STS Apr 1969

Volume 10 April, 1969 Number 4

WHAT IS FAITH?

H. E . Phillips

The religious world today relies greatly upon whatit pleases to call "saving faith" to produce salvation and eternal life. I believe there is a such a thing as saving faith, but I do not accept the definition givento it by denominationalism. Such terms as "accepting Christ as your personal Saviour," "believing ithe Lord Jesus," and "getting saving faith" are frequently used by the sectarian preachers. But what does the Bible say about faith that saves?

Especially in the epistles written to the Romans and Galatians the contrast is drawn between "faith" and "works of the law of Moses." "This only would Ilearn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" (Gal. 3.2)

While the works of the law will not justify, thework of obedience to the faith is essential to the faith which saves. "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (James 2:24). Icontrast to this we read: "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).the answer to this seeming conflict between these two passages is easily understood if we learn that the same kind of "works" is not under consideration in both passages. One is the works of the law of Moses whereby the Jews sought salvation, and the other is the obedience to the faith whereby the obedient believer is saved from past sins.

1. Faith is a mental act. It is the act of the mind in accepting as true the testimony given. "But without faith it is impo ible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that heis a rewarder of them that diligently seek him"(Heb. 11:6). "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3). In Romans 10:10 welearn that the instrument of belief is the heart — the mind of man. "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confe ion is made unto salvation." The gospel, therefore, is addressed to the hearing of man: to his heart, forthis is the part that believes. But is this mental act all that is involved in the idea of the faith that saves ? Is that what the Spirit meant when He said Abraham was justified by faith? Was it just a mental act andnothing more?

2. Faith is spoken of as that body of truth delivered by the Holy Spirit which produces belief in the heart. John said: "And many other signs truly diJesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not wr itten in this book: but these ar e wr itten, that yemight believe that Jesus is the Chr ist, the Son ofGod; and that believing ye might have life throughhis name" (John 20:30,31). Again, "But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith (revelation) of Jesus Christ might be givento them that believe" (the mental act of receivingthe truth -Rom. 10:17) (Gal. 3:22). The next verse says: "But before faith (revelation of Christ) came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faithwhich should afterwards be revealed." Now verse

25: "But after that faith (the revelation of Chr ist — the gospel) is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster" (the law of Moses). Jude 3 says: " ... it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you thatye should earnestly contend for the faith (revelation of Christ) which was once delivered unto the saints."

The mental action of believing rests solely upowhat is revealed by the Holy Spirit in the New Testament, which is called "faith." Without a "thus saith the Lord" there can be no belief in the Bible sense of the word.

3. Faith also includes the response to any and all requirements that the body of truth delivered byChrist contains. No one can claim to have the faith that saves until and unless he responds to those requirements the faith demands.

Hebrews 11 contains a list of men who were blessed by faith and in each case the ble ing came at the point of response to what truth demandedNotice these statements: "By faith Noah ... movedwith fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house" (vs. 7). "By faith Abraham ... obeyed; and he wentout, not knowing whither he went" (vs. 8). "By faith Abraham, when he as tried offered up Isaac ..." (Vs. 17). "By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land . . ." (Vs. 29). "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed aboutseven days" (vs. 30).

The faith that saves is that state of mind that accepts the revelation of Christ and responds twhatever requirements are found in it to receive the promised ble ing. If one should hear the word, believe the word — mentally accept it as true— but will not obey the requirements contained in it, he will no more be saved than the devils who believe in this way (James 2:19). This is the true doctrine of "faith only" or "salvation at the point of faith."

Following are some passages that prove that faith must be obeyed before it blesses. "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven! but he that doeth the will of myFather which is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21). "... and a great company of the priests were obedient to thefaith" (Acts 6:7). "But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from theheart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became theservants of righteousness (Rom. 6:17-18). One must OBEY the Faith (truth) to be saved by faith.

"Enclosed are three dollars for which please renew my subscription to Searching The Scriptures, which I have appreciated very much over the years. It contains so many articles that do such a marvelous job in clarifying hard to understand sections of the Bible. Particular mention is due to brother Patton's answer to the question regarding the 25th chapter of Matthew, as to which statements were referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, and which to thesecond coming of Christ." — Willie T. Gooch, Florence, Ala.

"We think you are going a fine work and we enjoy the paper." — Carl L. Matthews, West Point, Ky.

"May the Lord continue to bless you in your work. I deeply appreciate the paper and believe you are accomplishing great good." — Granville, Tyler, Decatur, Ala.

"It is an outstanding paper and I would like to encourage you to keep up the good work." — Carl P. McMurray, Huntsville, Ala.

"Searching The Scriptures" continues to be a most excellent paper. Your uncompromising stand for thetruth has, and will continue to be, a powerful force for good." — Sam L. Youree, Nashville, Tenn.

"I would like to commend you on the good job you are doing in spreading the gospel. I wish everyonecould read your paper. I certainly enjoy it, and looforward to its coming every month." — Joe Davis,Santa Susana, Calif.

"Keep up the good work."— Robert Jackson, Nashville, Tenn.

"We enjoy the paper very much." — R. H. Settles,Clinton, Utah.

"We continue to enjoy your fine publication." —Clayton M. Adams, Garden City, Ga

"We enjoy the magazine." — Alice E. McDonald,

Taylors, S. C.

"I have been greatly benefited by reading eac

month everything published in Searching The Scrip

tures. We wish for you continued success in your

work." — H. Ernest Shoaf, Jonesboro, Tenn.

"I believe that Searching The Scriptures gets

better as time goes by. Keep up the good work." —

Tom Wheeler, Frostproof, Fla

"I like Searching The Scriptures very much. Keep

up the good work." — M. L. Johnson, Pensacola, Fla.

"You and brother Miller do a very good job with

the paper. I look forward to getting it each month."

— Clark C. Buzbee, York, Ala

You are doing a good job with the paper, and myprayers are with you in this great effort to teach the Truth." — Robert Jackson, Nashville, Tenn.

"Keep up the good work in publishing SearchingThe Scriptures." — C. L. Bennett, Lawrenceville, Ga

"I have enjoyed your Searching The Scriptures for

the past 4 years. It is one of the best papers I have

read and look forward to receiving it every month."

— Roy F. Bunting, Barnesville, Ohio

"I enjoy all the articles, but especially the answers

to questions by brother Marshall E. Patton." —

Mavis Jackson, Cincinnati, Ohio

"We enjoy Searching The Scriptures. Keep up the

good work." — J. B. McInturff, Rector, Ark.

"I continue to appreciate the very fine work you

are doing with your paper, and I know it is appre

ciated by many people." — Vestal Chaffin, Louisville,

Ky.

"You are doing a wonderful job; keep it up." —

Edgar C. Walker, Flint, Mich.

"I would hate to miss an issue of Searching The

Scriptures, as it has many fine ARTICLES." — Ray

Harris, Terre Haute, Ind.

"I still like the paper fine and find that most, if

not all, of my conservative brethren do also."— Cecil

Justice, Bowling Green, Ky"I continue to appreciate your fine paper." — Edward O. Bragwell, Grenada, Miss.

"May God bless you all in the work of presenting

truth." — Mrs. E. Krumrei, Ambert, Wise.

"We enjoy the paper and I 'm gr ateful that yo

kept it coming." — Anna Mae Manix, Tampa, Fla

"It is an excellent paper. You are doing a fine job

with it." — John H. Gerrard, Kokomo, Ind.

"I really benefit from the paper ... Keep up th

good fight!" — David E. Curtis, Yuma, Ariz.

"I continue to enjoy and appreciate the good

articles in your paper." — Owen H. Thomas, Akron,

Ohio.

"I enjoy reading your publication. May the Lord

continue to bless this work." — Lindy McDaniel,

Baytown, Texas.

PSYCHOLOGICAL ARGUMENTATION

Many arguments made on the polemic platform are neither scriptural nor logical but psychological.They make an appeal to the galleries. Vernon L. Barr,well known Baptist preacher, has a good psychological argument and uses it every time he gets in atight. When pressed with many scriptures on thesubject of baptism, being unable to answer, he digs up this old argument and uses it. The argument goes something like this, "Now the difference between myopponent and me is that he has trusted the ordinance of baptism to save him but the Lord saved me." This sounds good to the ignorant and unlearned but is ridiculous to the informed child of God. The purpose is to leave the impression that members of the church have put their faith in an ordinance rather than the Lord.

Let me analyze the argument and test its true merit. First, this same theory would upset Barr's own idea of salvation at the point of faith. One couldsay "Now the difference between Barr and me is that he has trusted in faith and repentance to save him but the Lord saved me". One might go on to say,

"Now the difference between Mr. Barr and me is that he has trusted in grace, mercy and love to save him but I have trusted in Jesus to save me". T his points out the absurdity of such reasoning. Certainly, wall believe the Lord must save but the question is HOW does the Lord save? In Hebrews 5:9, Paulsays, "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him". T hus, we can see that one must obey before he can hope to be saved. This obedience embodies faith, repentance, confe ion and baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38)

The psychological impact of the above argument is alarming. This argument is used when Baptist preachers get in a tight and are stalling for time; itmakes good filler material. These people abuse the word LORD just as they abuse the word FAITH. It is true we are saved by the Lord but the question is how does the Lord save ? The answer is by obedienceto His word (Heb. 5:8). It is true that we are saved by faith but the question is by faith WHEN? T he answer is when we obey His will. Baptists people for years have implied that we do not believe in faithThis is far from the truth. The truth of the matter is that we believe in faith stronger than they. James

2:24 says, "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by faith only". E xamples of this have given Baptist preachers trouble for years. Theydo not like the example of Joshua and the Walls of Jericho. They know that God had given unto thethe City by grace but they did not receive it untiltheir faith had culminated in obedience. It was necessary for the children of Israel to obey God bymarching around the city before the ble ing was received. When God told the Jews that they had tlook upon the brazen serpent before they could behealed, he again certified that obedience is necessary.These two illustrations from the Old Testament have given Baptist preachers no little trouble. In the New Testament when Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:15,16), He confirms that fact that no man is saved until he has obeyed. Being baptized for the remission of sins is salvation by faith. When one submits unto the waters of baptism his faith has moved him to do what Godsays. This cannot be called water salvation anymore than the marching of Israel could be called walkinsalvation. May the Lord help all to see the difference in a scriptural argument and a psychological one.

A CATHOLIC QUESTION ... AND IT ANSWER

In the St. Louis Register, a Roman Catholic publication, for Friday, Sept. 9th, in the column entitled;"Ask and Learn", the following question was asked. We copy both the question and its answer by thCatholic columnist.

"Will you tell me something about the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg? A friend of minerecommended that I read a Swedenborg book."

ANS. "Emanuel Swedenborg, who lived from 1688 to 1773, established the Church of the New Jerusalem, members of which are commonlknown as the Swedenborgians. His sect resembles that of the Mormons, for it is built onChristianity but claims to have received and additional revelation. For instance, Swedenborgheld that he had received a revelation that the Last Judgment was to take place in 1757

'"Born into' Lutheranism, Swedenborg rejected several tenets of that sect, such as salvation by faith alone, and in some respects approachedteachings of Catholicity. But though a scientific man, Swedenborg fell into many errors, such as the denial of the Three Persons in the Most HolyTrinity. His works have elements in them resembling also Chr istian Science and false mysticism.

"Historically, of course, Swendenborg's sect is just another error in the religious history ofthe world. It can have no divine foundation, as the Catholic Church has, and is unable to prove the authenticity of the revelation it claims to have received. "Swendenborg's books should not be read by a

Catholic, and no Catholic can benefit from read-ingthem." (Emphasis mine. L.W.M.) We can prettywell agree with and go along with the Catholic columnist down to the place where he states that,"Swedenborg's sect is just another error in the religious history of the world." He points out that it can have no divine foundation "as the Catholic Church has..." And at this point, we have come to the parting of the ways

The Roman Catholic Church HAS NO DIVINE FOUNDATION, nor can she prove the authenticityof the revelation that SHE has claimed to have received. We submit some syllogisms which will pointedly serve to show her false assumptions.

Some Sample Syllogisms

1. T he Holy Spir it guided the apostles into alltruth (John 15:26-27 & 16:13).

2. But the Holy Spir it did not guide the apostles into Roman Catholicism.

3. There, Roman Catholicism is NOT of the truth.

The Apostle Paul kept back nothing in his teaching that was profitable (Acts 20:20).
But the Apostle Paul never once mention theRoman Catholic Church.
Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church is spiritually unprofitable.

The Apostle Paul declared ALL of God's counsel (Acts 20:27).
But the Apostle Paul never once mentioned the Roman Catholic Church.
Therefore, the Roman Catholic religion is notpart nor parcel of God's counsel.

The Apostle Paul WROTE the commandments of God for Christians (I Cor. 14:37)

Jesus Christ is the HEAD of HIS church (Eph.5:23)
But the Pope of Rome is the HEAD of the Roman Catholic Church.
Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church is NOT the church of Christ.

1. Christ's church must be subject unto Christ

(Eph. 5:24).

But the Roman Catholic Church is subject untothe Pope of Rome.
Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church is NOT Christ's church.

The Scripture furnishes the man of God unto ALL good works (II Tim. 3:15-17)
But the Roman Catholic Church insists upontraditions and Papal decrees.
Therefore, Roman Catholic teachings based upon traditions and Papal decrees, are NOT GOOD WORKS.

But Roman Catholicism forbids priests and nuns to marry, and command abstinence from meats at certain times and seasons.

The Apostle Paul pronounced a curse on those who would preach ANOTHER gospel (Gal. 1:8-9)

The above syllogisms should be sufficient to set forth in a simple manner, the failure of the Roman Catholic Church to harmonize with the teachings of the New Testament.

Censorship or Thought Control

Did you notice the last paragraph of the Catholic priest-columnist's reply

"Swedenborg's books should not be read by

Catholic, and no Catholic can benefit from read

ing them."

Here we have an explicit sample of Catholic thought control being exercised. If Catholicism actually had the TRUTH to offer to the people of theworld, she would not be afraid of her children readingany book! If they possessed the TRUTH, they wouldbe able to withstand any false teaching. Paul said that he was set for the defense of the gospel. In the 17th Chapter of Acts, he even quoted from the writings of heathen poets in order to make his TRUTH stand. But not Catholicism ... if she has her way, her subjects will have knowledge of NOTHING ... exceptthat which she places her own imprimatur upon.

Let us not forget that Jesus Christ taught..."... Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

----------------o------------

THE HOLY SPIRIT AND VERBAL INSPIRATION

J. T. Smith

There are many in the church and in the religious world that deny the "verbal inspiration" of the Bible,that it often scares us when we think what the outcome might be. It is bad enough to have those in the religious world deny that the Bible is a verballyinspired book; but when those who are members of the Lord's church deny this fact, it is even more deplorable. If the things written were just the thoughts of men, then how are they any better than thethoughts of men today?

The word "verbal" means, "that which is stated,said, or expressed." The word "inspired" means, "to breathe." Hence, when we talk about "verbal inspiration," we are simply saying "the word that Godbreathed out that is stated, said, or expressed." This statement is made plain in II Tim. 3:16 when Paulsaid, "All scripture is given by inspiration ofGod..." and is literally from the Greek "Every scripture is God-breathed." Thus, to deny verbal inspiration is to deny the plain teachings of the Bible. T his we shall attempt to further prove from thBible in this article.

The Lord Jesus Christ commi ioned his apostles to go into the city of Jerusalem and wait until theywould be endued with power from on high (Luke 24:49). There was a purpose behind this command the Lord gave these men. They were not even allowed to speak what they had seen and heard while with the Lord; but were to simply be "earthen vessels"used as instruments to carry God's Message. (II Cor. 4:7; Acts 1:2). God wanted to make sure that human weaknesses did not put his word in jeopardy, henceHe directed them as to what they should say. Christ's teachings in the gospels bears this out clearly

Jesus said, "He that loveth me not keepeth not my

sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but

the Father 's which sent me" ( John 14:24). T he

words which were spoken by Jesus were not His

own — they were given Him of His Father. Hence,

they were words that were inspired. But, not only were the words spoken by Jesus that which theFather had given, but Christ said, "Howbeit, whehe, the Spir it of truth is come, he will guide yointo all the truth; for he shall not speak of himself;but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak:and he will show you things to come" (John 16:13).I want to call special attention to the point Christ made with reference to the Spirit not speaking "ohimself." Oft times we tend to think of the word "of" that is translated here, as meaning "about.That is, the Spirit would not talk "about" himself,but he would speak "about" whomsoever it was givenhim to speak. This, however, is not the meaning othe word "of" that is used here in the King James Version. The word "of" is perhaps translated more nearly correct in the American Standard Version when the word "from" is used. It is translated from a form of the Greek preposition "apo" (aph) and is "used with the genitive only and denotes separation or departure from something— of the place from which it departed" (Goodwin's Greek Grammer, p255). Hence, the place "from which" the truth would come was not only the Holy Spirit, but He was goingto speak the things He heard.

Why then, should we be so amazed that the words that were spoken and written did not come from the apostles — but from God. Paul said, "... the gospelwhich was preached of me is not after man. For Ineither received it of man, neither was I taught it ofman, but by revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 2:1213). And, Paul also affirms exactly what Jesus said about the Spirit. "Now we have received not thespirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of Godthat we might know the things that are freely given us of God. Which things we also speak, not in thewords which man's wisdom teacheth, but which thHoly Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual" (I Cor. 2:12-13). Christ also told his disciples in Matt. 10:18-20, that they would bbrought before governors and kings for his name's sake. When that occurred, they were to "take no thought how or what ye shall speak; for it shall begiven you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you." So, Jesus said their speechwould not be their own, but it would be given themof the Spirit, (cf. with the comments made on John16:13).

Yes, the Bible is verbally inspired. It is not thatwhich the apostles thought about the matter, buthat which was given them of God by the Spirit tospeak and write. For Paul said, "If any man thinhimself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are thecommandments of the Lord." (I Cor. 14-37). Sowhether spoken or written, they are the words that God breathed.

300 HaynesSt.

Dayton, Ohio 45410

-------------o------------

FLORIDA STATE SALES TAX

Beginning at once, please add 4% sales tax on all subscriptions, books and tape or der s sold in the state of Florida.

THE "DAYS" OF CREATION (GEN. 1 AND 2)

— LITERAL OR FIGURATIVE? (No. 2)

As mentioned in the last i ue, and according tosound rules of hermeneutics, the term "days" in Gen. 1 (as in all literature) is to be accepted in its normal, ordinary meaning, unless the context rules against it or determines otherwise. This is true of all 14 times "day" is used in Gen. 1, EXCEPT vs. 4 and 5 where it is used in contrast with "night" andhence refers to the light part of the 24 hour cyclewhile night refers to the dark portion. In Gen. 2:"Day" refers to a SPECIFIC period of time, for theCONTEXT shows it denotes the entire period ofcreative activity prior to the time when God rested as He ENDED such CREATIVE work. A parallelcontext where the normal usage for "day" is foundis Num. 7:1-2, 10, 12, 18, 24, but verse 84, referringto this very same period of time, uses "day" in this EXCEPTIONAL sense. But in ALL OTHER PASSAGES IN Gen. 1 and 2 "Day" must be accepted inthe normal, ordinary sense just as we would in Gen. 7-10-12, 17, 24 or Gen. 8:3-5, 12-14.

There are times when "day" is used in a figurative (exceptional) way but, again context will show this by the use of qualifying words or phrases. It could involve a time of judgment or of grace. E xamples of such usage are, "the Day of Salvation," "the Dayof the Lord," "the Day of visitation." But in Gen. 1 and 2 there are NO qualifying words or phrase(save the exceptions cited) and the recurring interchange of Day and Night, E vening and Morning,Light and Darkne , should cause anyone to see that a 24 hour day is involved. We also noted that the sun and moon were to so function as to make po ible seasons, days and years and everyone should know what this means and what these two heavenlybodies do (Gen. 1:14-15). But vs. 16 also tells us the sun was to "rule the day" and the moon was to "rule the night." Now, if these two actions do not makeone 24 hour day what do these expressions mean?an age? an eon? multiplied millions of years? Did the sun hold sway, shining in all its power and brilliance, for a million years and then the moon takeover for a similar million years ? How can we make the light and darkness of Day and Night anythingbut what we see in operation today — the completecycle of one day? (see material in CRS Annual 1965,pp 7-13, also Bible-Science Newsletters, June 1966and Jan. 1966. These various articles have all been put in booklet form)

We also note that the "days," we have under consideration in Gen. 1, follow one another consecutively and are NUMBERED ONE THROUGH SIX. Authorities know of no instance where "day," associated with a numeral, means anything but an ordinary day. How can the 14th or 15th day of Nissan involve an age or eon? Where does the first or seventh "day" of the week mean millions or billions of years ? Arthur C. Custance at one time sent a letter to nine contemporary Hebrew scholars, members of the faculties of the leading universities, three eachin England, Canada and the United States. He askedthem questions about the meaning of the Hebrew word "yom" (day) in Genesis 1. He asked them if"yom," when accompanied by a numeral, could beproperly translated as (a) a day commonly understood, (b) an age, (c) an age or day, without preference for either? ALL who replied (seven of thenine) stated that it means "a day commonly understood." Constance, Between The Lines: An Analysis of Genesis 1:1-2, Doorway Papers No. 11, p. 36.

The interpretation of "yom" as a solar day is the interpretation which other scriptures indicate. In Exod. 20:8-11, the Sabbath is instituted and the passage states that because God worked six days andceased his CREATIVE ACTIVITY on the seventh they are to work six days and rest the seventh day. The week (SIX DAYS) of creation is tied to Israel's six work days prior to a day of rest. Days are directly related to days. After God told His people toremember and keep the sabbath Day he said, "six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work, but theseven day is the sabbath of the Lord — FOR, in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and the sea and all that in them is and rested the seventh day,WHEREFORE the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." (My emphasis, which shows one is"tied" to the other — P.F.) Now in this section ofscripture we find the words "day" or "days" six different times. By what kind of interpretation twisting and torturing and hermenutical acrobatics canwe make four of these actual, ordinary "days" and the other two figurative indefinite periods of timesuch as ages or eons?

The Sabbath command can be adequately understood ONLY when the days of the week are considered as solar days. Six days of 24 hours eachfollowed by another such period when God rested since he had CEASED from all such creative activity— this alone can furnish a CONSISTENT ANALOGY for the command given to Israel to work six days and then rest on the seventh. So the words and terms in Gen. 1 and 2 are very simple and ordinary. The "days" are associated with a numeral and eachday's cycle is tied together by evening and morning with its darkness and light so we must conclude with Delitzsch that they MUST BE REGARDED NOTAS PERIODS OF TIME, INVOLVING THOUSANDS AND MILLIONS OF YEARS, BUT AS ORDINARY, SIMPLE EARTHLY DAYS.

(To be concluded)

THE NASHVILLE DENOMINATIONAL CHURCH OF CHRIST

I have before me a copy of a sermon preached bybrother John McRay on May 12, 1968, at the Otter Creek Road church in Nashville, Tenn. and sent to me by him. T he title of the sermon is "T he Need For Unity." It would be more fitting to call the sermon, "The Way to Compromise the Truth of the Gospel with the Denominations." For the next several months in SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES I want to notice some things that are said in this sermon. I do this because (1) some one who read or heard thesermon might also see these articles, (2) to point out the liberal attitude that some of the brethren have toward the Bible, and (3) to warn brethren of the departures from the faith.

John R. McRay received his B.A. from Lipscomb in 1955 and his M.A. from Harding in 1956. He later taught at Harding and then took a leave of absence in June, 1962, to work on a doctorate at the University of Chicago. McRay was for a time the associate preacher for the Hillsboro church in Nashville where Batsell Barrett Baxter is the preacher and where B.

C. Goodpasture, editor of the Gospel Advocate, is an elder. When I received this sermon from him he was on the faculty at Lipscomb. I take it he is the preacher for the Otter Creek Road church in Nashville.

He begins his sermon by telling about a conversation with a man from one of the schools operated by the Christian Church. In the first paragraph of his sermon he tells some interesting things about this man. McRay says, "I was very interested to learn that this man was a member of the church of Christ. He wears the name church of Christ; the church of which he is a member wears this name." This is indeed interesting when McRay tells us that this church uses instrumental music in their services. It takes more than just wearing the name "church of Christ" to make it a church of Christ. The expression "church of Christ" denotes that the church is "of Christ" or is following Jesus Christ. I would be happy to haveeither McRay or another to cite to us the divine passage where Christ or his apostles ever authorized the use of instrumental music in the worship of God. How can a church be "of Christ" when it is doing something not authorized by Him? We are told that this man is a church of Christ. But no Bible verse was given to prove it. When men followed Christ to obeying the gospel to the salvation of their souls in New Testament times the Bible calls them Christians, Acts 11:26; not a church of Christ.

Next we are told that these churches of Christ which are Christian Churches "are dedicated to the principles of the Restoration Movement." In another place, I read the other day where the principles of the Restoration Movement were held up as the standard by which churches should be patterned rather than being patterned after the New Testament. That men in the Restoration Movement were seeking to return to the Bible, I would not deny. However, our standard is not the Restoration Movement. Our standard is the Word of God. This is the reason why these liberal churches are getting away from the Bible; they are using something else as their pattern. The New Testament presents the perfect pattern for the church.The Restoration Movement does not.

We are told that these Christian Churches, called incorrectly churches of Christ, have "Christian Colleges in this country, seven of them" in number. How come they have colleges? The reason is they do not follow the New Testament. No New Testament church ever had its own college like Lipscomb. If so, where is the verse that proves it?

We are told by McRay, "The only difference between us that I could find in our conversation was that they used an instrument of music, whereas wedidn't." This is interesting when we consider that McRay says, "They accept the New Testament as authority, as I do." McRay is correct in this last statement because neither are willing to accept the authority of the New Testament of Jesus Christ. But McRay and those with him in liberal churches are working on getting this difference taken care of in the not too distant future. Many churches of McRay's knowledge will bring the instrument in for a wedding and one of these days it will be forgotten and left in the building. In fact, it would be interesting to know how many so called churches of Christ in Nashville right now have an instrument in their building.

It would be something I would like to hear when McRay tried to tell someone why they did not use instrumental music in their services. Would he argue against its use because he could not read its authorization in the word of God or on the basis that the church of Christ didn't have it?

When God said "sing" in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16 that excluded playing upon an instrument. "Singing" excludes playing an instrument. I would like to know if McRay thinks these Christian Churches which use instrumental music are engaged in sin? Did he dare tell this man from the Christian Church they were wrong and in sin for adding to the word of God when they played upon an instrument? How strong are McRay's conviction against the use of the instrument in the worship?

"EXAMINE YOURSELVES"

Olen Holderby, San Pablo, Calif.

(Continued from last month)

Preachers should, perhaps more than all else, examine themselves and their practices. I suggest this to be the case because of the great amount of teaching and influence wielded by the preacher. There remains no excuse for any of us preachers to involve ourselves with any of these evils, or to permit ourselves to be used to these ends. Paul told T imothy, "Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, incharity, in spirit, in faith, in purity." This instruction was given directly to a preacher. I am aware that this becomes a pattern for all believers, since Timothy was to be an example to believers. However, I am concerned at this point only with the preacher. "In word" I understand to refer to words of instruction, that which he teaches. Does he teach the gospel and only the gospel? (Gal. 1:8-9). II Tim. 2:15; 4:2, both have to do with that teaching. I Pet. 4:11, II John 9, and I Cor. 4:6, applies to preachers as well as to other members of the church. Remember that preachers are to be examples to the believers in what they teach. Why are not more preachers speaking out against those things mentioned in this article? The preacher's manner of life is brought into focus in "in conversation." This is especially true with reference to others. Preachers, if all members of the church treated you just as you have treated others, how would they treat you ? Would they lie about you? Would they misrepresent you? Would they backbite? Would they try to destroy your character? Would they undermine your work for personal gain? Would they- use you as a "goat" to cover their ownsins? We preachers need to remember that our example is for believers to follow. "In love" brings the humility of the preacher directly under consideration ; because love for God demands complete andhumble obedience to God's Word. How does our example fair here? To be the proper example "in faith" is to forbid any action or arrangement which is not found in God's Word. To accept any other course is to demonstrate a lack of faith in God's Word. Indeed, the supreme test of one's faith is to be found in his willingness and readiness to be directed by that record which is able to make the man- of God perfect (II Tim. 3:16-17). "In purity" is closely related toone's manner of life. Whatever it may include, itcertainly excludes all impurities. I do not believe itwould be laboring the point to say that this demands a preacher's life to be above reproach. In Eph. 5:2527, Paul describes the purity of the church as Goddesires it. While this may not be limited to the moral aspects, it certainly includes such. Preachers, whatkind of an example do we offer to the church in this

respect?

When Paul told the preacher to do "the work of an evangelist," he circumscribed his labors and spelled out his functions in relation to the church. I am persuaded that many have ignored this and are occupying chairs whose legs are mighty lame. We should not be surprised should the brethren rise up and"yank" them from beneath us. Let us, then, examine

ourselves to be sure that we are "in the faith!"

Every member of the church should search his own heart, examine his own situation and ask himself the

question: Have I been party to fostering such evils

upon the church of my Lord ? Let us all determine to

walk in the "Old Paths" while yet there is time.

Digression comes in many forms; one is as corrupt

as the other. How long shall we retain the "candle

stick" in our midst? will the Lord soon remove it?

The contents of this article are meant as both a

challenge and a warning. A challenge for us all to

face up to the situation and "fight the good fight of faith." A war ning that it may soon be too late to

stem the tide of digression that has come in the

"back door" while we have been watching the front.

May God help us all to, "seek ye first the kingdom of

God" (Matt. 6:33).

THE OLD TESTAMENT WORLD

The lands mentioned in the Old Testament are insignificant in size compared with those known by today's space-age traveler. In fact, as the first map(Figure 1) indicates, the Old Testament world occupied about one-third of the area of the UnitedStates. Included in the small rectangle are the lands inhabited by the Egyptians, Sumerians, Hittites, Assyrians, Syrians, Babylonians, Persians, Israelites,and other ancient peoples. Today's traveler easilymay cover more territory than this during his summer vacation.

(Figure 1)

The Bible relates that this small area is where human history began, where sin entered, where redemption was first proclaimed, and where the promises of God were fulfilled. Looking at the second map(Figure 2) for a moment, draw an imaginary quarter-moon from the city of Ur on the Persian Gulf northwest to Haran on the Euphrates and then southwest through Damascus to Jerusalem in theland of Canaan. James H. Breasted called this region"the Fertile Crescent." The two extremities of the Fertile Crescent — Babylon and Egypt — spawnedthe most ancient civilizations known to man.

(Figure 2)

Abraham traveled this exact route. The account may be read in Genesis chapters eleven and twelve.Terah took Abram (later named Abraham) his son,Lot his grand-nephew, and their families, and "went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go intothe land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, anddwelt there" (Gen. 11:31). Terah died in Haran. Sometime afterward God i ued a call to Abram,"Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred,and from thy father 's house, unto the land that Iwill show thee" (Gen. 12:1). In addition the Lord promised that Abram would become the father of a great nation and disclosed to him that all families of the earth would be blessed through his spiritual seed. "So Abram went, as Jehovah had spoken unto him;and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy andfive years old when he departed out of Haran ..." and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; andinto the land of Canaan they came" (Gen. 12:4,5).

ABRAHAM IN CANAAN

Souther n Canaan, called the Negeb, becamAbram's new home. Soon, however, this section ofthe "land flowing with milk and honey" (Exod. 3:8)felt the fury of a prolonged famine, being consumed by clouds without water and withered by hot desert winds. The famine forced Abram to enter the land of Egypt which was well watered by the Nile. Here he remained until he was forced to return to Canaan because he deceived Pharaoh (Gen. 12:10-20)

Thus in the early chapters of Genesis a panoramic view of the Old Testament world comes into focus. The perceptive Bible student, following the footstepsof Abraham, will discover a wonderland of sacred ways and sites.

THE NEWS LETTER REPORTS

"... They rehearsed all that God had done with them.. ." — Acts 14:27

LeRoy E. Posey, 2304 Thomas St., Ceres, Calif. 95307— Since I began work here, August 4, 1968with the church in Ceres, California, the congregation has had many problems keeping a place to meet. The congregation had its beginning a year and a half ago, meeting a year and three months in the OddFellows Hall of Ceres, and another three months in a rented building about one block away. While in this building a new city zoning ordinance was acted upon, forcing us to look for another place to meet. After much hard work and searching, we were unable tofind a place in the city of Ceres. We decided to look for a place in Turlock, a town about eight miles south of Ceres, which we did. We found a very nicebuilding located on the corner of Orange and Columbia streets. We had no idea that we would be able to purchase this building because it had been appraised by the Bank for a sum of $35,000.00. However, after talking with the Seventh Day Adventist who owned the building, we learned that we couldpurchase it for $18,000.00 cash. We were able toraise a little over $2,000.00 among the members and an interested individual was good enough to loan us $16,000.00 for twenty years making a monthly payment of $128.00 per month. We are still recovering from the shock as to how quickly and smoothly this whole deal fell in place for us. We are grateful andthankful to the Lord for it all.

The building included all the furniture from A to

Z. The auditorium has forty ten foot hardwood pews, enough to seat at least three hundred and twentyfive. Class rooms came complete with everything necessary, such as chairs, tables, etc. The papers are now in Escrow and should be completed in a few days.

Turlock is a very nice town with a population ofabout 30,000. We are easy to find. Turn west off freeway 99 five blocks to Orange St., south one block toColumbia. We invite all to visit and worship with us when coming our way.

Edgar E. Holcomb, 1015 Nebraska Ave., Lorain, Ohio 44052 — The church in North Ridgeville, Ohio is now meeting at the rear of the shopping center in North Ridgeville in a rented building, but we hope to be in our new building before summer. The membership stands at 47. We had 51 for the mid-week service this week, and 89 attended Sunday morning. We have never had a full time preacher working with us. at present Herb Hiser, Morris Holsteen and I are doing the preaching. We have been having several visitors and have been studying with some of them and hope to convert them to Christ. If you knowsomeone in the area, please notify us and we willcontact them.

Roy L. Foutz, Box 346, South Houston, Texas —Our work here at the South Houston congregation continues in a good way. I am in my sixth year with this church. I will preach in a meeting for the church in Brazoria, Texas April 7-13. Jerry M. Wilburn is

the preacher for this church. I will be with Bill Crews

and the Central church in Beaumont, Texas from

April 27 through May 2.

John J. Miller, Jr., Rt. 1, Box 926, Bremerton, Wash. 98310 — The Bremerton congregation is small, 89-90 Sunday morning, but self supporting. I began working with the church here in August of last year, since then three have been restored and onebaptized due to the efforts of the brethren. While the work is slow the brethren have a mind to work and the future looks bright. If you know of any Navy personnel going to the P.S.N.S., please let us know about them and let them know we are just a short distance from them. Transportation will be supplied by calling ES7-0311 or ES3-3269. We have a meeting scheduled for May 11-18 with Milton L. Anderson of Roseburg, Oregon doing the preaching.

Calvin C. Essary, 17865 Citron Ave., Fontana, Calif. 92335 — From the time our work with the church here began in October, 1968, until now (February, 1969) 8 have been baptized into Christ, and 18 have made public confessions and been restored to their first love. Of the last group, 3 represented membership gains. Two others have also placedmembership with the congregation here during this time. These figures include seven restorations andone baptism which took place during a gospel meeting January 26-31, in which Otis Moyer from Colton did the preaching. Our next meeting is planned forOct. 5-10 with Elvis Bozarth doing the preaching.

If there are congregations that desire to have ameeting, but are not financially able to do so, thebrethren here at Fontana have made it known that they will continue my regular support if I am away in such an effort.

NEW CONGREGATION IN BEND, OREGON

A new congregation has been started in Bend, Oregon due to the apostasy of the older group meeting there. It is composed primarily of three families of good and stable people. T hey have made a long and diligent effort to maintain the truth in theolder congregation, but were faced with the threat of either lining up or being withdrawn from. T hey also tried to worship in nearby Redmond but found no love for the truth there either. They want to, and must, establish a congregation in Bend with whichthe Lord will be pleased, and I am confident theyhave the faith and determination to -make that goala reality.

After more than four years in Cottage Grove, Ihave committed myself to move to Bend to workwith these brethren beginning next August. Abouthalf of my support will be supplied by the good church in Cottage Grove and a small amount willcome from Bend. At the time of this writing I havenot yet located the remainder of my support, buhave just now begun to look for it.

Bend is located in Central Oregon at the eastern foothills of the Cascade Mountains. Its setting is beautiful with tall mountain peaks just to the west,and the high Oregon desert to the east. The immediate area abounds in timber, lakes, rivers, wildlife,and geology. T he climate is dr y, the air clear, and the wide open spaces are still in abundance.

The town itself has a population of 13,000 with a two-year college, and is growing. There are several other smaller towns within 15-30 miles driving distance. From what I have observed personally, thpeople of the area compose a fertile soil for theplanting of the seed. There is no other sound congregation in the area, and only one other in the entire eastern two-thirds of the state. Thus Bend is strategically located as a town from which the truth can eventually be supported in other starved areas. The few faithful disciples in Bend have committedthemselves to this task and I look forward to working with them in its accomplishment. The Lord beingour helper we shall succeed if we try

If you have ever contemplated a move to help in a work such as this, why not consider a move toBend? Contact me (address below) or James Bus-sard, 525 Broadway, Bend, Oregon 97701.

— Jerry F. Bassett BB Rt., Box 191 CottageGrove, Ore. 97424

G. D. Dean, P.O. Box 613, Fort Smith, Ark. 72901

— During 1968 I worked with the church at Park Hill for my fourth year, conducted nine meetings,and helped with the work at other places. There were 86 responses.

BIBLE LANDS TOUR

For $85. down and less than $40. per month, you can Walk in the footsteps of Jesus in the Cradle of Civilization for a total of $846. for a 15-day Tour beginning June 5, 1969.

Relive past history and experience events first hand

in the area dominating current world attention. ACT

NOW!

Co-hosted by: Mr. & Mrs. Choice L. Bryant 4757 East Kerckhoff Avenue Fresno, California 93702 Phone (209) 255-2783

A REPLY TO "EXAMINE YOURSELVES"

In the January, 1969 i ue of Searching The Scriptures there appeared an article titled "Examine Yourselves," by Olen Holderby. He claims the right tmake twelve serious charges against churches andpreachers on the basis of having arrived in California back in 1953. Since my citizenship in the State predates his by more than a decade, I claim the right of reply. There are few churches in the State where I have not held meetings or debates, and fewer preachers and elders not known to me personally. OleHolderby is one of a very few preachers with whom I am acquainted anywhere in the whole United States who have so far isolated themselves as to be alone in the attitude toward other preachers and churches so as to bring forth such a blanket indictment. The list of his charges and my reply follows.

"Preachers virtually ruling whole congregations. I flatly charge that in practice it is no less than the 'Pastor System'." I flatly charge that this charge is false; it is a reflection on every sound gospel preacher and church in the State. Olen Holderby has observed no such thing in California. I challenge him to name one such ruling preacher or one such ruled church in California.
"Elders being mere 'figure heads' and 'yes men'for preachers." This is a false charge against the godly elders in the churches in California. Many of the churches in California having elders have been and still are my friends and supporters, and are not guilty of such weakne . The preachers out here are not of the character who would want men serving as elders who would be "mere figure heads and yes men." The churches would not have them serving ifthey were such. Olen Holderby's charge is false.
"Where no elders exist, the preacher is often granted the authority to use whomever he chooses in the pulpit." If the "Pastor System" charge made in number one were true, the preacher would notneed to be "granted authority." The authority is inherent in the "Pastor System." However, the church has as much right to delegate authority tthe preacher as to the song leader, or someone to arrange for teachers for the classes, or to see to arrangements for serving the Lord's Supper. This authority would be taken away from the church if the preachers were indeed ruling the churches. Number three being true, number one must be false, andOlen Holderby has answered himself on that one.
"Scriptural discipline is completely disregarded by other congregations. This may be brought about,in part, by the fact that many preachers get themail, and the congregation remains uninformed." The charge against the honesty and fair dealing of preachers in general here is resented by me, because I believe it is a slander on the character of preachers in California. Let Olen Holderby name one such dishonest preacher who is presently employed by church in the State. I know of no such preacher. Since I am one preacher in the State, I deny thecharge for me, and for all others until proven guilty
' "A Preachers' clique exists, and is being permitted to just about control the thinking of manycongregations. Such clique has, it seems, just about become a 'clearing house' for incoming preachers. It

appears evident that as long as one does not cross any member of the clique, it doesn't matter muchwhat else he does." This is a very serious chargeagainst the preachers and the churches being victimized by the "preachers' clique." Not only are we told that we have a clique, but the standard it_ sets is pretty low. If Olen Holderby will inform us who is in this clique, we will help him break its strangle holdon the churches. Here again, I must state that this is a false charge. There is no such condition existingamong the preachers in this State, and I know of no other State where such exists.

"Preachers who are in out-right rebellion against God's word, living in sin, being upheld by atleast some of the clique and used in public services of the church." Since Olen Holderby's clique does not exist, it is impossible for any of its members to be thus guilty. Preachers being used by the churches out here are not of the character and kind to upholdand encourage the use of anyone in "out-right rebellion against God's word, living in sin."
"Preachers not practicing what they preach,and what they condemn in other s they often dthemselves. This is especially true with reference to 'hob-nobing' with the liberals or apostates." There isnot a preacher being used by the churches in California known to me who is guilty of this charge. None of the preachers with whom I am acquainted are 'hob-nobing' " with liberals or apostates, and still working with sound churches in California.

8."The disposition of church members to permit TIME instead of REPENTANCE to abolish (?) sin." Not knowing personally all members of the church,I cannot speak for all here. However, this is another charge which I know to be untrue of MOST members in California. There is no widespread affliction of this nature active in the churches.

. "Elders or congregations hiring preachers with little or no investigations as to their soundness or character. Many investigations appear to be limited to the 'clearing house' mentioned in number 5 above." There is not an elder or a church that would know

how to contact the 'clearing house'" mentioned innumber 5, for the simple reason that it exists onlyin Olen Holderby's mind. This is just another false charge unsupported by any facts whatsoever.

12. "The tendency toward a 'professional clergy,'limiting their obligations to appearing before the public two or three times per week, plus keeping his'social house' in order." There is not a more hard working, down to earth, group of gospel preachers known to me anywhere than the ones who make upthe California preachers. There is not a tendencythat I have observed toward a "professional clergy" on the part of any preacher that I know out here.

All of the sins enumerated by Olen Holderby are opposed by all of the preachers, and churches, antheir elders that are known to me. All of us resent these false charges, and I hereby deny every one othem. I am confident that the preachers and elders in California join me in this resentment and denial.

John W. Wilson 1364 Manzanita Avenue Chico, California 95926

MASHAL: PARABLE AND PROVERB

The Hebrew word for 'parable' is MASHAL, throot meaning of which is "to be like" or similar

(B.D.B. Heb.-Eng. Lex., p. 605). It is used 38 times in the O.T. and is usually rendered 'proverb' (19times) but is also rendered 'parable' (17 times).

The term MASHAL denotes the broad meaning of'saying' and its prime purpose is 'teaching', both ithe O.T. and Hellenistic Greek. In Biblical Hebrew the term always expresses a comparison, either directly or indirectly by implication (two exceptions,Job 27:1; 29:1). It also embraces a variety of forms such as short popular sayings, similitudes, metaphors and taunt songs. In the Gospels there is a similar variety of forms.

The simplest form may be a short saying (I Kings 9:7) but may be in reality a group of sayings or oracles (Num. 32:7-12; Prov. 10:1). It should bepointed out that in the O.T. there are instances in which a passage may consist of what is a parable but is not so called. Perhaps the most familiar and clear example of such is found in the story of the Ewe Lamb told to David by Nathan (II Sam. 12:1-7).Here the parable becomes a brief narrative.

Two figures of speech may also come under the usage of MASHAL. A simile is illustrated in Psalms 1:3-4. The righteous man "shall be like a tree" and the ungodly "are like the chaff." An example of ametaphor is found in Isa. 40:6-7. "All flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of the field." It may take a poetical form of a taunt song (Isa 14:4; Num. 21:27).

In the post-biblical literature of the Talmud, wefind the same use of the word MASHAL. A favorite story is told of how a king distributed royal garments among his servants. The wise servants placed thegarments in a chest, but the foolish servants wore them in their ordinary work. One day the king asked for his garments. T he wise gave them back to theking just as they had been received, but the garments returned by the foolish were soiled. Then the kingcommended the wise, but the foolish were cast intoprison, and their garments were given to the wise.This story is called 'a parable of a king' and illustrates the saying "Give it (the soul) back to Him (God) as He gave it to thee" (Talmud Shabb. 152b).

WHY I BECAME A CHRISTIAN,A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST

PART No. 2Joseph Lee Block

As I grew older, some one called to my attention,

that the Holy Bible, Old and New Testament, was a

wonderful book to study. Being of Jewish faith, I

asked a few Rabbi's opinion, if I was allowed to study

the Holy Bible, which is the King James Version . ..

These Rabbis did not tell me that I should not read

it, but they did say, that the interpretation was not

the same as the Jewish. .. T hey also told me not to

be swayed from the teachings of our ancestors ... I

started to read this Holy Bible, or shall I say, just

glanced thru it, and received nothing from it, so I laid

it down and thought nothing of it.

In my travels, in almost every hotel that I entered,

there was a Bible in the room. I found a little time to

look into it, but still with no feelings of satisfaction.

I knew that the Bible was given to people for some

good reason and I knew that when a person was

troubled, they always looked to God and that God was

the Bible, or the Bible is God ... So when some little

thing came up and troubled me, I looked into the Holy

Bible and still got nothing out of it, so, I laid it down, never realizing what I was doing.

In 1941 I married a non-Jewish woman. She was

then and is now a member of the body of Christ, the

church of Christ. . . My wife Ruby, knew I was

Jewish and never once did she question me about it,

as to what I intend to do. In fact we married each

other because we were following our concepts of our

heart, about two people being in love ... At this time,

I would like to inject one thought, my wife had no in

fluence over me one way or another to become a mem

ber of the church of Christ. What I mean is, she did

not say to me, that either I become a Christian or we

will not be married. She accepted me for was I was.

While we were in Chicago, we met with my wife's

Aunt Emma, who was very religious, she asked me

a point blank question . . . Joe, "would you change

from Judaism to Christianity for Ruby's sake?" Not

wanting to hurt her, but I figured, the truth must come out some time, so I said, "Aunt Emma, if I ever

became a Christian, I would do it from within my

heart and not for any person for any reason. .."

She was very angry with me and was kind of sulky,

I will admit she was hurt, but I considered the facts and that was that.

As time went by, Aunt Emma took very sick and we would get letters from Mama (Ruby's) that her time (Emma's) was running out, but she seemed tohold on for some thing. Well, in the meantime, I became a Christian, I wrote Mama to tell Aunt Emma that, we received a letter back, that when Aunt Emma heard the news that I was baptized, she had a smile on her face, and went into her deep sleep, she passed away very peaceful. I am running ahead of my story, but this was an actual fact and I felt that it should

be said, also to say, that no person should become a

Christian for any ones sake, except for the sake of

themselves and our Master, Jesus Christ.

During our first year of married life, my wife was

attending the services at the church of Christ, where

ever we may have been, as we were doing a little

traveling at that time. She never asked me if I wanted

to go to church with her or not, because I was still

attending all the Jewish Holidays and going to the

synagogue every day . . . One thing did puzzle me,

what if the Jewish folks at the synagogue knew that

I was married to a non-Jewish woman, would they

have accepted me as they did? Would they have

allowed me to enter the synagogue ? What would they

have done? T hey never asked me, so I never told

them, I assume they thought she was Jewish. T his

much I knew, I never would have denied it, no matter

what they would have said or done.

"SHOULD I PREACH"

Many a dedicated young Christian man is faced with the momentous question "Should I preach?" He can look around him and see the grave need for men to tell the lost of the Christ. He can feel the responsibility imposed on him by his knowledge othe Gospel. Yet, he may never heed this call to preach, or, having heeded it, he may face obstacles which will cause him to consider, and perhaps to enter, another type of work. One of the great obstacles which he may face comes in the form of another question: "Who wants to listen to me?" His knowledge of the Scriptures may not be as deep asthat of a more experienced preacher. His words maynot come as readily, and, when they come, they maynot be ordered in the most logical and forceful manner. Thus, it is natural that he doubt his acceptability to a clientele accustomed to such orators and students as James P. Miller and Homer Hailey; yet, he must have sufficient opportunities to develop his talents. What he needs is not a pat on theback and the you'11-be-a-fine-preacher-someday lineHe needs the wholehearted support of Christians interested in spreading the borders of the kingdomTheir assist-ance may come as sincere words of encouragement or as the constructive criticism which the young preacher needs, or it may come as instruction which gives a fuller insight into the word.One of the most helpful things that can be done is to provide the young preacher with the opportunity to work full time studying and teaching. Such an opportunity would certainly ban open door to service in the kingdom of God.

That door has been opened to the young preacher who is writing this article. For the past several years, I have felt as Paul in regard to preaching theGospel — "Woe is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel." In an effort to obtain a broad and yet detailed understanding of the Bible, I have spent three years at Florida College and intend to spend one more, for here I am afforded the opportunity to study at thfeet of men with an exceptional knowledge of andlove for the truth. However, the cla room and thestudy cannot provide all that I and others need tobecome effective preachers; only experience canbridge the gap. Realizing the great need for encouraging novice preachers, the brethren who meet onClinton Boulevard in Jackson, Mi i ippi, have engaged me to work with them this summer whiletheir regular preacher, A. H. Payne, conducts Gospel meetings. (Brother Payne, an exceedingly capable and dedicated evangelist, will be available for meetings between May 7 and August 27. Any congregation interested in scheduling him for a meetingshould write him at 5535 Clinton Boulevard, Jackson, Mi i ippi 39209, as quickly as po ible.

The program which the brethren have in mind is indeed an aggressive one, for they, a congregation of about seventy members, plan to support brother Payne fully in his evangelistic work while supporting me fully in the work in Jackson. It is hoped notonly that this program will result in the salvation of souls and the development of a young preacher but also that it will produce spiritual growth in thechurch in Jackson and that it will provoke other congregations to a similar work.

Thank God for this rare opportunity!

— Michael A. Tanner