WHAT MUST THE CHURCH DO TO BE SAVED?

James P. Miller

The question, what must I do to be saved can beapplied to many different situations in the religious world. It can be asked not only by the pagan jailor at Philippi, but also by the lost child of God, the"do nothing member" of the church, and by thchurch itself. In this study let us apply it to thchurch and ask the question, what must the church do to be saved?

First, if the church is to be saved it must be true to its mission in the world. Paul writes to Timothyin I Timothy 3:15, "But if I tarry long, that thoumayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the livingGod, the pillar and ground of the truth." The term "Pillar" carries the idea of the undergirding orsupport, and the term "ground", translated mantimes "bulwark", meaning a strong wall of defense. Thus the mission of the church is to support the truth and defend it. From the earliest days in thechurch in Jerusalem there are those who would turn the church aside from these two great responsibilities and cause it to leave the "ministry ofthe word", to "serve tables". John cried out in theclosing words of the Revelation and said, "the spirit and the bride say come." The denominations around us have long been turned aside. The demands of the social order have triumphed over the call of thesoul. On every side churches of Christ are turningto the Fleshly side of man. Entertainment is offered in place of the gospel of the son of God.Recreation is substituted for sound doctrine and the church is made attractive to the world, without thought of its divine mission. In what other way can we explain such projects among us as "recreation hall", "young peoples churches","basket ball teams", and a host of other things? Yes, if the chur ch is to be saved it must be trueto its mission.

If the church is to be saved it must recognize theauthority of Christ. In Paul's great essay on thechurch in God's purpose in Ephesians 1:22,23 whave these words. "And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all." Churches need to learn that they do not have legislative power. All authoritybelongs to Christ who is "the Saviour of the body." This simple le on would demand that the church have elders, deacons, evangelists and saints andnothing more. That it confine its efforts to scriptural procedures and to them alone. It is useless

to preach against human creeds attached to thechurch, and then divide the body over human institutions attached to the church. The Lord has given as much authority for one as he has for the other. Christ is LORD in every sense of the termThere is little purpose in calling him Lord, Lorand then going beyond what he has said.

Salvation for the church depends upon the abilityof the church to tell truth from error. In commending the church at Ephesus in Revelation

2:2 Christ tells them, "thou has tried them which saythey are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars." Think about a church so well taught that icould prove pretenders to the office of apostle false. We are thrilled to even contemplate such acongregation. It is easy to understand when weread the 20th chapter of the book of Acts. Paul tells the Ephesian elders in verse 20, ... "I kept bacnothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house." The church at Ephesus did not have to calloutside help. T hey worked from no approval list fur nished by some publishing house or college.They simply put the pretender to the test. If churches were this well taught today they would be safe. Any time any part of the truth is not preached "publicly and from house to house", thechurch is defenseless in this area and can not be the "pillar and ground of the truth." We have seenthe storms of error demolish what should be the bulwarks of God. Churches fell to Premillennialism and now to instutionalism for the simple reason that they could not tell truth from error. Think now how foolish it is to say that since we do not have anPremillennialism here we will deny anyone theright to preach on the subject. Brethren all over this nation have said, Since we are not troubled over the support of human institutions and theHerald of Truth, we will not allow it to bepreached or discussed.

What if the elders of the church at Ephesus had said, "Since we have not had any false apostles come our way, we will refuse our preachers the right topreach on how to test them"? Brethren by ththousands who read this paper, can you not see that it is often too late to lock the barn after the horse is stolen? T he time to teach is before error in anyform becomes a problem. I think that some of this refusal to permit an open pulpit stems from a love of error itself and some of it comes from an over estimation of the power of elders. Some elders actually believe that they can prevent false teachingand practice simply because they are elders. History denies this to be true. Elders have been set aside, meeting houses have been stolen and entire congregations have been lost simply because the church did not know the truth. The effort to teach came too late. Let no elder be deceived, although his rightto rule comes from God, the instrument in his hands to enforce this right is the word. Only when theword is taught fully and completely and the church is warned of every danger is the elder safe and the church safe.

For the church to be saved it must be pure. The charges against the church at Sardis were on this point. In Revelation 3 :2 Christ tells them that "I have not found thy works perfect before God," then in verse 4 he says, "Thou hast a few names even inSardis which have not defiled their garments: andthey shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy." It is a sad commentary on the church today, that while the WOMAN'S CHRISTIAN TEMPERANCE UNION is condemning Pat Boonefor his role in State Fair, under the heading,"Another Chr istian Has Fallen," the largest school among us is promoting the sale of a new album of spiritual songs in which their chorus sings withPat praises to God Almighty. If our righteousness is to "exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees", we had better learn from the WCTU. If a group of women who are not Christians in the true sense of the world can see a fallen Christian,and the church made up of Christians can-not, thebody of Christ is in real danger.If the church is to be saved it must maintain the unity for which Christ prayed. This is more than an agreement to disagree. It is a unity that consists of ONE MIND, ONE MOUTH, AND ONE HEART. In the 15th chapter of the Roman letter we havethese words, "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be like minded one toward another according to Chr ist Jesus; that ye mawith one mind and one mouth glorify God, evethe Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." The earlychurch achieved this unity and we have examples of them practicing it. They were united in doctrine in Acts 2 :42. They were united and of one heart inseeing to the needy in Acts 4 :32. They were of one mouth in Acts 4:24. They knew that true Bible unitycould only come from the word of God. The church today must learn this le on. Many brethren have the idea that we can meet and agree to differ and this will please God. Try the case of Peter at Antioch in the 2nd Chapter of Galatians, Paul said, "I withstood him to his face because he was to be blamed." Here two great apostles differed. What ifthey had agreed to disagree and Peter had gonthrough life teaching that there was a difference in the Jew and Gentiles and Paul had spent a lifetime saying, "There is no difference between Jews and Greeks"? The result would have been a unbelieving world, for one of the purposes of unitydefined by Chr ist in John 17 is, "that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." If brethren differ in regard to Premillennialism, can they please God by simply agreeing not to be disagreeable? Will this fulfill the Saviour's demands? If so,what about our neighbors in denominationalism? Can the church make the same agreement with them? If one brother believes the church to be sufficient in evangelism and benevolence and another argues that it must have a human institution to be complete, what are the re-(Continued on Page 3)

DANGEROUS POLICIES

The editorial in the November 24, 1962 i ue of the Christian Standard, a publication of the Christian Church, relates a meeting near Stillwater, Oklahoma late in October, 1961 of fifteen widely representative men from Christian Churches to discuss "internal unity." The subject turned to "restructure" by theInternational Convention of Christian Churches (Disciples Of Christ). Professor Woodrow Phillips of Ozark Bible College inquired if this was adefensive move because of the growth of some organizations and Christian Churches not connected with the International Convention. It was said that the "restructure" was partly defensive, born offear. The editorial observes: "So defensive restructure among Disciples is likely to a ume some grotesque forms."

"How much farther can it go, we wonder, than atDixon, Illinois, where the following announcementappeared in the Sunday morning service bulletin of First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), July22, 1962:

" 'Report of Trustees: The title to all church properties has been executed to the Illinois DisciplesOf Christ at Bloomington, Illinois. The Illinois Disciples of Christ has executed title to the same properties to the Dixon Disciples of Chr ist, Inc.,which is a newly created corporation. DixonDisciples of Christ will execute a lease agreement to the First Christian Church with a clause providingthat its use must be consistent with the policies of our brotherhood

DID YOU FORGET TO RETURN YOUR ENVELOPE WITH YOUR SUBSCRIPTION? DO IT NOW!

which is affiliated with the Illinois Disciples oChrist, United Christian Missionary Society, thInternational Convention of Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ), and all agencies reporting tUnified Promotion. The directors of Dixon Disciplesof Christ are thirteen members from this church. If there is a violation of the above policies or loyalties, the lease is terminated (breach of contract) and the congregation must vacate thechurch premises. It is our prayer that you will not permit this to happen, and that this church willgrow to be one of our strongest Disciples of Christ Churches in Illinois.'

"If the 'policies of our brotherhood' had not changed radically in recent years, the congregation that accepted such shackles would have been set out in the street the next day! A more violent breach of the principles of the movement from which Illinois Disciples sprang can hardly bimagined. How will such enslavement even relate itself to the International Convention, whose constitution starts thus:

" 'We, members of Churches of Disciples of Christ, reaffirming our steadfast adherence to the independence and autonomy of the local churches and disavowing any control over our congregations or missionar y, educational and benevolent agencies other than that which is advisory, aninviting the fellowship of all our brethren in the accomplishment of these ends, do hereby adopt thfollowing constitution.'

"Restructure has, indeed, advanced a pace!"

Does anything of this nature sound familiar toyou? On the editorial page of the August 30, 196i ue of The Gospel Guardian F. Y. Tant wrote: "From Chattanooga, Tennessee, comes this interesting bit of news from the bulletin of theBranerd Church of Christ, Maurice Howell, preacher:

" 'The Brainerd church has accepted the oversightof the East Brainerd work, as requested by thbrethren there. Our plans include the erection of a new building with adequate facilities for future growth of that congregation, and to a ist them indeveloping a strong congregation.'

"It came about like this: the East Brainerd Church was having internal troubles. About half of the members felt they could no longer conscientiously worship there, and left. The members who remained there then decided to ask 'help' from the Brainerd Church, some five miles away. They asked for help. It was offered to themon the following terms: (1) the East Brainerd church property would be deeded to the Brainerd church, (2) the members of the Brainerd church put themselves under the 'oversight' of the Brainerd elders in exactly the same way in whicBrainerd members were under their oversight, (3) no'hobbyist' be permitted to preach in the E ast Brainerd pulpit

"These terms were accepted, we understand; anthe above notice in the Brainerd bulletin would seem to set things out in their true light. The Brainerd elders now apparently have the 'oversight' of two congregations — the one in which the Holy Spirit made them bishops, and the other one in whichSatan undoubtedly must have taken a hand."

One of the surest ways of holding control over a congregation is to hold the deed to its property. Of course, in the view of those who have little or noregard for congregational autonomy, to willinglysurrender property and request the oversight ofanother church is not losing autonomy; the only wayautonomy can be lost is to have it taken awawithout consent. In both cases cited in this article the property was "willingly" deeded to others not of the congregation involved. If autonomy was retained in one case, it was in the other. There is as much scriptural authority for the "Dixon Disciplesof Christ, Inc." to hold properties for Christian Churches as for one eldership to have "oversight" of two congregations, including the possession ofboth meeting houses. "Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things." (Rom. 2:1).

WHAT MUST THE CHURCH DO . . .

(Continued from Page 2) quirements for Bible unity? Simply to resolve thedifferences in the light of the Bible. There must be a unity of mind before there can be unity of mouthUnity of heart makes unity of practice. Godrequires, yes, demands, that the part of the bodthat is without authority bow their head to him who is the head, even Christ. This is what Peter had to do and this is what ever y institutional brother on earth will have to do today if the church is to be of one mind and of one practice. These are some ofthe things the church must do to be saved.

"WAS I WITNESSING HEALING?"

A. H. Payne, Columbus, Miss.

Due to the ever increasing sentiment among thuninformed and the emotionally unstable when the"faith healer" makes his claims, the followinletter from Harper's Magazine, April, 1962, p. 4with certain observations, is submitted.

"Hayes B. Jacobs (in 'Oral Roberts: Hig

Priest of Faith Healing," February) neglected

what every cub reporter learns is basic to his

job — leg work. Had he bothered to check out

some of Mr. Robert's purported healings, Mr.

Jacobs might have moved toward an answer to

his question, "Was I witnessing healing?" . . .

He justifies his neglect by saying it would

require "years of research" to study th

healings . . . That's unconvincing rationalizing.

In 1956, the Fresno Bee decided to look into the

healings of .. . a faith healer much like Mr.

Roberts . . . The Bee sent a staff of reporters to

the tent revivals where the reporters gathered

the names of those who claimed they were

healed. Newsmen followed up these persons

throughout Central California and documented

many of the cases. I will select two of those we

interviewed:

"1. Jerry: This ten-year-old was healed one

night on the healing ramp under the strong lights

of a television crew. The boy walked to the ramp

with a lar ge br ace encasing his leg from hip to

RETURN THAT ENVELOPE IN THE LAST ISSUE WITH YOUR SUBSCRIPTION TODAY!

ankle. After several demons were exorcised, the

brace was cast off and Jerry pranced through

the aisles. To the screams of the faithful, Jerry

was pronounced healed. A reporter tracked Jerry

down, learned the name of his physician, and

questioned the doctor, who said that the boy

could always walk but that the brace had been

placed on his leg "to protect a weakened hip

from damage. He could walk on it perfectly well

before. I recommended the brace to keep him

from developing a limp."

"2. Mr. Barnett: An aged and sick man waswheeled to the healing ramp after an overnight trip from Colorado. He was healed of cancer. A reporter . . . managed to get Mr. Barnett's home address from his wife, and the man'sphysician was asked what effect the healinghad. "This man has already died of cancer," the physician replied. "It is most unfortunate that the Faith to which one turns as the end of

life draws near should be so distorted by so-

called 'faith healer s'." Death had come thr ee

weeks after healing.

"In summarizing its findings, the newspaper

stated that no case of healing was confirmed by

a physician; many illnesses were self-diagnosed;

there were healings of ailments which people did

not have; and several persons who were alleged

to have been healed later asserted that their

illnesses remained." Melvin Mencher Asst. Prof. of Journalism University of Kansas

Irrespective of what the scriptures teach, (which will not allow Miraculous Divine Healing in thepost-apostolic age), for the "faith healer's" claims to stand, the following facts, taken from the finding of the Fresno Bee, must be refuted by unbiased evidence and true testimony: 1. The alleged healing was not confirmed by a physician.

2. Many illnesses were self-diagnosed. 3. There

were alleged healings of ailments which people

did not have. 4. Several persons who were alleged

to have been healed later admitted that their

illnesses remained. 5. Death came to many,

brought on by the very ailments from which they

claimed to have been healed.

A good preventive for those who would acceptthe false claims of the "healers" is suggested byMr. Mencher, i.e., "What every cub reporter learns is basic to his job — leg work." When folk bother to investigate some of the purported healings, their questions will be answer ed as to whether or notOral Roberts and those of his kind are really servants of the Lord Jesus Christ or impostors. The greatest fraud introduced to modern man and one of the greatest crimes perpetrated in acivilized nation is this "faith healing" craze which has not only been the basis for the Holiness Movement, but has steadily become an important part of the thought of the elite of

denominationalism.

Remove the extravagant par apher nalia, along

with the false claims, and the "healer " stands as

any false teacher, without scriptural authority to

support his claims and practices and deserving of

a good scr iptural whipping with the Gospel of

Chr ist for the salvation of his soul and those who

would hear him.

NEHEMIAH

T he book of Nehemiah is a wonderful book of trials with which men are encountered when they serve the Lord. Of course, the trials, tribulations and mocker y suffered by our Lord far surpass any trials that we encounter. We see a faithful servant of Jehovah in Babylon who is much concerned about the condition of God's people. It is a tribute to Nehemiah to be so concerned. Do not fear that there is a lack of concern for the condition of the church of our Lord today? It seems that manybrethren are now aware that we must start again inthe "little red school house" and the "brush arbors" if we are to have a faithful group in His service.

In Babylon Nehemiah was faithfully discharging his duty to the king, but was cognizant of another duty to a greater King. His concern for thecondition of Jerusalem and the walls surrounding the city caused him to ready himself for the task ahead. His learning that the walls were fallen down, and decay surrounding the Lord's work, caused him to be very sad and he prayed to Jehovah. In his sorrow, the king grants his desire to return toJerusalem and rebuilt the walls. This of course grieves Sanballat, Tobiah and Geshem. There is always grief among the enemies of Truth whenmen who love truth start to practice what Truth requires.

Every child of God must face these battles in the fight for the Lord. The first is the Mockery inchapter 4:1-3. There was a time when those of us who are banded together against all innovations of error, faced the ridicule and mockery of designing and promoting men. The mockery and ridicule has not ceased nor will it cease. Nehemiah and the people under him had a mind to work and they accomplished the work for the Lord. If you,brother, and I will have a mind to work we cancomplete the job as the Lord would have it completed. The next battle was a proposed fight.The enemies acted as if they were willing to fight for their cause, but when their bluff was calledthey, as cowards backed when their bluff was called they, as cowards, backed down. Notice chapter 4:6-8 and compare with

We have men who are willing and ready to meet the enemy on the polemic platform anytime, butthere are not many who really desire to put their teaching to the test of God's word among thepromoting brethren of our day. The time willcome when all of them will think best not to debate their cause as did the religious leaders of the day of Christ. When they questioned Christ and were put to shame; it did not take them long to decidethey did not help their cause by questioning Him.

GET THAT ENVELOPE WITH YOUR RENEWAL IN THE MAIL TODAY. IT IS TIME TO RENEW.

T he next battle was a plea for Unity. Unity is a fine thing, but we can never have unity short ofTruth. Any compromise we make is a defeat fortruth. We must not allow the truth for which our Saviour died to be dragged in the dust of error. We are to make no compromise with error, but be ready to firmly stand against the compromises offered bythose who oppose Truth.

See the life of Christ in His actions through these trials and decide your course by following in His steps. T hey lead to heaven at last.

- James P. Miller MY PEOPLE— THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL

The sixty third chapter of Isaiah has long been awonderful section of scripture to the mature Bible student. With the many ideas about the fullmeaning of the chapter, we are not concerned at this time. Rather than engage in long speculations weare interested in a principle as old as God's dealing with man. Simply, that God promises to be faithful to those who see fit to be faithful to him. Let us look at just three verses of the chapter.

"8. For he said, Surely they are my people,

childr en that will not lie: so he was their

Saviour.

9. In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.
1. But they rebelled, and vexed his holy spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them." Here we have the sad story of the fall of God's people with the reasons for their fall given. Paul was plain about this use of Old Testament scriptures in regard to this very subject in 1 Cor. 10:6 when he said, "Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted." Let us take a close look at the passage.

GOD'S RECOGNITION OF THEM

Jehovah exclaims, "Surely they are my people."Just think about such a wonderful honor. While the rest of the wor ld was without God and without hope, God's people knew God and were known ofhim. They had all the advantage and in all of their dealing with the Master they had seen his wonders. His confidence in them knows no limits for He cries out that they ar e "childr en that will not lie." Hehad brought them up out of the sea and had led them through the wilderness that they might notstumble. God's goodness to them knew no bounds and thus he became their Saviour. Let us count with Jehovah his goodness to them:

1. He had saved them.
2. He had redeemed them.
3. He had bor ne them.

4. He had carried them all the days of old. These four statements are as complete as God could make them, and they sum up the story of his dealings with them throughout their history. Whenhe said he saved, bare, redeemed and carried them he could say no more for they knew this was true, and even though they had drifted from God, they

could remember these things and know they were true.

THEIR REBELLION

The simple statement, "But they rebelled", has been so many times the story of the fall of God's children. Many times in debate I have been asked, "How many sins does a child of God have to commit to be lost?" The answer is always the same: any rebellious sin. Sins of rebellion putthe heart of the child far away from his Father. This was true of all of the sinners in the Old Testament and is true in the new. When theyrebelled they announced to God that they no longer wanted Him for a Shepherd. T hey cr ied out andsaid in the 11th verse: "Where is he that broughtus up out of the sea?" The effect of rebellion against God has always been the same — they "vexed hisholy Spirit". Little do men stop and think aboutoffending God. How little thought they give to His feelings and desires. The man who curses will apologize for cursing in the presence of a preacher, and yet turn his face to heaven and curse all day in the presence of God. When they did not have every whim supplied they pled ignorance of God's presence and vexed his holy Spirit.

THE RESULT

The result of this saddened heart of God is found in the last part of the 10th verse. It starts with the term, "therefore", which simply means, because of that which has gone before. We need to remember that the "therefore" logically follows every time. It followed them and it follows now. Any time manrebels against God it will vex his Spirit. God's heart is broken when His people sin against Him. We need to notice also that ever y sin is a sin against God. He is thus involved whether we mean for Him to be or not.

The action of Jehovah in the face of the rebellion of His people was instant and decisive. It is summed up in these three simple statements.

1. He turned.
2. He was their enemy.
3. He fought against them.

Just think of the tragedy that befell God's people and think how these things are our examples. Withevery thing God could give them they were notsatisfied. With His grace poured out upon them onevery hand they were still ungrateful. In the 10thchapter of 1 Cor. here is the result in verses 11,12: "Now all these things happened unto them forexamples : and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall".

(From the pen of F. B. Srygley comes the

following timely article on the methods of the early

church. This article is taken from the May 14th,

1931 i ue of the Gospel Advocate. We wonder if

brother Srygley could have been heard on this

subject through the pages of the Advocate today. —

Editor).

THE EARLY CHURCH AND ITS METHODS

By a careful study of the Bible any one shoulbe able to see that the Holy Spir it, through theapostles, banded the believers together in small groups and that these groups were called "churches of Christ." We now frequently see the expression,"the churches of Christ of America," by which is meant the different denominations of America. But this is not the sense in which this name is used in the New Testament. When Paul said, "The churches of Christ salute you," he meant thelocalized body of Chr ist, or the body of Chr ist indifferent localities. These churches were independent of each other and of all other congregations. They were not bound together byany organization under the control of the eldership ofany one of these chur ches, neither were thebanded together under one board created by anState or national law. The single task of these local chur ches was to preach the gospel and save souls. They had no organization larger than their local churches. There was no discussion amongthem about how to build and control institutions such as orphanages, or homes for the aged, or hospitals for the sick. There is no more authorityin the New Testament for the control of such things than there is for the control of a farm or a health resort. The purpose of these local churches was to preach the gospel. While the brethren inAntioch were praying they were instructed to separate Paul and Barnabas and send them forth into other fields to preach the gospel and builother groups such as had already been established in Antioch. All these groups of Christians in thedifferent localities were like all other groups or churches. These early Christians who were under the direct instruction of the Holy Spirit did not goout and build different denominations and placthem under boards, but they established simplchurches. These churches were not tied together by any organization for any purpose, whether under a board of elders or under a charter of a human government

Some time after the apostles died (it even began

to work in their day) men became dissatisfied

with this simple organization and began to desire

to do some great work. These simple organizations soon began to band themselves together throughtheir eldership. No doubt they felt that they coulddo a greater work by a closer cooperation, and this led to a more extended organization, which eventually led to the Roman Catholic hierarchy.The Catholic Church then undertook to organize in a way to control schools, hospitals, and evethe political governments of the world. When Luther, Zwingle, Calvin, John Knox, and others came out of the Roman Catholic Church and this brought about what has been called the "Reformation," they did a great work by freeingthe Bible and putting it in the hands of the peopleand by challenging the authority of the Pope oRome. But perhaps they did not see all the mistakes that the Catholics had made. While no church or churches could control the political government inNorth America, and, therefore, could not takcharge of these United States even if they so desir ed, they did adopt some of the errors of theCatholics in their organizations. These denominations that grew out of the Reformation have tried to build and operate schools, hospitalsand like institutions. We now have brethren that should know better trying to find authority forowning and operating such things under the overworked rule of expediency. Brethren have theright to own and operate newspapers, schools,homes for the aged, and farms; and they not onlyhave the right to teach the Bible in and through anything they have the right to own, but it is their duty to do so. Preaching the gospel, by which souls are saved, is the duty of all churches andindividual Christians as far as they are able to do so; but this is far from saying that they have theright to build anything in the way of a religious institution which is not author ized by the NeTestament. There is nothing in the New Testament larger than a local church or smaller than the body of Christ. Such institutions as are here mentioned, if owned and operated at all, should be owned and operated by individual Christians and not by chur ches. Whenever chur ches leave their own task of preaching the gospel and saving souls to build up other institutions, they are likely tget into controversy over how to own and operate

such institutions as they may build.

ARE WE WRONG ABOUT II CORINTHIANS 9:12-13?

Arthur 31. Ogden, Live Oak, Fla.

"In reply to this, Brother Hill presented Gala

tians 6:10 and II Corinthians 9:12-13. He showed

that the anti-brethren apply the phrase "all men"

in Galatians 6:10 to other s than saints because

they believe it is individual action, but refuse so

to apply "all men" in II Corinthians 9:12-13

because they realize it is church action. It was

shown that the construction was exactly the same."

("Hill-O'Neal Debate", A review by Alan E.

Higher s in the October 1961 i ue of the "Gospe

Defender".

After a delayed reading (eight months) of this

report of the Hill-O'Neal Debate in which the pre

ceeding appeared, I was moved to give some fresh

study to these two texts. We present them side-by

side for comparison.

Galatians 6:10 II Corinthians 9:12-13

"As we have therefore "For the administration opportunity, l e t us do of this service not onl

good unto all men, supplieth the want of theespecially unto themsaints, but is a-bundant who are of the household also by many

of faith." thanksgivings unto God;

Whiles by the

experiment of this

ministration they glorify

God for your professed

subjection unto the

gospel of Christ, and for

your liberal distribution

unto them, and unto

all men."

(Both texts are from the Authorized Version. All

emphasis mine, AMO

One cannot help but see a similar ity in the twtexts as to the expression "unto all men", but such likeness does not mean they are identical or that they teach the same thing. It should be noted that the word "men" is in italics in the Authorized Version and is therefore an interpolation and nopart of the actual text. The Greek calls for the rendition of "unto all", and from henceforth we will refer to it as such.

Whether or not Gal. 6:10 and II Cor. 9:12-13 are identical in scope so as to include all men depends entirely upon the context. There is no question but that the scope of Gal. 6:10 is "general",including all men everywhere, and this is indicated by the fact that "brethren" are only a part of the"all" to whom we are to do good. There is nosuch indication in II Cor. 9:12-13 however. The text states plainly that the distribution was for the "want of saints." (Verse 13). If the expression "all" in the text is to include "everybody", there must first be some indication of it somewhere in the text. Since it does not appear anywher e in chapter s 8 and 9, it must be concluded that thescope of the passage is not "general" so as to include all men. The two texts are not therefore identical.

One of the best means of arriving at the truth of

any difficult passage is to compare the different

translations. Almost invariably, the truth can be

found. I n a study of twelve differ ent translations

on these two passages, I found two outstanding

facts: (1) that without exception, the translators

agreed that the scope of Gal. 6:10 is general,

including all men, and in most cases r ender ed it

thusly, but (2) in dealing with II Cor. 9:13, only

two of the translators agreed that the scope of the

text was all men, and one of them, the Authorized

Version, indicated that the word of "men" was

an interpolation by putting it in italics. T he r est

did not believe it to be "general" and did not so

indicate in their translations. This shows clearly,

that while the translators saw evidence in the

context of Gal. 6:10 strong enough to demand the

rendition of "all men" (everybody everywhere),

such evidence did not reside in II Cor. 9:13. The

two passages are not therefore parallel.

One important question remains. If the "all" of II Cor. 9:13 does not include ever ybody everywhere, who is included? Is the "dog"included? "How r idiculous", some might say, butthere are

some occasions when dogs would be included in

"all". But it is not so in this case. "Dogs" are

not under consideration in anyway in the text an

could not therefore be included. What is under

consideration? The relief of the needy, but not all

the needy. The relief of the needy saints, but not

even the r elief of all needy saints. T he thing

under consideration is the relief of "all needy

saints in Jerusalem." (Rom. 15:25-27). I believe

the expression "all" in II Cor. 9:13 has reference

to the "needy saints in Jerusalem", and I submit the

following thoughts as evidence.

THE TRUTH OF THE TEXT

The key to understanding the truth of this passage, I think, is our recognizing the facthat there is a difference between the "church" ( as such) and the "individual", not only in"doing", but in "r eceiving" as well. T his contribution was for "the poor among the saints that are at Jerusalem" (Rom. 15:26, ASV), and while, according to precedent (Acts 11:27-30), itmay have been received by the elders of thechurch in Jerusalem for distribution, it does not change the fact that its purpose was to supply "the poor saints at Jerusalem". Paul states that the contribution was for "the ministering to the saints" (II Cor. 8:4 & 9:1), that "the wants of the saints" might be supplied. (II Cor. 8:14 & 9:12). T hese needs and wants were individual and personal, as is evidenced by the fact that Paul says the "contribution" will result in "many thanksgivings unto God". (Verse 12, Emp. mine, AMO). The MANY thanksgivings off er ed would be on thepart of the saints who would personally thanGod for the supplying of their "individual" wants. As they offered their thanks, they would "glorifyGod" for the subjection of the Corinthians unto the Gospel of Christ, and for their liberal distribution "unto them". The expression "unto them" has reference to the saints who would thank God for this gift, but it views each saint separatelyas he thanks God. The word "them" is used in the stead of "he" or "she" because it pictures aplurality of saints doing the same thing; thankingGod. But the prayers of each one would not be onlyfor himself, for they would thank God that "liber al distribution" had been made "unto all". That is, all the other needy saints in Jerusalem. This seems to be the only logical conclusion that canpo ibly be drawn from the text. Now, with this

thought in mind, r ead the text anew.All of the tr anslator s seem to agr ee with this view with the exception of the two mentioned, and

even then, the Authorized agrees if you take into

consideration the fact that the word "men" is in

italics. When the interpolation is r emoved, thabove effect is clearly seen.

Consider the text as rendered by both the"Amplified New Testament" and "James Moffatt":

"For the service the ministering of this fund

renders does not only fully supply what is lacking

SUBSCRIPTION NOW $2.50 PER YEAR, BUT IF YOU GET THAT ENVELOPE IN THE LAST ISSUE TO US AT ONCE THE OLD RATE OF $2.00 WILL BE ACCEPTED. DO IT TODAY!

to the saints (God's people), but it also overflows in many ( cr ies of) thanksgivings to God. Because of (your) standing of the test of this ministrythey will glorify God at your loyalty and obedienceto the Gospel of Chr ist which you confe , as well as for your generous-hearted liberality to themand to all (the other needy ones." (Amplified New Testament

"For the service rendered by this fund does more than supply the wants of saints, it overflows withmany a cr y of thanks to God. T his service showswhat you ar e, it makes men pr aise God for theway you have come under the gospel of Christ which you confe , and for the generosity of youcontribution to themselves and to all.") (James Moffatt

Are we wrong about II Cor. 9:12-13? Not at all. If authority for the church to support those who are not "saints" is found, it will have to be founelsewher e, for this passage just does not teach it.

"MAN, NOT GOD, IS FALLIBLE"

Maurice Jackson, Titusville, Florida

During the course of the past two years, whilestudying the American Standard Version Bible, botthe complete edition and the New Testament, I havediscovered a number of typographical errors in thetext. Seldom are such errors made, and thus I wasamazed to find them. They are as follows:

FULL BIBLE: 1 Samuel 15:24 (two words — hav(e) and (s)inned) Psalms

127:3 (one word— c( h) ildr en)Acts 2:18 (one word— (w)ill)

NEW TESTA MENT: Matthew 22:44 (one

word— (pocket size) (u) nderneath2 Timothy 2:2 (one word— last should read hast) Titus 2:15 (one word — eshort should read exhort

In Luke 7:41-43 Jesus compares two debtors,and asked the question, "Which . . . will lovehim most?" Simon answered, "He ... to whom he forgave the most." According to English grammatical construction the comparative "more" should appear rather than the superlative "most". (This is an error in translation, not a typographical error; neitheris the error to be attributed to Jesus!As a result of simple curiosity I wrote the

publishers, Thomas Nelson & Sons, concerningthe above. In addition, I asked if they were previously aware of these errors. The following is their explanation to me:

"Since the plates on these editions are veryold and worn, the letters sometimes disappear, as is the case here. I suspect that where incorrect letters appear, they had been inserted by the printer in place of letters that had disappeared. However, we have no records available to show that this is the case.

At Luke 7:41-43, English grammatical construction, of course, would demand "MORE" and not "MOST". We, as publishers, have noauthority to make such a change. To the best of my knowledge, the correction at Titus 2:15 ("eshort" instead of "exhort") is the only error previously brought to our attention." There mabe some who will so reason that if the Bible is wrong in these instances, then it does not mer it a following. Yet, to so reason is to express shallowness, because such are only errors of men involving the work of translation and publicationFor this reason all versions (translations) are subject to criticism and should be compared withthe original text for accuracy. We have not here the space for a study of internal evidences, but thediscerning Christian knows it is more rational tobelieve the Bible to be "A Special Divine Revelation," and that it will fur nish the man of God complete, unto every good work.

The translators and the publishers were notmiraculously inspired, thus they were subject tmake mistakes, but God is infallible. Thanks be to God, that through His divine providence, we havHis revealed word to man, which is "a lamp untoour feet, and a light unto our pathway."

COLLINS-CRAIG MEETING

Thomas G. O'Neal, Jasper, Alabama

From October 7 through 14, 1962, the Charlotte Avenue church of Christ sponsored the Collins-CraigAuditorium meeting in Nashville, Tennessee. Anumber of articles have come across my desk whictook the information concerning this modern da"revival" to task, calling for the SCRIPTURE thatauthorized such. Since this "revival" surely some thoughts in review are in order.

UNSCRIPTURAL

As one who is informed in the Scriptures looks atthis meeting, it speaks for itself as being unscriptural. The Charlotte Avenue church wasplanning a work that she knew when planning ithat she would not be able to pay for the cost. If an individual were to plan some program, knowing allthe time that he could not pay for it, the worldwould say he was dishonest. Thus the Charlotte Avenue church solicited money from churches in Nashville, middle Tennessee, and even out of state. I raise the question, where is the Bible authority foone church to take on a program of work and thenbeg money from churches to help her pay for it? Where is the passage in the New Testament where a church ever sent funds to another church for her to preach the gospel? Thus, when Charlotte Avenuedid that which there was not one verse of Scripture for, her action was unscr iptural.

DENOMINATIONAL

T he advertising of the meeting had the tone obeing some denomination putting on a "revival." The advertisements looked like what one would expect from Billy Graham or Oral Roberts, but not from the Lord's church. This "revival" called for directors, general chairman for attendance, with number of sub-chairmen under the director of the general chairman.

APPEAL

With such a big "revival" going on, one would not expect people to be appealed to attend upon thbasis that the pure, simple, gospel of Jesus Christ was going to be preached by a humble man of GodThus, practically everything else but the gospel was used to draw a crowd. People were appealed toattend upon the basis that: (1) the Gospel Advocate Company would give them a souvenir song book ofthe songs used each night, (2) the meeting was beingconducted in Nashville's new five million dollar auditorium, (3) the meeting marked the historic opening of the new municipal auditor ium, (410,000 people will be present for the event, (5) this effort would be the largest effort of its kind bchurches of Christ to preach the gospel, (6) there would be delegations from different areas of thestate coming in motorcades to this big event. In the pieces of literature that I have not one time was it announced as a "GOSPEL MEETING."

EMPHASIS

One may get the idea that the gospel of Chr ist was emphasized in this meeting. However, thadvertisements of the meeting prove otherwise. Inthe literature I possess, the college in Nashville was mentioned 11 times, the number of people expected was mentioned 19 times, the Gospel Advocate Company was mentioned 15 times, the new auditorium was mentioned 35 times, with theGOSPEL being mentioned 6 times.

WHERE IS INTEREST?

According to one source there are "Some 117 congregations" in the Nashville area "comprising some 40,000 Christians." It is really something tthink about that "some 117 congregations" and"some 40,000 Christians" in an area where the church of Christ is probably stronger numericallythan any place on earth, had to have support sent into Nashville in order to have a meeting. Maybe friend of mine was correct when he remarked sometime ago that Nashville was a good place to do some "mi ion work" and restore the New Testament Church.

LET'S PREACH THE OLD GOSPEL, BRETHREN

While liberal brethren will not stop with this kind of an effort, let all those who really love the Lord's Cause preach the gospel in any and every place the opportunity is afforded. Acts 28:30-31 practiced everywhere by every Christian will do more than many of the above kind of meetings.

Page 9

HOW FAR WOULD YOU WALK?

O. Fred Liggin, Jr.

"I'd walk a mile, cry or smile, for my Mama anDaddy, all because I love them so." How many times have you heard this song and said, "Yes, so wouldI"? We all have great love for our parents and this is good, provided we do not misplace that love. Yet I wonder how many people would still say, "Yes, so would I," if we changed the Mama and Daddy tGod and Jesus Christ! Not nearly as many, I am sure, would answer in the affirmative. Now, this is my question: How far would you walk to hear Christ's word proclaimed? Not long ago we had brother ride 130 miles on a bicycle to attend training cla . Incidentally, he is 70 years old. There were others who walked 30 to 40 miles to study. Yet today we know brethren who are notwilling to walk three blocks to services. We all know the Bible says "Go preach," but not many are willing to go. Why? If asked, "Do you love thLord?" you would say "yes". But do you love Hienough? Jesus said in John 14:15, "If ye love meye will keep my commandments." Now one of His commandments is to "go into all the world." Manydo not love the Lord enough to leave family anfriends and come to a foreign land to preach andteach God's word. True, many brethren have reasons for not being able to go, but there are many more who try to make reasons out of excuses. Which is your place, reason or excuse? Give yourself a test and see.

One might say, "Well, I know we are to go, bulook at our own people who are without the gospel."Granted there are many Americans who know notGod. In the days of the Apostles there were manin the land of Palestine who knew not God. Yet,did not brethren carry the news abroad? Yes! Whatare the possibilities of doing a good work in acountry like Africa? I might answer this in one ofmany ways; but let me show some po ibilities, some accomplishments and what lies ahead. Fir st of alllet me say that, "the field is white unto harvest but the laborers are few." Nearly every week wereceive many requests from people asking us to come and teach them. I now have in my office a letter from some people on Lake Nyasa asking us to come and preach. Another reports that we seem to haveforgotten the brethren at Mlowe. This is the congregation on the Lake shore, which can only bereached by foot. We are able to drive to the mountains overlooking the Lake. Then we have a 5 hour walk to Mlowe. Needle to say we have only been able tomake two trips down there.

We have had one gospel meeting and have twothers scheduled this month. There are 22 congregations in the Northern Province and only African evangelists and myself. I am the only person who drives; thus the preachers must go by footbicycle, if they have one (which most do not) ; oby bus. T hey go with me in the car when I am able to carry them. Their salaries are very small so thecannot afford to ride the bus to all of the places where they are needed. Even though I try to go to a different congregation every week, it still takes 22 weeks to make the rounds.

The opportunities for spreading the gospel here are unlimited. There are no restrictions on publicpreaching and it is always easy to gather a crowd for hearing the Word. There is no restriction onpa ing out tracts and they are always well received. T hrough our preaching, and teaching throughtracts, 242 have been baptized, and 112 restored to the Faith this year. Many others are anxious to hear the truth. Would you like to come and helpin this work? God needs you her e in Nyasaland and the Lord's church needs you. Please answer our call. — P. O. Rumpi, Nyasaland, Africa.

KOINONIA, "FELLOWSHIP," — No. 4

KOINONIA IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

In the best Greek text of the New Testament koinonia occurs 19 times. The term occurs 20 times in the Textus Receptus, which employs the noun inEph. 3:9. (Better Greek texts have oilonomia,"stewardship," here.) Barclay observes that koinonia occurs 18 times in the New Testament but he apparently counted the passages in which thterm occurs, instead of the occurrences themselves. (William Barclay, A New Testament Wordbook (New York: Harper and Bros., n. d.), p. 71.

The occurrences of koinonia in the New Testament may be placed into several distinct groups. These groups will reveal the nature andextent of the term.

"PARTNERSHIP IN A COMMON LIFE"

It seems to the author that in several passageskoinonia denotes "partnership in a common life," "friendship," "intimacy," in a common endeavor. This denotation implies full recognition of one another as partners striving similarly toward a common goal. T his seems to be the widest use of the term. Koinonia apparently has this significationin Acts 2:42; II Cor. 6:14; Gal. 2:9

Perhaps the significance of koinonia in Acts 2:42 is not easily seen. Lake and Cadbury observe that the term may denote either one of the following

(1) fellowship with the apostles (2) the communityof goods later practiced (3) the breaking of bread (4) almsgiving. (F. J. Foakes Jackson, and Kirsopp Lake, The Beginnings of Christianity,(London: MacMillan and Co., 1933), Vol. 4, p27.)

It does not seem likely to the author that koinonia in Acts 2:42 denotes the community of goods later practiced. Luke appears to introduce that practice a few verses later. There doesn't seem to be anynecessary connection at all between "the breakingof bread" and the term. Further, the special contribution would not likely be referr ed to atthis ear ly per iod in the history of the chur ch.

It seems most likely that the term denotes that partnership in a common life which was shared by the early Christians and the apostles; then, later,by the other Christians. This partnership in acommon life is beautifully expressed outwardly ithe "right hand of fellowship" (Gal. 2:9) ; that is,the right hand as an expression of their sense of partnership. Before this "right hand" Paul had been rather suspect as a true "partner" with th"pillars" in Jerusalem.

It is interesting to note that the Aramaic equivalent of koinonia, habhura, seems to have been in common use to describe a group of companions who shared a common life; particularly, those who united to celebrate a Common Pa over meal.

(G. H. C. Macgregor, The Interpreter's Bible, (NewYork: Abingdon Press, 1954), Vol. 9, p. 50.)

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

Lakeland, Florida November 28, 1962

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

Last January during my debate with W. L. Tottyin Clearwater, Florida, I was handed a statement purported to have been made by brother James R. Cope concerning his willingness to debate the subject of Institutionalism. I read this statement publicly and attributed it to brother Cope. Later I learned that the note was not written by brother Cope and that he did not authorize anyone to write it. To clarify the matter in the minds of all whoare interested, I here submit the statement I made in the debate, which statement was based on thestatement erroneously attributed to brother Cope

"All right, here I have a statement: 'brother James R. Cope will gladly debate the subject — institutionalism, such as orphans' homes, widows' homes, and so on— with brother Goodpasture or one of the presidents of one of the Christian colleges: the debate to be held at Florida Christian College andr epeated at the home city of the other debater.'

Now, brother Totty has a lot of influence — so he tells, and I accept his statement along that line

— with his brethren. Now, if he can get brother Goodpasture or one of the presidents of one of thecolleges to debate on these subjects, brother Cope says the auditorium in Tampa, Florida, is open for such a debate. They say it is open for such a debate."

When brother Cope learned that the above

statement was being used he wrote me that he had

never made this statement, did not write it or

authorize anyone to make it. I trust that this is a satisfactory explanation othis matter. I regret whatever damage may havbeen done to any person by it. I did act in goofaith at the time. In the interest of fairness to brother Cope I hope everyone will give the same prominence to this statement that has been givento the statement I made in the debate.

Glenn R. Sheumaker, Sr.

GET THAT ENVELOPE WITH YOUR RENEWAL IN THE MAIL TODAY. IT IS TIME TO RENEW.

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

Owen H. Thomas, Waynesville, Ohio— I began work with the

Third Street church of Christ in Waynesville, August 1, 1962.

We have baptized two and two have been restored. My address

is: 141— 5th St., Rt. #3, Waynesville, Ohio. Jerry Belchick, Orlando, Fla.— Since the first of September

we have had eleven place membership with the Azalea Park

congregation. Attendance has averaged between 90 and 10

for the Sunday morning ser vices and the contribution has

averaged between $130 and $150 per Sunday. The church is

working together in harmony and the prospects for growth

ar e ver y bright. Leonard Tyler of Pine Bluff, Ark. was in a very good

meeting at North Street, Tampa, Fla., November 4-11.

Paul Andrews, who preaches at North Street, says the

following of that meeting: "This was our most successful

meeting from several standpoints. Bro. Leonard Tyler was

everything we hoped for. He preached the word without fear

or favor. North Street members were as faithful as any

congregation we have ever seen. But probably the most

outstanding thing about the meeting was the fact that mor e

than sixty adults, who are not Christians, heard the gospel.

This is true because Christians worked. Some brought three

different families. Surely this meeting was a fine

demonstration of our love, faith and zeal." Three were

baptized and two placed member ship.

H. Ernest Shoaf, Concord, N. C.— After spending nin

months with the church in Ocoee, Florida, we have moved t

Concord, North Carolina. There are thirty members that

are sound in the faith. They are planning to start a new

church building right away. The population of Concord is

about twenty thousand, and Kannapolis is closely by with about

thirty thousand, with a congr egation of about fifty

members. This is a ripe harvest field. While in Ocoee

Florida there were twenty-eight responses with fourteen

baptisms. Ross O. Spears, Tompkinsville, Ky.— The Grandview church

of Christ of T ompkinsville, Kentucky began meeting in it

newly constructed building November 19, 1962. Grandview

is composed of sound brethren dedicated to the preservation

of the whole truth. For the past eight months the

congr egation met in the High School building. Now after

much work and sacrifice the building is completed.

Although we ar e heavily in debt we have faith that we ca

discharge our obligations for all "have a mind to work."

This congregation will be of much strength for the future

in this section of Kentucky in its stand for the old paths. We

have just closed a meeting with the following speakers: H. E.

Winkler, Emmet Creacy, Charles Holden, Randall

McPherson, B. G. Hope, Ferrell Jenkins and Charles Brown.

At present I am working with the congregation. Worship

with us when visiting this section. Jimmy T uten, Jr., St. Louis, Mo.— During the week of

October 14-21, brother Leslie Diestlekamp preached in a

meeting at Spring & Blaine. The services were characterized

with good interest and excellent preaching throughout. There

were three responses during the meeting. After the meetin

there have been four responses, one of which renounced the

Christian Church after seeing some of the errors within it.

The church here is at peace and it is a pleasure to be

wor king with it. Hugh W. Davis, Lake Wales, Fla.— We've just finished a

good meeting here with Connie W. Adams. Attendance was

excellent, specially from the community. In fact, interest was

probably best in the history of the church here. I begin

Sunday, Nov. 11, with the Pine Hills church in Orlando. Eugene Britnell, Little Rock, Ark.— The work here looks

encour aging. We have just closed a good meeting wit

Her schel Patton doing the pr eaching.

E . L. Flannery of Gainesville, Fla. was in a meeting a

Lake Wire in Lakeland, Fla. Nov 25-Dec. 2. Thomas G. Butler

is the preacher at Lake Wire . . . E. Lacy Porter was in a meeting at Joliet, Ill. with James W. Sasser in November . . .

Grover Stevens moved from Wendell Avenue church in

Louisville, Ky. to labor with the Park Blvd. church in the

same city . . . Harold Sharp of Conway, Ark. was in a meeting

at Kirkwood church in St. Louis, Mo., Nov. 25-Dec. 2 ...

Marshall E. Patton of Orlando, Fla. closed a meeting with the

7th Street chur ch in Meridian, Mi . November 18. A. C.

Grider recently moved from Louisville, Ky. to work with this

chur ch in Meridian . . . B. G. Hope of Bowling Gr een, Ky.

was with Oaks Gowen in a meeting at Bradenton, Fla. which

closed Nov. 11. Roy E. Cogdill was in a meeting at the First Street church

in Lawrenceburg, Tenn. in November. Weldon Warnock is the

preacher at First Street .. . A series of meetings was con

ducted late in November at the Grandview Church in

Tompkinsville, Ky. with a differ ent speaker each night. Ross

O. Spears is the preacher at Grandview . . . David Claypool

recently moved from Louisville, Ky. to begin work with the

Franklin Road church in Nashville, Tenn. He was the speaker

in a meeting with that church Nov. 11-18 . . . Ferrell Jenkins,

who r ecently moved fr om St. Louis, Mo. to labor with the

West End chur ch in Bowling Gr een, Ky., was in a meeting

at West End which closed Nov. 18 .. . Conway Skinner was

in a meeting on South Court St. in Montgomer y, Ala., Nov.

25 to Dec. 4 ... Yater Tant was in a meeting at North

Birmingham church in Birmingham, Ala., Nov. 11-18 . . .

Thomas G. O'Neal was in a meeting at Morehead City, N. C,

Nov. 5-Dec. 2 ... Ernest Shaof recently moved to Concord,

N. C. . . . Grover Stevens was in a November meeting with

the Fairview church in Birmingham, Ala. Howar d See

preaches at Fairview . . . Dennis Reed was with Bobby K

Thompson Nov. 25-Dec. 2 in a meeting at North Miami church

in Miami, Fla. Reed preaches for the Berney Point church in

Birmingham, Ala. Ferrell Jenkins of West End church in Bowling Green, Ky.

will present a series of lectures on Evidences of Christianity

at Central church in Owensboro, Ky., Dec. 25-29 . . . James

P. Miller was in a good meeting with the Par Avenue church

in Orlando, Nov. 25-Dec. 2. Marshall Patton is the preacher

at Par Avenue. There were 16 r esponses during the meeting

. . . Grover Stevens will be in a meeting at New Hold church

near Big Clifty, Ky., Dec. 2-9. Forest Hurst preaches at New

Hope . . . Robert Crawley moved from Belview Heights in

Birmingham, Ala. to work with the church in Lexington, Ky.

. . . Rufus R. Clifford of Eastland church in Nashville, Tenn.

was with the Seventh Avenue church in Miami, Fla. in

meeting November 4 . . . J. T. Smith is the new preacher for

the Belmont Heights church in Tampa, Fla. Baxter Evans,

formerly of Belmont Heights, is now working with the ne

church in Lacys Springs, Ala. Leslie E. Sloan is doing a good work in Jasper, Ga. He

recently moved to this area from Palmetto, Fla. He is

supported by the North Miami church in Miami, Fla. . . . Paul

Andrews of North Street in Tampa, Fla. was in a meeting at

Belmont Heights in Tampa November 25-Dec. 1. J. T. Smith

is the pr eacher at Belmont Heights.

SNELL-STUMBO DEBATE

A. C. Grider On the nights of January 14-15 and 17-18 brother J. R.

Snell and br other Stumbo will engage in debate at Butler ,

Mo. I will moderate for brother Snell. Propositions will deal

with Benevolent Institutions and Sponsoring Churches.

Specifically, the propositions are the same as in the tw

Cogdill-Woods debates and the Grider-Woods debate.

Brother Snell moved to Butler several months ago and his

teaching has had its effect. I think a debate in that section

will do a lot of good. It is to be hoped that br other Rue

Porter and others of the liberal persuasion will get behin

Stumbo and that we can have a representative debate.

Remember the dates.

SCRIPTURAL ELDERS AND DEACONS 'A Study of Church Organization" by

H. E. Phillips

A book every elder, deacon, preacher and Christian should

read in the light of God's word. I ues revolving around "Church Organization" are ever present with us. A thorough scriptural studyof this important subjecEighteen chapters dealing indetail with the or ganization of the church, qualifications and duties of elders and deacons, and duties of the church toward them. Over 300 pages of easily read type, cloth bound.A complete scriptural index in the back of the book plus references to standard works in the text. Chapters discuss: "The Na ture of Church Organization"; Perverted Organiza tions in the Church": "The

Scripturally Organized Church"; "No Elder Theory"; "The

Relationship— Apostles, Elders, Preachers"; "The Eldership and

Apostasy"; "The Authority of the Eldership", "Scriptural

Appellations of the Oversight of the Church"; "Attitudes Toward

Qualifications of Elders and the Consequences"; "The

Qualifications of An Elder"; "The Duties of the Eldership";

"Duties of the Church Toward the Elders"; "Ordaining o

Elders"; "The Office of Deacon", "The Qualifications of

Deacons"; "Duties of Deacons and the Church"; "Concerning

Wives of Officers of the Church"; "Questions and Answers".

Cloth bound -$3.75

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE SO-CALLED CHURCH OF GOD?

This is a book of debate notes used by Brother Miller in his debates with Thomas O. Dennis and Billy Sunday Myers of the "Chur ch of God" in the spring and fall of 1956 These debates were held in Charleston, South Carolina and Lancaster, South Carolina

The book is well worth the price of $1.50 Those who are interested in knowing the falsepositions of the "Church of God" will gr eatly benefit by

r eading this wor k Or der your

copy today

Price $1.50

BOOK-MILLER DEBATE

"Instrumental Music In Worship"

Morris Butler Book of the Christian Church and James Parker Miller of the church of Christ discussed the question of instrumental music in the worship in the Howar d High School auditorium in Orlando, Florida, March 15, 16, 17, 1955 Large crowds heard every session of this debate. It is one of the finest in print. This book is the debate exactly as it was presented by Book and Miller.

Cloth bound — $2.50

WHAT IS THE CHURCH OF CHRIST?

by H. E. Phillips

This 24 page booklet is designed to help "strangers to the covenant of promise" have a better understanding of what the church of Christ really is, and how it differs from present denominationalism. It is divided into three parts: "The Church in the Days of the Apostles", "Denominationalism of Today"; "The Church of Christ Today". An excellent book to hand to your denominational friends.

Paper bound — $ .25