set the priests in their apparel with trumpets, and the Levites the sons of Asaph with cymbals, to praise the Lord, after the ordinance of David, king of Israel" (Ezra 3:10). It was David's own idea about the use of the instruments, else it could not have been said that he invented them. " .. . that chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instr uments of musick, like David" (Amos. 6:5).

But if we grant that David brought in the instrument by the authority of God, we still have no authority for it in the chur ch today. We ar e to follow Christ and not David.Christ has all authority in heaven and earth (Matt. 28:18),and Christ is head of all things to the church (Eph. 1:22,23;Col. 1:18). Peter says that God has given us "all things that pertain unto life and godline ," (2 Pet. 1:3), and it saysnothing about the use of the instrument of music in praise to God. Christ has given us a "new and living way," which does not include the instrument like David used. (Heb.10:20). Paul said the "priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law" (Heb. 7:12)This new law does not include the instrument that David used under the Old.

DAVID DID OTHER THINGS

But if we ar e to use the instrument because David did, we find ourselves obligated to do other things on the same basis. How are we to pick out one thing that David did under the law and bring it over into the chur ch and at the same time keep out those other things which David did? Noticesome of the things that David did which we would beobligated to do if we accepted the instrument by his authority:

1. We must use all the KINDS of instruments that David used and required. If David is the authority for the USE of the instruments, then he is also the authority for the KINDS of instruments to be used. He used cymbals, trumpets, harps, or gans, flutes, dr ums, ten stringed instruments, etc. We have no right to substitute another instrument un known to David if he is our authority.
2. David danced in worship to God. "And David danced before the Lord with all his might: and David was girded with a linen ephod" (II Sam. 6:14). We have no right to refuse the kind of dancing David did in the worship to God.If a man wants to dance by David's authority as worshipin the chur ch, no man can complain who used David as the authority for the instrument.
3. David kept the sabbath day in wor ship to God. Onecomes into the chur ch and says, "I want to keep the sabbath day holy just as David did," and the one who uses the in strument by David's authority cannot object.
4. David burned incense unto God as worship. "I will offer unto thee burnt sacrifice of fatlings, with the incense

HAS YOUR SUBSCRIPTION EXPIRED?

Have you checked the expiration date on your subscription? If you have not renewed, please do sotoday. We do not want to lose you as a r eader and you will not want to miss a single i ue. If yoursubscription expires 1-62 this will be your last i ue unless we hear from you. Send in a list of your friends with your own.

of rams; I will offer bullocks with goats" (Psa. 66:16). One has as much right to offer incense to God in worship as to use the instrument by David's authority.

1. David offered animal sacrifice unto God as worship."I will go into thy house with burnt offerings: I will pay thee my vows" (Psa. 66:13). "I will offer bullocks with goats" (verse 15). Can the man who uses the instrument because David did, object to one bringing animal sacrifice into the wor ship because David did?
2. David had several wives. "And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David" (II Sam. 5:13). His son, Solomon, had 700 wives and 300 concubines (I Kings 11:13). Why cannot a manhave a plur al number of wives in the Chur ch by David's authority as well as to have the instrument because David did?

We must either take all that David did as our authority, or take none. But we are not under the rule of David. He is not our example. Christ is our king and we are obligated to do His bidding, which does not include the instruments of music in praise to God. Every effort to prove the instrument by David fails unless we are willing to take all theother things David pr acticed in wor ship, and even then wewill have to account for our taking David instead of Christ for authority.

In the advertising of the Teenage Christian published in Austin, Texas we have the following statement:

"With inimitable exuberance and informality of style,America's most popular young songster presents in this captivating holiday book a reverent and stimulatinginterpretation of Christmastide's deeper significance .. . a sensitive and realistic contemporary philosophy born of unique Christian faith and practice. Her e is ajubilant depiction of the Christmas spirit at worthroughout the year."

Thus we have a book by Br other Boone "born of contemporary philosophy" held up to our young people by apublication designed just for them. We also have a manidealized as an example who is a common figure in the night clubs of Las Vegas. I do not know what is "unique" aboutPat's faith unless it is this. He, in spite of his failure to liveunspotted from the world, continues to enjoy the respect andconfidence of br ethr en who should be tr ying to save his soul. Schools continue to exploit his fame, papers trade on his reputation, and brethren who have lost respect for divine authority themselves point him out as the example of thecentur y. How much better it would have been if he hadwritten a good sermon on Galatians 4:9,12.

"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather ye are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak andbeggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be ibondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, andyears. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon youlabor in vain."

This is not "contemporary philosophy", it is just the word of God and is not born of any "unique faith", but of the "faith once delivered", that teaches the truth on Christmas and Easter and all other days not found in the Bible.Br ethr en, when will we wake up to the flood of such influence that is sweeping the chur ch of our L or d intodenominationalism.

A CHURCH OF CHRIST SCHOLARSHIP

In one of the counties of Kentucky br ethr en have established a Church of Christ Scholarship to help some youngman through college. The idea of course is that in this waythey will make it po ible for a boy to make a pr eacher. All of this is worthy within the bounds of the scripture but thequestion is this: If brethren are doing it, how is it a work of the church and if it is not the work of the church or churches how could it be a Church of Christ Scholarship.Of course, if it was the work of the church (which it is not)it would just be the church at work. Let us try some other examples of this kind of thinking about the chur ch. Whatabout a CHURCH OF CHRIST CHRISTIAN? If we can have a Church of Christ Scholarship why on earth could we not have a Church of Christ Christian? Better still what about a CHURCH OF CHRIST CHURCH? When brethren ar e asked, What denomination do you belong to and theyanswer the Church of Christ is this not exactly what they are saying? I am a Church of Christ Christian and I attend the Church of Christ Church. Not long ago in this same section a man was asked about his religion and he answered, I am Church of Christ. Now brethren seem to think we are in no danger and that any child of God who says we ar e is an "anti". I marvel that they do not know better and are not willing to hold up the hands of those who do. There is not room for a Church of Christ anything on this earth but a church of Christ. This church is the body of Christ (Eph1:22,23).

"And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him tobe the head over all things to the chur ch, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."

We are members of this body (I Cor. 12:18).

"But now hath God set the member s ever y one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him."

These members in the body are called Christians in Acts

11:25. The church at Antioch was not a Church of Christ Church made up of Church of Christ Christians giving to Church of Christ Scholarship or running a Church of Christ School or a Church of Christ Orphan Home or Hospital. They were Christians in the church bought with the bloodof Christ.

SINGING THE OLD SONGS

I marvel that through the years the brethren have notlearned the value of the old songs. It seems that all over the land too many congregations are trying to sing songs that callfor one part to sing while the other is silent and this may beright within the limits but they ar e forgetting the value othose songs we all know and love. Sometimes this is true in our preaching as well. We forget the old texts that call for the "old paths" and ar e always tr ying for something new.The result is the same in both cases. We raise a generation that do not know the old songs nor the "old paths".

JUST ON THE COMMITTEE

In some of the bulletins this master piece came to print. It is too true for our readers to miss it.

"In a certain congregation a lady made known her desire to take part in personal work. The preacher was delighted and gave her sever al names and addr esses. After several weeks had gone by and she had not made the calls the pointed question of why was asked. Shepertly replied, 'you do not understand. I did not want to make any calls. I just wanted to be put on thvisitation committee.' Nuf said."

Another of the bulletins had this bit of wisdom.

"In a certain congregation a brother was asked to be anelder. "No," he replied. "I drink a little and curse some and have a tendency to gamble a little. I am notqualified to be an elder; just let me continue to be ahumble, consecrated Christian like I have been all these years."

PAUL PREACHED IT ALL

In his final admonition to the E phesian elder s at Miletus in the 20th chapter of Acts we find these wor ds in ver se 20:

"And how I kept back nothing that was pr ofitable unto you, but have showed you, and taught you publicklyand fr om house to house."

This simply means that Paul was not a hobby rider. Hetaught all of the gospel all of the time. Brethren sometimesforget this wonderful example. It is easy to think, talk andpreach so much about one thing that something else is negleced. A failure in the last 20 years to preach onorganization and authority has made the present apostasy po ible. If no thought and time is given to other things now, this neglect will result in other difficulties later. The apostle told the brethren at Thessalonica that they knewperfectly about the second coming of Christ. He reminded the Roman Christians that they had been baptized into thdeath of Christ and should no longer continue in sin. In the second chapter of II Thessalonians he reminds the saints of his teaching on the gr eat falling away. Yes, Paul pr eached all of the truth. He did not spend all of his time on just one part, no matter how important it seemed to be. His example should be our s and we should "keep back nothing."

ANTI ANTIFREEZE

Some one suggested that some of the brethren are so"anti anti" that their automobiles ar e going to be in danger this winter. There is a possibility that they are against antifreeze.

The question as to whether the phenomena of life are explainable in terms of physical and chemical reactions, has pr oduced two differ ent schools of scientific thoughtvitalism and mechanism. The Vitalistic theor y is that ther e is present in living organisms a vital essence, or force, which is peculiar to living organisms and which isdifferent from all other forces found outside of livinthings. This vital force, which is the driving power of the living condition, is not explainable in terms of physicochemical phenomena. Death ensues when this for ce is destroyed or leaves the or ganism. On the other side of this question the philosophy of Mechanism holds that there is no mysterious force especially characteristic of living things, but that all life processes can be interpreted by the applicationof chemical and physical laws. Mechanists believe that theexistence of unexplained processes and reactions of livingorganisms does not imply the pr esence of immeasur able vital forces, but r ather that at the pr esent time, scientific methods and technics ar e inadequate to analyze such complex phenomena.

We can see some logic in both theories. We certainlywould not question the facts that have demonstrated by the mechanists approach. If we have a deficiency of vitamins or minerals in the body the results are soon notable. On the other hand, a cell may be analyzed as toits contents and then these same amounts may be putogether again but the cell is not alive. T o base our f aith in God on either of these theories might eventually prove of great concern. Suppose we contended man would never get to outer space, as some have done. Lets say that webelieved if God had intended for man to get to outer spaceHe would have pr ovided a way. Since no way had beenprovided we assumed that man would never reach this area of the creation. If this had been a basis of our faith in God we would have been placed in a very difficult position after the journey of Commander Shepherd. Our faith is not based uponwhat man may or may not do, but in our God.Wherever truth is found it supports our faith in the God of heaven, the sour ce of all truth.

IS IT REALLY A HOME?

Curtis E. Flatt, Florence, Ala

In our day a plan has been devised by men to enable several congregations to cooperate in helping needy peopleThis is done by creating another organization (benevolent society) beyond the local congregation which is God'sorganization to do the work God a igned to the church. This is without Bible authority. But brethren who favor such anarrangement try to justify it on the ground that this is just a home. The stock reply is, ' Well, it is just a home and the home is a divine organization." Such talk evidently sounds good to many people but to many other s it sounds like afoolish assertion made by people who are desperate because of the lack of Bible authority

Is it really a home? That claim needs to have a close examination. We need to remember that calling that organization a home does not make it a home. Just because people are gathered together there and cared for there doesnot make it a home. Calling it a home does not any mor e make it a home than calling a camp for displaced per sons a home or calling an insane asylum a home make thehomes. That is a man-given name for a man-made organization. It is not just a home. I was in the immediate area of Childhaven when it was organized. It was Childhaven, fully organized and functioning, long before people ever lived together at the specified place. This organization was then a legal body able to make decisions, solicit and spend money, and to do all other things it still does — with or without children living together the quibblthat such is a home is just that — a quibble to blind people asto its real nature. It is just another society — an asylum for little children who in the main have parents or relatives who should be looking after them and would be looking aftethem if this society did not make it convenient for them not to do so.

WHY BAPTISM IS NECESSARY

L. A. Mott, Jr., Las Vegas, Nevada

I am awar e that this study begins with an assumption:e.g., that baptism is necessary to salvation. Many people whodoubt the truth of this assumption, I am sur e, have felt the force of such verses as Mk. 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, and I Pet. 3:21, and yet have refused to believe that baptism is a condition of salvation because they, weighing the subjectby the standard of human reason, have been unable to understand why it should be regarded with such importance.

The object of this article is to give what I trust will be a satisfying answer to those who are forced to admit thecogency of such passages as those mentioned above, and yetcannot under stand why baptism is necessar y

The position that baptism is necessary is based upon thepr emise that baptism is a divinely appointed condition of salvation .Man cannot chart his own course in life. Jeremiah recognized that "the way of man is not in himself", and that "it is not in man that walketh to dir ect his steps" (10:23).After thousands of years of experimentation, the best efforts of human reason had proved vain, for "the world through its wisdom knew not God" (I Cor. 1:21).

The wisdom of God is measureless; that of man is finite: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith Jehovah. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so ar e my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts" (Isa. 55:8-9). That we cannot under stand God's appointments does not, therefore, argue against their necessity. Man's place is not to question God, nor to instruct him as to what is right (cfRom. 11:33-34), but simply by faith to acquiesce in whathe has said whether we fully compr ehend or not.

Dipping in the Jordan seven times was absolutelynecessary to the cleansing of Naaman's leprosy because thiswas a divine appointment. Similarly, baptism is necessar y simply and solely because God so appointed it.

In Matt. 28:10 baptism is seen to be r elated to the threedivine per sons as bringing one into fellowship with thdivine family. Another relationship also exists betweenbaptism and the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; it is r elated to them as being authorized by each of them.

BAPTISM AS A PART OF GOD'S COUNSEL

Baptism is first mentioned in the New T estament inconnection with the preaching of John the Baptist whopreached "the baptism of repentance unto remi ion of sins" (Luke 3:3). Some accepted his baptism; others r ejected it. Those who r efused his baptism "r ejected for themselves the counsel of God" (L uke 7:30)

The "counsel of God" refers to God's will, or purpose. Only those who obey the will of God can be saved (Matt. 7:21)Baptism, as seen in Luke 7:30, is a part of God's will. Hence, one who r efuses to be baptized is r ejecting the counsel of God and cannot be saved.

BAPTISM AS IN THE NAME OF CHRIST

Philip preached good tidings concerning the name oJesus Christ. (Acts 8:12). Whatever we do is to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus (Col. 3:17).

"Name", in the New Testament, sometimes refers simplyto the proper name of a person. In other instances, it has abroader significance and refers to all that is brought to mindwhen the name of a per son is hear d or thought of.Sometimes it refers to the rank or position of a person. (See Thayer on the Greek word onoma.)

The name of Jesus Christ is a name which is above every name (Eph. 1:21; Phil. 2:9-11; Heb. 1:4-5). Baptism for the r emi ion of sins is commanded in the name of Christ (Acts 2:38; 10:48). Therefore, one who disobeys, ignores, or disregards this command is guilty of setting aside anddisregarding the highest authority in heaven and on earth (cf. Matt. 28:18).

BAPTISM AND THE HOLY SPIRIT

Paul, in Eph. 5:26, lets us know that Christ cleansed thechurch "by the washing of water with the word". It is this connection with the word of God which makes baptism condition of salvation.

The Holy Spirit operates through the word of God. Peter tells us that we are begotten again of incorruptible seed through the word (I Pet. 1:23). Unlike Luke 8:11, the word is not her e said to be the seed. Notice the pr epositions: We ar e begotten of the seed through the wor d. John 3:6 is a parallel verse. To be born of the flesh is to be born ofcorruptible seed; to be born of the Spirit is to be born ofincorruptible seed. Peter regards the Spirit as the origin orsource of the life begotten in us. But in the new birth the Spirit

oper ates, not dir ectly, but through the wor d by which wear e instructed to be baptized (E ph. 5:26). Thus, in baptism we are born not only of water but also of the Spirit (cf John 3:3,5).

Then, in I Cor. 12:13, we learn that "in one Spirit (byone Spirit, KJV) were we all baptized into one body . . ." The evident meaning is that the Spirit instructs us to bebaptized; thus, baptism is by the Spirit. (Note: Each of these passages, John 3:3-6; I Cor. 12:13; Eph. 5:26, and I Pet. 1:23, thr ows light upon the other s.)

CONCLUSION

Thus, baptism is necessar y because the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit so testify. One who r ejects baptism is setting aside the combined authority of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

COMMENTS TO EDITORS

"We enjoy the paper so much and only wish we could send to ever y one we know at least for a year . . . Keep up the good work and may God bless you for the truth."— Mrs. E. G. Gaylord, Orlando, Fla.

"I enjoy the paper ver y much and hope you will continue the good work for many years."— Mrs. C. H. Carter, Trenton, Tenn.

"Thanks for continuing to send SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES. Enjoy it very much."— Allison G. Driskell, Tampa, Fla.

"You are to be commended for the good work you are doing with the paper."— Hugh W. Davis, Lake Wales, Fla.

"I am enjoying your monthly paper very much andconsider the material contained therein to be some of the best that I have r ead on the subjects discussed. Keep itup."— Capt. Wallace H. Little, San Francisco, Calif.

"Thank you for reminding me that our subscription is up.This paper is a big help in explaining to our eighteen year old son the issues before the church today. It's good to knowthere are still people in the world such as your writers that adhere strictly to God's word."— William McDearman, Corinth, Mi .

"We enjoy and get much good from it (SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES), refreshing to read a "thus saith the Lord" in your articles. Wish I could send it to ever yone I know, especially those in error." — Vivian and Ed Palmer, St. Petersburg, Fla.

"Have enjoyed the paper, SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES. Thanks for sending it to me. Enclosed is two dollars for another year." — Paul Hutchinson, El Centro, Calif.

"We appr eciate the splendid publication you ar e pr oducing and the outstanding cor ps of contributors you have on your staff. May the good wor k long continue is our prayer." — Vernor and Cleo Gowin, Tampa, Fla.

"You alr eady know how much I appr eciate your paper . If I wer e able I know lots of people I would send it to. Mayyou continue to keep this work. I think it is the best." — Mr. and Mrs. Fred Belue, Orlando, Fla.

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH

(The following article by Brother F. B. Srygley is fromthe Gospel Advocate dated July 11, 1931. Brother Foy E.Wallace, Jr., was the editor at that time. This issue of the Advocate was a special Davidson County issue. BrotherSrygley's article sets forth in a simple way what the NewTestament teaches on the subject of the church. We suggestthat you read it carefully and study it in the lights of NewTestament teaching.)

Every reader of the New Testament knows that the New T estament r eveals a church, and when we speak of the New Testament church we mean that church. Jesus said: "And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this r ock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." (Matt. 16:18.) There is some dispute as to when Jesus built this church, butmore, I suppose, over the fact that he did build it. The question is, What did he build when he built His church? Jesus also said on the same occasion: "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thoushalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Verse 19.) The "kingdom of heaven" in this verse evidently is the same as "my church" in the preceding verse.

In viewing the institution from the standpoint of its government, it is a kingdom, and Christ is the King in thatgovernment. It is an unlimited monarchy. Christ is King over his government, and all who submit to that rule are in his kingdom. Man enters this kingdom by a birth. Jesus said to Nicodemus: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5.) Abraham's seed entered the fleshly family of Israel by a fleshly birth, but men enter the kingdom of heaven, which is a spiritual kingdom, by a new birth of water and the Spirit. We enter the church the same way. The church is called the "family of God," and we enter that family by a birth. All of God's children are in his family. They did not join his family; they were born into it. As the kingdom of heaven embraces all the rule of Christ, so does the church. The church, in its universal sense, is made up of all of God's children, wherever they are. There is no organization of the church in this sense, for it is made up of all of God's people. It is not a denomination or a party in religion, but it is the spiritual body of Christ. God knows his own children, and they know their Father, though they may not be acquainted with each other. They cooperate with each other, wherever they are, as far as they operate under the direction of the same King.

There is another sense in which the word "church" is used in the New Testament, and that is in a local sense. "For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and I partly believe it." (I Cor. 11:18.) The word "church" means a "calledout" body, and her e it is used as the congr egation called out, or called together, for the worship of God. These were all in the church, if they were all Christians, before they came together as a congregation. Christmas were not said to go to church in the New Testament, for they were in the church before they met as a congregation; but whenthey met together , they wer e the chur ch.

The local church is often referred to in the New Testament as the church, but it is circumscribed by locality. We read: "Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, even them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that call the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place,their Lord and ours." (I Cor. 1:1, 2.) It will be noted that the "church of God" in this passage is circumscribed by locality, the city of Corinth. The church of God inCorinth was made up of the saints in Corinth. Of course is consisted of all the sanctified ones or saints in that city. Again, the apostle said: "All the churches of Christ salute you." (Rom. 16:16.) These were not different churches, but the same church in different localities. These local churches were separate and distinct from each other, and still they wer e all alike in that they were all churches of Christ. They were all like the church of God at Corinth; in fact, that chur ch, no doubt, was included with these. All the organization that there was in the New Testament church was the church in its local sense. The church in Corinth had no control over the church in Jerusalem. Each was able to act without the other."

Any organization that binds two or more churches together is a step toward a denomination. Any religious institution larger than a local church and yet smaller than the whole body of Christ is a human institution, with which the children of God should have no connection. In Acts

9:31 we read: "The church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace." This was more than one congregation and less than the whole body of Christ. But in the territory specified it included all children of Godwithin that territory; yet it was not an organization, save as the local churches were organized.

I believe that all the Christians in any community are the church in that locality, provided they are governed by the word of God; but if they have any organization binding them together except local congregations of Christians, theybecome a denomination. If they reject God's government and establish one of their own, they become a humaninstitution. There is no precept or example in the NewTestament for binding local churches together with anykind of an organization. The church in New Testament times had the same work to do that churches of Christ ought todo yet, and they did the work without any organization except the local church.

In the days of the apostles there were needy people,widows and orphans, just as there are today, and the apostles taught the churches to care for them, and there was no organization or institution by which the churches were tied together in supporting them. Paul directed thechurch to care for the widows that were widows in deed, and ther e was nothing said about any institution exceptthe church through which it was to done. There were famine sufferers in Jerusalem, and their needs were supplied without anything in the way of an institution except thechurch in Jerusalem.

This is no new thing with people who have read theGospel Advocate in the past. Mi ionary work and benevolent work was done in the early church without any or -ganization except the local church. Brother Lipscomb said with reference to Brother McCaleb when he went to Japan: "Four chur ches in T ennessee and one in Kentuckyagreed to support him, and their support was to be sent directly to him." (See Gospel Advocate, 1892, p. 628)Again, he said: "If one church asks all the churches in the State to give it all the funds they can give to general work, that the elder s of one chur ch may dir ect all the pr eachingand work in the State, then I say this is wrong, is subversive of divine order, and concentrates power in one church thatGod distributed to many." (Gospel Advocate, 1899, p487.) Brother McQuiddy said: "There is no Scripturalauthority for one church directing the affairs of another."(Advocate, 1910, p. 487) Brother Elam said: "The New T estament chur ches not only communicated dir ectly to themi ionaries they supported, but when they helped thepoor they sent the help directly to those needing it. This we have clearly seen in Acts 11:30. 'Which also they did,sending it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.' And in the case of the Corinthians: "Whomsoever ye shall approve, them will I send with letters to carry your bounty to Jerusalem.' (I Cor. 16:3.) On church sent directly to the missionaries and directly to the poor independently of all other chur ches." (Advocate, 1897, p. 358.)

I make these quotations from the older brethren who have gone to their reward, not as proof (the New Testament furnishes that), but to show that I stand with them, and in doing so I stand in good company.

IS THIS NOT CATHOLICISM?

By Jimmy Tuten, Jr.

Brethren who have been fighting the tendency amongsome to substitute divine authority for human authorityhave been speaking out against the drift in this direction expressed by the attitudes which some hold for certain religious publications in the brotherhood. We deplore the undue veneration which some brethren have for these periodicals and lament to see respectful reverence anddevotion to the inspired Book transferred to the works of human hands. It has been expressed long ago, that no papedeserves one iota of reverence except as it publishes truth. Yet, worshipful veneration for such papers as the GospelAdvocate continues, and the r oad to human cr eeds is cr owded with those who have their "under standingdarkened."

Recently I came face to face for the first time with a verbal expression of this type of reverence for a "brotherhood paper." I was passing through Jacksonville and attended services one evening wher e Paul Hunton was doing the pr eaching in ameeting. In this ser vice he was laboring har d to get thaudience to subscribe to "old reliable" (?). The GospelAdvocate, he said, "has been a bulwark against modernism, digre ion and antism for a hundred and six years." He stressed that it was a "must for every Christian home whether you read it or not. It should be where others can see it because of its influence." He then capped it off by saying,"you can do more good by sending the Gospel Advocate into a home than by sending two gospel pr eacher s into that area to do personal work."

My first reaction was, "what a paper! To think that I do not subscribe to it." After giving it thought, my next reaction was, "why, this is Catholicism!"

During the formation of the Roman Catholic Church, thematerialistic demand for more and more insistently tangiblobjects of devotion resulted in the veneration of relics, pictures, medallions and crucifixes. The reverence for these items today is so pr onounced on the part of catholics in general, that we are left with the impression that they feelsome mysterious influence from the mere presence of these objects. Does Brother Hunton mean to say that because thGospel Advocate exerts influence by merely being present in someone's home, that it deser ves this type of r espect?

I do not want to be uncharitable toward Br other Hunton, and I certainly do not charge him with believing that thGA as a piece of paper has intelligence or power in and of itself. But is he not thinking along the same lines as Gibbons who defends the devotion of catholics for relics, etc., as being"relative respect?" Is not the devotion of some for the GA in proportion to the veneration to the institutional movementwhich the paper represents? If Brother Hunton did not mean that the mere presence of the GA makes a "silent, thougheloquent, profession" of one's faith in the institutionalmovement, then what did he mean? Maybe Br other Hunton will tell us.

One other thought is worthy of consideration. Catholics have gear ed their pr opaganda campaign towar d floodincatholic homes with literature which keeps them so busyreading this material, that they do not have time for a study of the Bible. Some of the subscription drives of the GospeAdvocate appear to be efforts to stuff the homes of Christians with "their " liter atur e, and in this way keep the people sobusy reading the material which favors the digressive movement, that they have no time to read anything offered against these apostasies.

All of this bring one question to mind? WHAT IS THIS, BUT CATHOLICISM?

MISSING LINKS IN WALKER'S "EVERY GOOD WORK"

Harold Dowdy, Deland, Florida

A brief review of D. E. Walker's booklet "Every GooWork." FIRST — the purpose of the book — To prove that churches may contribute their resources (and obligation) to humainstitutions such as Schools (as David Lipscomb College)and Orphan Homes (as Christian Home and Bible School at Mt. Dora). SECOND — the author's proof —

(The first 18 pages)

1. (a) AGATHOS (good) works are to be performed by both the individual and the church, (b) KALOS (good) works however may be enjoined simply on a single in dividual.
2. (The last 5 pages)
1. Walker classifies — Schools and Orphan Homes under the heading of AGATHOS works.
2. Therefore Schools and Orphan Homes may be sup ported by contributions from both the individual and the church. THIRD — The Missing Links

I.

The author "forgot" to prove his second point to be inaccord with the scriptures. He simply "assumes" that theythe AGAT HOS works.

A. Notice the classification of AGAT HOS works according to:

The Christian Church D. E. Walker The BibleColleges Colleges Not Even MentionedOrphan Homes Orphan Homes Not Even MentionedMissionary Society (left out) Not Even MentionedRecreation (left out) Not Even Mentioned

B. Some Observations —

1. Does the Bible classify Colleges as AGATHOS works?

Answer — No! The Bible nowhere mentions the word AGATHOS with the word "Schools."

1. 2. Does the Bible cla ify, Institutional Orphan Homes as AGAT HOS works?
Answer — No! The Bible nowhere mentions OrphanHomes much less Or phan "Homes" and AGAT HOS to-together.
3. Is James 1:27 or "visiting the fatherless" ever usedin connection with the wor d AGAT HOS?

Answer — No! But . . . D. E. Walker "assumes" that it is AGATHOS instead of KALOS and his proclamation is enough to convince at least Barney Colson

1. Does the Bible ever present the church contributing from its treasury to any human institution, thereby indicating this to be an AGAT HOS work?
2. Answer — Never! Not once!
1. (a) Does the author admit that the Greek words AGAT HOS (good) and KALOS (good) overlap in meaning?

Answer — Yes, as shown by his chart on p. 14.

(b) Since the Bible does not cla ify these human institutions (Schools and "Homes") as AGATHOS works, by what authority does D. Walker cla ify these works as AGAT HOS (good) and not KALOS (good)?

Answer — D. Walker simply "assumes" the authorityto classify for brethren everywhere what may and manot be supported from the church treasury because Walker likes it, and "thinks" it is an AGAT HOS wor k.

II.

The author admits that he must prove these things in order to sustain his proposition on church supported Schools:

1. A human institution teaching the Bible is an AGATHOS work.
2. T eaching r elated subjects is an AGAT HOS wor k not a KALOS work.
3. Providing the necessary environment (soft-ball?)is AGATHOS.
4. That individuals may contribute to such institutions because they ar e AGAT HOS wor ks r ather than KALOS (good) works.

Note — Knowing that he must pr ove these things, he does not even attempt the job that he outlines for himself. And I mean does not even T RY to pr ove these things. It is one thing to tr y and fail, but to acknowledge that these things must be proven and then not even try, seems to be a waste of good paper and ink.

III.

T o get the School and Or phan Home in the chur ch treasury and leave out the Fun and Frolic that so manchurches engage in today, the author simply TELLS us that they are not AGATHOS works. Does he quote a single passage of scripture in proof of this? Not one! Then what is the proof ? ?

Oh, a fellow might say that it is evident that Fun andFrolic are not authorized under the heading of AGATHOS works. The missing link is that the author does not have the scripture to prove his point so he says it is simply EVIDENT to him, and ought to be evident to all.

IV.

He forgot to prove that the words "fellowship" and "contribution" were identical terms. Indeed, the church might well be in fellowship with the widow who has r elatives in I Tim. 5:16 but forbidden to contribute to her. Hence, the mi ing link in "E ver y Good Wor k" is it is not true that these two things are identical:

1. A Human Institution or individual doing a good work of its OWN . . . and . . .

2. The CHURCH contributing money to such a work.

V.

The author quoted II Tim. 3:16, 17 which states that the "Scriptures furnish the man of God unto every GOODwor k," and then he "forgot" to quote the scripture that authorizes the church to contribute to a human institution. If it is not in the SCRIPTURES it is not an AGATHOS work.

When the Bible authorizes the chur ch to do a work then I know this is pleasing to God. Yet there are some who willfollow a man when he declares — "I will point out what is GOOD for the church to do." II John 9, "Whosoever goeth onward ..."

VI.

The author "forgot" the definition of the ver y wor d he spent 18 pages trying to identify. Agathos — "good, profitable, generous, beneficent, upright, virtuous, producingpleasure and satisfaction."

Now he says that Colleges and Orphan Homes in thchur ch budget ar e "good", agathos.

1. These institutions have caused division in the churches.

1. They have caused faithful Christians to loose their jobs.
2. Such a practice is not found in the "faith one delivered."
3. It is the doctrine of men to have the church contributing to human institutions.Yet . . . the author says they ar e "good", agathos — producing pleasure and satisfaction.

It is little wonder that few others (if any) will use this argument to pr omote institutions in the chur ch budget.

VII. CONCLUSION

D. Walker's entire system boils down to this statement: Let me, D. E. Walker, cla ify all the promotional schemes and Human Institutions my brethren may want to leach on to the chur ch. For then, without any Scripturalauthority what-so-ever, I will declare many of them — AGATHOS — to be supported by the Lord's church. Selah.

No action has ever been more purely human and arbitrary.

A certain amount of opposition is a great help to a man. Kites rise against, and not with, the wind. Even a head wind is better than none. No man ever worked his passage anywhere in a dead calm. Let no man wax pale, therefore, because of opposition.

Anon.

Inter est in your wor k is the best evidence in the world of your sincerity for service. When time hangs heavy on your hands and you can see no chance for progress or promotion, when your interest in your work lags, it is your duty to geinter ested or get out.

Anon.

If the entire church would work as hard for the Lord as a faction will work to carry its point, nothing could stop its progress. If a fraction would deal with a faction by usingthe swor d of the Spirit, the battle would be won.

No man can reach higher without looking to God. Man was made in the likeness of God, but when he turns from God he transforms himself into the image of the Devil.

God's way is one and runs in a straight line, but man's ways are many and go in all directions. It is only when man's way par allels God's way that man is right.

Faith is not a way of talking, but a way of walking. It is not a pr oblem to answer, but a path to follow. It is the habitual loyalty of a disciplined life to a living and loving God.

The man who is swift to hear and slow to speak is worth listening to.

SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE

Help us add 5000 new subscribers to Searching The Scriptures

$2.00

per year

in advance

HAMARTANO, "I SIN"-NO. 13

The verb hamartano and the noun hamartia had not as serious a meaning in cla ical Greek as they have in the NewT estament. We have seen that in cla ical Gr eek the basic idea of the noun was "failure". We observed that the verb signified "missing a mark" as when a spear was thrown at a target. Further, the verb was used for mi ing a road; for failur e in one's plan or hope or purpose. Apparently, botthe ver b and the noun wer e connected with some of negative failure rather than with some kind of positive transgression. As we shall see, the New Testament attaches A much deeper significance to these wor ds.

We may note that Jesus did not attempt to define sin, as do some of the New Testament writers. Yet, it is likely thatwe all confess that we learn more about sin from Jesus than from any other Bible writer. Hence, we learn about sin from Jesus in observing His treatment of sinners; not in observingHis treatment of the words for "sin". _-

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

E. L. Flannery

In the Friday, Nov. 17, 1961, i ue of the Nashville Banner, there appeared a front-page article, "Catholic BishopsDenounce U. S. Aid Discrimination". I deny the implication of the headline title, and the contents of the article. I denythat federal aid to education would be "discriminatingagainst children attending non-public schools" as asserted by the Bishops.

Actually, there has been federal aid to education through most of the history of our country, the federal land grants (1785) being one instance. Since 1862 (The Morril Act)the policy of the Federal gover nment in subsidizingeducation has been to support some specialized educationaactivity, as agriculture, mechanic arts, nautical and aeronautical education, nurse training, etc

The controversy as whether to include or exclude non-public schools has long existed, but became mor e vocal in the 1880's when the Blair bills to provide federal aid togeneral education in non-sectarian public schools were introduced. Senator Blair's bills failed to pa , and heattributed the failure to "Jesuit" influence. A quarter of a century passed before further effort was made to secure feder al aid

to general education (Smith-Towner bill, 1918, and the Sterling-Reed bill, 1923) but these efforts also failed. In1937 again a federal aid to education bill was blocked bCatholic influence. The chief objection to this date was thatcentral control of education was dangerous. But with theintroduction of the Mead-Aiken bill, 1945, which included in federal aid to the non-public schools, the Catholicssanctioned such federal aid. This bill was defeated by thProtestant groups and the National Education Association. The Barden bill, 1949, which sought federal aid to general education in public schools, caused the contr over sy between Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt and Cardinal Spellman. thought Mrs. Roosevelt presented clear, valid and unprejudiced arguments concerning federal aid when she noted:

1. Public education should not be connected with religious contr ol of schools which ar e paid for by taxpayer 's money
2. Parents should be free to send their children to any particular kind of school they select, for religious or anyother reason, if they pay for such schools and schooling
3. The policy has been, and should continue, that the public schools of our countr y should be entir ely separ ate from any kind of denominational control, and that only schools that are free from such control should be tax-supported.
4. The separation of church and state is extremely important to any of us who hold the original traditions of our nation.

I do not believe tax money should be given to anysectarian or private school. If any group of people desire to build and maintain such a school they should have thatright, but they have no reason to expect or demand those whose religious views differ (or who have no religion) to pay for their particular desires in education. I attended a private college; my children attend private college. I wantethe moral environment and religious teaching availablthere and I want my children to have the same. But I do not expect nor desire federal aid to such private schools. IfCatholics want schools to teach Catholic doctrines they should have the right to build them, but should not expectpublic funds to aid in this effort. Our fine public school system will become fragmentized once the wall of separation of church and state is broken, and every denomination sets up its schools with federal aid to teach its particular beliefs.

Some churches have private libraries. Should they makdemands to be tax-supported because the public library is tax-supported? Should they ask to be tax-exempt as concerns the public librar y because they have paid for a private library?

Any citizen may call on the local police for protection. Tax money pays the policeman's salar y, and he is available tothe general public. But any citizen has the right to hire adetective or a per sonal bodyguar d if that is his desir e and if he is able and willing to pay the expense involved. In this latter case he could not expect "aid" in footing the bill from tax money, fr om public r esour ces. Nor could he expect tobe r efunded tax money in that he had not used a publicser vice that was available.

Every pressure is being exerted to obtain federal aid to non-public schools by the Catholic hierarchy, and its intensity has increased greatly the past few years. We now have aCatholic President, a Catholic Attorney-General, and a Catholic heading the Senate and come Januar y pr obablya Catholic as Speaker of the House. One-fifth the population is Catholic, but with Catholics in key positions in government evidently they believe they can muster enough votes to demand and get federal aid for their schools. For

75 years now they have blocked federal aid to education ingeneral. It is time citizens raise their voices in protest. It is not bigotr y, it is not discrimination to speak and act fr om "real conviction and honest belief". Let's maintain separation of church and state. This policy largely made America thegr eat nation she is today in my opinion.

71 % OF FOODS & FIBERS DISTRIBUTED BY CATHOLIC GROUP, DONATED BY UNCLE SAM!

Luther W. Martin, St. James, Missouri

During the fiscal year 1961, over 71% of the foods and fiber s distributed by the National Catholic Relief Ser vices was donated to the Catholic or ganization by the United States Government.

The November 26, 1961, i ue of the CATHOLIC MISSOURIAN, the Official Newspaper of the Diocese of Jefferson City, (Mo.), published a news release from Washington, D.C., containing the following statement:

"Catholic Relief Services — National Catholic Welfare Conference conducted the largest overseas relief program in the history of American voluntary relief during the yeaending September 30.

"The U.S. Catholic overseas relief agency sent nearlyone and three-quarter billion pounds of relief supplies in more than 2,000 shipments to 67 countries, according to its annual r eport to the meeting her e of the U.S. Bishops

"This figure included some one-and-a-quarter billion pounds of sur plus foods and fiber donated to the agencyby the U.S. government for free distribution overseas to needy persons, regardless or race, color or creed.

The CRS-NCWC relief program was valued at more than $125 million, according to the report submitted byAuxiliary Bishop Edward E. Swanstrom of New York, executive dir ector of the agency.

Since the value of the relief was $125 million, and since the United States Government donated 71.4% of that which was distributed by the Catholic Relief Services, then,effectively, U.S. Taxpayers were forced into donating almost NINETY MILLION DOLLARS to the Roman Catholic Church.

From other sources, it has been learned that some of the sur plus goods distributed by the Catholic Relief Servicescarried the following label information.

CATHOLIC RELIEF

KENNEDY CASABLANCA

Donated By The People of The

United States of America Not

to be Sold or E xchanged

". . . THEY REHEARSED ALL THAT GOD HAD DONE WITH THEM . . ."— Acts 14:27

KELTON WHALEY, Vinemont, Alabama -Nine have been baptized, nine restored, and 2 have placed membership since my last report. Brother LEE GUNTER, Stevens Avenue, Huntsville, has just held a fine three nights meeting with us here at Vinemont. One was restored. The reading matter in Searching The Scriptures is spiritually invigorating.

REAVIS PETTY, 301 Greely Drive, Columbia, Tennessee — After almost four years with the Mooresville Pike congregation in Columbia, I am planning to begin work with the new chur ch in Mor ehead City, N.C., Januar y 1.1962. This church is six months old and has about 15 members. I ask your prayers in this new work. If you have relatives or friends stationed at Cherry Point of Camp Lejeune Marine Bases, please send us their names and addr esses if we can be of any service to their spiritual welfare. Also, the names and addr esses of any one living in that ar ea, would be appr eciated. If vacationing in eastern North Car olina, please visit with us. Please note my change of address: Box1211, Mor ehead City, North Car olina.

James P. Miller begins a meeting at the Her cules Avenue church in Clearwater January 14 to continue through

21. Services will be at 7:30 each evening.

Marshall E. Patton of Orlando, Fla. was in a meetingwith the Lake Wales chur ch, December 4 through 10. Hugh

W. Davis is the preacher with this church. Good interest and attendance was shown thr oughout the meeting.

Morris D. Norman, Plant City, Fla.— Roy H. Lanier, Jr. will be in a meeting with the Plant City church, beginning February 25, 1962. The church in Plant City is showing pr ogr ess in attendance and contribution. A new work program has stirred enthusiasm among the members of the church. When in Plant City worship with us at 805 W. Mahoney St.

BAKER'S BIBLE ATLAS

This atlas has features which will be appreciated by all

students of Scripture. This volume is an atlas in the true sense of the word. Its emphasis is on geography. In addition to the colored maps there are black and white outline maps showing clearly the geographic features emphasized in that chapter. Photographs have been carefully chosen for the purpose of clarifying the text.

The authors of this Bible Atlas are eminently qualified for this project through their background of studies and visits to the "Holy Land" and other lands significant in Bible history.

Price -$8.95

SHEUMAKER - TOTTY DEBATE

Glenn R. Sheumaker, Sr. of the Northside church in Lakeland, Florida and W. L. Totty of the" Garfield Heights church in Indianapolis, Indiana will meet in two debates. Thefirst one begins January 22, 1962 and will end January 25. It will be in the building of the Howard Street church inClearwater, Florida, located at Howard Street and Scranton Avenue. The second debate will be in the building of theNorthside church in Lakeland, 919 North Ohio Avenue. The date for this one will be announced later. The propositions to be discussed will be the chur ch support of orphan homes and the Herald of Truth. Totty affirms two nights and Sheumaker affirms two nights.

BOOKS ON VARIOUS SUBJECTS

THE GOSPEL IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

by Donald A. Br andeis ___________________ 3.95 OUR DEPENDABLE BIBLE by Stanley E. Anderson 3.95 GOD SPAKE BY MOSES by Oswald T. Allis (paper) 2.00 UNITY OF ISAIAH (paper) by Oswald T. Allis____ 1.50 FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES by Oswald T. Allis _____ 4.25 PROPHECY AND THE CHURCH by Oswald T. Allis 3.75 PRINCIPLES OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

by L ouis Ber khof ________________________ 2.95 CONFLICT WITH ROME by G. C. Berkhouwer __. 5.95 DOCTRINE OF ETERNAL PUNISHMENT

by Harr y Buis ___________________________ 2.75 50 YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME by Charles Chiniquy _____________________ 3.75 CHRISTIANITY RIGHTLY SO CALLED by Samuel G. Craig _____________________ 2.75 JESUS OF YESTERDAY AND TODAY

by Samuel G. Cr aig ______________________ 2.75 HISTORY OF PREACHING by Edwin C. Dargan ..__ 7.95 CHURCH IN THE BIBLE by Don DeWelt _______ 3.95 EUSEBIUS' ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY ______ 3.95 HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION by F. W. Farrar 6.95 HARMONY OF THE LIFE OF ST. PAUL

by Fr ank J. Goodwin _____________________ 3.00 SEVEN LAWS OF TEACHING by John M. Gregory 1.75 ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF THE BIBLE

by John W. Haley _______________________ 3.50 THE BIBLE AND THE LIFE HEREAFTER

by William Hendriksen ___________________ 3.95 BIBLE SURVEY by William Hendriksen __________ 4.50 NEW HEAVEN AND NEW EARTH

by Ar chibald Hughes _____________________ 3.75 MIRACLES OF OUR LORD by John Laidlaw ___ 3.50 280 TITLES AND SYMBOLS OF CHRIST

by James Large ---------------------------------------4.95 APOSTOLIC FATHERS by J. B. Lightfoot ________ 3.95 THE LIFE OF DAVID AS REFLECTED IN HIS

PSALMS by Alexander Maclar en ___________ 2.75 PERSONALITIES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

by Ralph G. T urnbull ____________________ 1.95 THE PATRIARCHAL AGE by Charles Pfeiffer ___ 2.95 CHURCH IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE

by Sir William M. Ramsay__________________ 4.95

FLORIDA CHRISTIAN COLLEGE SIXTEENTH ANNUAL LECTURE SERIES HUTCHINSON MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM -F.C.C. CAMPUS

TEMPLE TERRACE, T AMPA, FLORIDA THEME:

"Ancient Faith and Modern Gods"

Monday, February 19, 1962 7:30 P.M."Historical Development of Religious Papers" ………………………………………… Yater Tant, Ft. Smith, Ark.

Tuesday, February 20, 1962

9:15 A.M. Chapel— "The Shepherd and the Lost Sheep" ………………………… Charles Maples, Huntsville, Ala.

10:05 A.M.	"Book of Revelation" ………………………………………………………… . Homer Hailey, T ampa, Fla.
11:00 A.M.	"Modern Gods — Deifying Human Reason"……………………………… Clinton Hamilton, Tampa, Fla.
1:45 P.M.	"Difficult Passages" ………………………………………………………	Cecil Douthitt, Fort Smith, Ark.
2:35 P.M.	"Recent Advances in Science and their Relationship to the Bible" … ...B. Hall Davis, Baton Rouge, La.
3:30 P.M.	Panel— "Role and Relationship of Human E xpedients to Work and Wor ship" …… . Dudley Ross Spears,
	Chm., Blytheville, Ar k.; Oaks Gowen, Bradenton, Fla.; Eugene Britnell, Little Rock, Ar k.;
	Mar shall Patton, Orlando, Fla.
7:30 P.M.	"Historical Development of Benevolence Societies ……………………… .. James R. Cope, T ampa, Fla.

Wednesday, February 21, 1962

9:15 A.M. Chapel— "The Woman Who Lost Her Money………………………………… Al Payne, Columbus, Miss.

10:05 A.M. "Book of Revelation" ………………………………………………………… Homer Hailey, Tampa, Fla.

11:00 A.M. "Modern Gods -Deifying the State" ………………………………………… Harry Payne, Tampa, Fla.

1:45 P.M. "Difficult Passages" ……………… …………………………………… . Cecil Douthitt, Fort Smith, Ark.

2:35 P.M. "Pre-historic Man and Adam" ………………………………………… .Earle H. West, Cleveland, Ohio

3:30 P.M. Panel— "Right of Christians to Operate Schools, Papers and Orphanages" … . Leslie Diestelkamp, Chm.,

Oak Park, 111.; Steve Hudgins, Ocala, Fla.; Connie W. Adams, Newbern, Tenn.; Gorin Rutherford, Scottsbluff, Neb.

7:30 P.M. "Historical Development of Educational Institutions" …………… .. Robert Turner, San Antonio, Texas

Thursday, February 22, 1962

9:15 A.M. Chapel— "A Prodigal Son" ______________________________ Weldon Warnock, Lawrenceburg, Tenn.

10:05 A.M. "Personal Responsibility in the Lord's Work" -------------------------------Irvin Himmel, Ferguson, Mo.

11:00 A.M. "Modern Gods -Deifying the World" __________________________ Louis Garrett, Tampa, Fla.

1:45 P.M. "Evolution and Creation" ___________________________________ Earle H. West, Cleveland, Ohio

2:35 P.M. Panel-"Problem of Fellowship and Unity". _________ James P. Needham, Chm., St. Petersburg, Fla.; Harold Trimble, San Antonio, Tex.; Paul Brock, Jacksonville, Fla.; William H. Lewis, Knoxville, Tenn.

7:30 P.M. "Historical Development of Congregational Cooperation" ---------------------Cecil Willis, Akron, Ohio

Friday, February 23, 1962

9:15 A.M. Chapel-"An Elder Brother"…………………………………… .………… .John Swatzell, Waycross, Ga.

10:05 A.M. "Book of Revelation" …………………………………………… .…………… . Homer Hailey, Tampa, Fla.

11:00 A.M. "Modern Gods -Deifying Philanthr opy" ……………………… .…………… . E . V. Sr ygley, T ampa, Fla.

1:45 P.M. "Current I ues in the Science-Faith Dialogue" ……………………… .. Earle H. West, Cleveland, Ohio

2:35 P.M. Panel— "Role and Responsibility of Elders"…………………… ... Bob Crawley, Chm., Birmingham, Ala.; Charles G. Caldwell, Columbus, Ga.; John Whitehead, Las Vegas, Nev.; Leslie E. Sloan, Palmetto, Fla.

7:30 P.M. "Historical Development of Social Emphasis" …………………………… .Irven Lee, Russellville, Ala.