Volume 10 August, 1969 Number 8

THE NATURE OF LAW AS SET FORTH IN JAMES 2:10-11

L. A. Mott, Jr.

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one (point), he is become guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adulter y, said also, Do not kill. Now if that dost not commit adultery, but killest, thou art become atransgressor of the law.

These two sentences are set down by James asproof of his previous statement that respect of persons is a sin and involves the one committing it intransgression of the law as such. Hardly any other passage of the word of God has as much to say about the nature of law.

The use of the two commandments in verse 11 does not show that the ten commandments as such are bound upon Christians. These commandments are used as illustrations of the general principle laid down in verse 10. James could have chosen illustrations from any other law just as well.

Law is a Unit

The principle that underlies the statement in verse 10 is one which applies to any law. It applies to the law of Moses. It applies to the law of Christ. It applies to the national constitution. It applies to ourstate laws. That principle has to do with the nature of law as such. A law — whether the law of Moses, of Christ, or some other — is not composed of a lot of independent parts, having little connection witheach other, so that one might violate one part without disturbing the others. Rather, all the parts of a law are welded together into one compact whole, so that the law exists as one unity. It is for that reason that a violation of any one part of that law involves the violator in a violation of the law as a whole. That is why a person becomes guilty of thewhole when he violates the part.

What is it that welds all the parts of a law into one whole? Verse 11 indicates that it is the common authority that stands equally behind each part of the law. He who said that said also this. When it comes to divine law, the whole force of divine authority stands equally behind each part of the law. Whenone transgresses any part of the law, whether large or small, he indicates his attitude toward the authority which gave the law.

Small Sins?

Perhaps from one standpoint it may be proper to speak of small sins and large sins. Some seem to have worse consequences. But what should be realized is that any sin, even the "smallest," is a serious matter. Those who speak of small sins seem to conceive of divine law as consisting of a lot of independent parts, so that one may violate a small part, isolated to itself, without disturbing the other parts of the law. T hat is a misconception of the nature of the law. Divine authority has welded all the parts of the law into one whole. For that reason, a transgression of any part of the law, no matter how "small," is a transgression of divine law as such. The transgressor, by his act, indicates an attitude toward divine law as a whole. That is true of any sin that may be committed.

The Sabbatarian Position

There is always one passage or one line of attack that will meet an erroneous position better than any other approach. James 2:10-11 is the passage whichannihilates the distinctions Sabbatarians make as to the system of law in the Old Testament. Their erroneous position is wrecked against the principle which underlies these verses. This is rather ironical, too, since they often use the verses as though this were their passage.

A few minutes with a concordance will convince the reader that each of the expressions, "the law,""the law of Moses," and "the law of God," refers to the Old Testament system of law in its entirety, and includes all the parts, ceremonial, moral, or what.Sabbatarians conceive of this system as consisting of many independent parts, so that some can be retained while others are discarded. But according toJames all parts of a law are welded together into one whole, a single unit. Keeping any law is, therefore, an all or nothing proposition.

Box 155

Romulus, Michigan 48174

"It is still the best paper I have ever read." — Mrs.

J. E. Parrish, Nashville, Term."E njoy ever y issue. Keep up the good wor k." — Henry G. Fowler, Eagle Lake, Fla.

"You brethren are doing a fine job with SearchingThe Scriptures. I pray that God will continue to bless your efforts." — Gordon J. Pennock, Rolling Meadows, Ill.

"Am enjoying the paper Searching The Scriptures;keep up the good wor k." — R. U. 'Jack" Gilliland,E dna, T exas.

"You have a good paper." — Luther Blackmon, Noblesville, Ind.

"It believe you have a very fine paper and trust that you will be able to continue it f or many year s to come." — Jack Gilliland, E dna, T exas.

"We sur e r ead and appr eciate your paper here."

— Douglas Matlock, Birmingham, Ala.

"Your work is certainly appreciated. The paper continues to be of interest and every issue is filled with excellent articles. I pray that God will bless you for your stand." — Bud and Barbara Young, Miami, Fla.

"We enjoy very much your publication "Searching the Scriptures" and feel you are doing a great work. We especially appreciated the articles by brethren Cogdill, Needham and Hutto on I Corinthians 11: 116." — Wayne W. Black, Ft. McCoy, Fla.

"We look f or war d to r eceiving the paper and enjoy reading it very much." — Delmar P. Coffield, Richmond, Va.

"We enjoy this publication and are so glad for those who stand for the truth." — J. C. Moore, Hermanville, Miss.

"I do enjoy your paper Searching The Scriptures,and please keep up the good wor k to help stem thetide of digression." — David L. Stevenson, Richmond, Calif.

"We continue to enjoy Searching The Scriptures.We appreciate the good articles and the fine way you set forth the truth of the gospel." — Sam W. Gar rison, Nashville, Tenn.

"T his jour nal is quite scholarly and contains quite a bit of 'meat' each month. I always enjoy reading it. My only regret is that it is not a weekly." — Harry

E . Ozment, Nashville, T enn."You have an excellent paper, may God bless you."

"I enjoy reading your paper, hope you will continue the good work." — Wallace Comer, Tompkinsville, Ky.

"Your paper is a great encouragement to sound Christians — May it continue to be so." — Mrs. Sherrel A. Mercer, Houston, Texas.

"The paper is still the best." — Ward Hogland,

Greenville, Texas.

"I certainly do not want to miss a single issue as I treasure its (Searching the Scriptures) contents assome of the most thought provoking studies that reach my desk; they are true to the Book. — J. G. Savage, L ewisville, T exas.

pit preaching and class teaching, and the rest of the

time they loaf and play. But these poor excuses for

preachers of the. gospel should not cause brethren to

set unscriptural standards for "the right man" to

work with them. But who is "the right man" ? What

kind of preacher do brethren generally want ? I have

heard some amazing qualities and strange standards

for "the right man."

One brother asked that I help find a preacher "between 35 and 40 years old, with a friendly wife and not more than three children, who has a good disposition to get along with all kinds of people, and who can get his sermon across in not more than 30minutes." This man must have been a novice or verynaive, but I guess he was speaking for the church who wanted this kind of preacher. The apostle Paul would not fit the demands of this brother. He would not have come within the age limits, he did not have awife or children, his disposition did not keep hifrom spiritual conflicts with false brethren, and hepreached until midnight and then talked to thbrethren until break of day on at least one occasion (Acts 20:7). Paul "was long preaching" (Acts 20:9).I doubt that Peter, James, John, Timothy, Titus or any of the first century preachers of truth woulhave measured to the standard required by this brother.

Another brother wrote: "Will you help us get a

preacher who will really do the work of the church ?"

I wondered what this church intended to do when

they found a man "to do the work of the church."

This is one reason there are so many dead churches

across the nation today. They hire a preacher to do

all the work and the members do little more than

warm the pewsonce a week, or maybe twice

An elder asked if I knew of a preacher who waabout ready to move. "Our preacher is moving ithree months. He has been with us two years and we think that is long enough for a preacher to stay at one place. He getstoo close to the members if he stayslonger." He may mean that the preacher learns enough about some of the members to preach what they really need. When I suggested a preacher whomight want to move, this elder asked: "Where did he go to school and how many degrees does he

have?" I told him I did not know, he would have to

ask the man.

And there was the appeal for a preacher who had

the tact and diplomacy to preach without offendin

people, not to call names or debate with the sects.

This preacher must have the political skill to "preach

the gospel" without those in error knowing that they

are sinners and lost. Teachers of this sort can be

found for the right price, who will tickle the itching

ears of those who have turned from the truth and

have turned unto fables (II Tim. 4:3,4)

These are typical requirements for preachers today. Have you noticed that there is not one singlescriptural requirement in any of these ? Apollos was "an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures,""instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently thethings of the Lord," but he lacked something to bethe kind of preacher God wants. "Knowing only thbaptism of John," he needed to be taught the trutbefore he could do the work of an evangelist (Acts 18:24-26). If a man does not know the truth or will

not preach it, all else makes little difference.

If you want a preacher, why not look for one who

loves the truth and will preach the word in season

and out of season (II Tim. 4:2) ? who will declare all

the counsel of God (Acts 20:27)? who will do the

work of an evangelist (II Tim. 4:5) ? who will fight

the good fight of faith (I Tim. 6:12) ? who will do

nothing by partiality (I Tim. 5:21)? who will re

prove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering an

doctrine (II Tim. 4:2) ? who will not hold back any

thing that is profitable but will teach publicly an

from house to house (Acts 20:20) ? who will give no

place by subjection to false brethren (Gal. 2:4,5)?

and who will preach to please God and persuade

men (Gal. 1:6) ? If one does all this, what difference

does his age, looks, family, education, personality,

popularity, and background make? If he preaches

and practices the faith once delivered he will do anychurch good.

But then after "the right man" is found and employed to work with a congregation in preaching the word, there are always some carnal minded "churchgoers" who can criticize and find fault until thepreacher leaves or a squabble starts through the longand loose tongues of these "experts" on what apreacher would be. The spiritual babies, who havenot grown one inch spiritually in 20 years, never learn anything from a sermon or Bible cla . They are too busy looking for the faults of the man doingthe preaching to hear the message which he proclaims. This is exactly the attitude of the Pharisees and Sadducees, who found fault with Christ but

never learned anything from his doctrine. What difference does it make how fat or skinny

the preacher is? How does the color of his suit, tie or shirt affect the message he proclaims from the word of God ? John the Baptist would not have rated in any fashion contest, but he moved a lot of peoplwith his message. What if he is "too young" or "too old" (whatever that may be), how does that hinder the truth of the gospel ? What if he does foul up the"King's English" a few times during the discourse,

doesthis destroy the power of the gospel ?

Brethren, when we come to fully realize that men

are lost in sin, and that the gospel is the power of

God to save (Rom. 1:16), we will be concerned, no

about all these unimportant characteristics of the

man, but the message which will convict men of sin,

br ing them to repentance and obedience to the

gospel of Christ. The man or woman who stresses

the dress, good speech, personality, financial stand

ing, crowd pleasing, soft-soaping and entertaining

qualities of the man, will never know very muc

about the saving power of God because they are

really not listening to learn. These are the self-ap

pointed experts on preachers and preaching tech

nique, but they know nothing about the message.

They really know nothing about preachers either, be

cause one must know the message to know what God

requires of preachers.

If you are looking for a preacher, do not consider

anything before you know of his knowledge of the

gospel, his love for the truth, his courage to preach

it fully, and his determination to please God and

per suade men. Other matters ar e secondar y anunimportant.

QUESTION — I would like an explanation ofMatt. 28:19-20. To whom was this commission

given, the apostles or the church? Another ques

tion : I hear so many say we are commanded to give

upon the first day of the week as God hath prospered

that there be no gatherings when I come. How may

we determine how we are prospered, and who is com

ing after what the church contributes ? — A.M.W.

ANSWER — While the Great Commission was given directly to the apostles, it, nevertheless, ap

plies indirectly to all Christians. The Great Com

mission obligated the apostles to teach those bap

tized "all things" which Chr ist had commanded

them. Just as sur ely as Chr ist commanded the

apostles to "teach all nations, baptizing them in the

name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy

Ghost. . .," just that surely every person baptized

is to be taught to do the same thing. True, some

things Christ taught the apostles to do were peculiar

to the apostolic office. The above, however, is not one

of them. While these verses of themselves establish no au

thority for the church, as such, to carry out th

Great Commi ion, a further study of the church in

the light of divine history (e.g., the book of Acts)

reveals that the church did just that. Thus, th

Bible teaches that the apostles, individual Chris

tians, and the church were active in carrying out the

Great Commi ion.

The second question involves a quote from I Cor.

16:2: "Upon the first day of the week let every oneof you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." Thus,Paul instructs the Corinthian church how to meet its financial obligation to which it had committed itself even a year before (II Cor. 8:10). The expression "hath prospered" is from a Greek word which means "to set forth on one's way." Whatever one had orreceived that made possible his jour ney was his prosperity. Whatever we have or receive that makes po ible our journey through time is our prosperity.Of this we are to give each week. The text implies that we are to give in proportion to this prosperityboth as to when and how much. Just what proportionof this prosperity should be given must be determined by other passages. The Old Testament affords us a history of four thousand years. During this time nothing less than one tenth of one's prosperity was ever acceptable to God. The law of tithing was bound upon the Jews. Above this were various sacrifices,offerings, gifts, etc. In the New Testament all references indicate liber ality above this measur e,

especially in view of distressing and urgent circum

stances (See Acts 4:34-37; II Cor. 8:1-4; 9:6-8).Concerning the last question, Paul was coming for the "bounty" which they promised a year before

and which was gotten ready according to the "order"

of I Cor. 16:1,2. Since this reveals to us the mind of

God on how the early church met its financial obliga

tions, it becomes a matter of faith for us. In the

absence of any other plan by which the church

raised its money, we should follow the one that is

revealed. That the church used its money for other

purposes than that mentioned in the context of this

ver se is evident from II Cor. 11:8 and other

passages.

"FEAR OF DESTROYING THE BOOKKEEPER"

A few months ago it was my sad privilege topreach the funeral of brother J. C. Murphy of Cumby, Texas. Brother Murphy had been a faithful gospel preacher for several years. His work included being a staff writer for the "Evangelist" and contributing to other religious journals through the years. Brother Barney Thompson and I said the final words over brother Murphy to an overflow crowd inthe Southside building at Sulphur Springs, Texas. Afew days later sister Murphy came by and gave mcopies of old religious papers which brother Murphhad saved through the years. I appreciated this verymuch. As I looked through these old "Bible Banners," "Evangelist," "Gospel Lights," etc., I foundmany interesting things. Some of these papers date back to 1935 when I was a "wet behind the ears" boy! Years after 1935 when I started opposing thmi ionary and benevolent societies among us I heard the old hue and cry that "NO one had opposed the Orphan homes before about 1950!" Old papers don't die or lie, they just fade away. To prove mypoint to some of the doubters I refer to an article in the Gospel Guardian in March-April of 1936. It was written by brother C. A. Lambert and was titled "The problem of organized cooperation." This article proves two things. First, that the cooperation question was well known in 1936 and brethren considered it a threat to the liberty of faithful brethren. Second, that they also called Orphan homes byname and many brethren opposed them. About pooling resources brother Lambert says, "I have no rightto assume more than I can do and demand of mbrother that he help me, for he has a right to a ume his own duties. Just suppose that every Christian should decide to a ume more than he can do. Do local congregations have a right to assume more than they can do? Do they have a r ight to assume burdens for other congregations? If the Lord had intended that his work be done on a bigger scale than can be handled by a local congregation wouldhe not have designed a bigger organization ? Should congregations or Christians who have done all they can as congregations or as individuals worry or have an uneasy conscience because much remains to bedone?"

On the orphan home question he said, "When New

Testament churches contributed to the support of

Paul or to the relief of the distressed they did so as

individual congregations. They had no get-together

meetings, no interlocking committees nor any other machiner y tying the congregations together.

"Last year twenty-five thousand people appliefor orphans for adoption in the United States and seventeen thousand failed to get them. This shows that there is now only one orphan for every three persons who would be glad to provide a home. childless home needs children just as badly as anorphan needs a home. I know of one congregation where this was emphasized to some extent and as a result eight or nine children were adopted. There were no orphans available in that particular localityand practically all of the children had to be secured in another state. One lady traveled over several states before securing a child. The number of homes needing children probably about equals the number of children needing homes and the reason for thedearth of children is probably the practice amongreligious institutions of maintaining orphan homes. These homes then have an excellent pretext forscouring the country for funds. These funds are collected by people who have never been heard of before by the congregations. Regardless of the misgivings a Christian may have with reference to the scripturalness of the institution or of the management of it, he usually is loath to voice them for fear of damaging the innocent children. It is parallel tothe bank robber who carries away with him theyoung lady bookkeeper. He knows that ever y onwill hesitate to shoot for fear of hitting the younlady."

Many things could be said about the above quotations but I want to center your attention on one factwhich I believe answers many of our questions. Brother Lambert said, "Regardless of the misgivings a Christian may have with reference to the scripturalness of the institution or of the management of it, he usually is loath to voice them for fear of damaging the innocent children. It is parallel tothe bank robber who carries away with him theyoung lady bookkeeper. He knows that every onwill hesitate to shoot for fear of hitting the younlady."

Gentle reader, I believe this little article written thirty-three years ago strikes at the core of our problems. People involved in this present fight over institutionalism have wondered why many of th"old time" preachers did not oppose the orphanhomes. Is this not part of the answer? They were afraid of killing the lady bookkeeper along with thebank robber. I have no doubt that brother Lambert was correct back in 1936. The emotional appeal of an orphan home is tremendous. As a matter of fact,I don't know of anything which carries more. This is the reason, when I was a boy I heard only a fewpreachers mention their opposition to these institutions. Many of them, like brother Lambert, opposed the orphan home becoming a leach on the body of Christ but being afraid they would hurt the "ladbookkeeper" they would not shoot the robber!

Finally the day came when the robber become so

brazen that a challenge to a showdown was inevita

ble. We must remember that in 1936 only a few

struggling orphan homes existed among us. Sinc

that time dozens have sprung up all over the coun

try. No doubt, back in brother Lambert's day many

preachers also felt that the orphan home situation would never be very large and would po ibly die natural death. This did not happen. Just as the bank robber who gets by with robbing one bank isn't likely to stop, the beat of institutionalism kept moving. This should prove to all preachers of this daythat we should not be reluctant to speak out andoppose an innovation just because we think it is small or because it has tremendous emotional appeal. Tr uth is truth regardless as to wher e it mabe found. Just think, if all those preachers back in 1936 had come out as one man fighting the benevolent organizations among us how much better off the church would be today. As brother Lambert saysthey were afraid of killing the lady bookkeeper alongwith the robber and therefore fired very few shots. About all the institutional brethren felt was some bird shot at a distance of about a hundred yards! This wouldn't kill a half-sick sparrow. These brethren back in 1936 fired buck shot loads at close range at the premillennial teachers. Bollites and Jorgenson's song books were plastered on almost everypage. As a result these things are not the threat they could have been. But what about the orphanhomes? Well, as brother Lambert says they opposed them but didn't want to take a chance on "killingthe woman bookkeeper." It has been necessary for preachers of this era to fire at close range. This has brought down on us the stigma of hating poor littleorphans. Nothing could be further from the truth. Does the police hate the lady bookkeeper when hebreaks the door down and shoots the bank robber? Gentle reader, think it over and I believe you willagree that brother Lambert was right way back i1936 when the Ford automobile had more speed than it did brakes!

KETCHERSIDE'S "FIFTH COLUMN"

J. Edward Nowlin

A generation ago, Hitler's Panzer divisions wageda "lightning war" in Western Europe, and gave us a new word for the dictionary — "blitzkrieg"; buthere was a more subtle side to that war. Germany'schief agent in Norway was Major Vidkun Quisling,who betrayed his country and paved the way for German occupation of that rugged land. This "fifth column" tactic was widely used, both in Norway andin the Low Countries, so that "Quisling" and "fifth column" have become expressions which remind one of the lowly termite of the animal world. They workfrom within to destroy!

Among churches of Christ today, some are tryingto "blitzkrieg" the denominational world with "on the march" mass psychology tactics; such as, Herald of Truth, Worldwide Mi ionary and Educational Foundation (called "World Radio"), Campaigns for Christ, Campus Evangelism, etc. But, lurking in thshadows are a few "Quislings" and "Fifth Columnists," who are trying to sell the church down theriver of denominationalism by undermining the veryfoundations of faith upon which we base our plea for New Testament organization, worship, and work. Foremost in this subversive work is Carl Ketcherside, editor of MISSION MESSENGER, and popular unity-meeting speaker. He seems to consider it his God-given task to promote peace and fellowshipamong those who use musical instruments, or preach Premillennialism, or use only one cup, or supporthuman institutions from the church treasury, anthose who do not. His zeal is admirable, but his method of operation stinks to high heaven. He wouldform a "fifth column" of young, sincere, gullible, inexperienced, untaught students which he designate"the fellowship of the concerned ones." (See MISSION MESSENGER, Nov. 1968, p. 176.)

"Cell Groups" and Subversion

In his paper for September, 1968, p. 130, Ketcherside uses the language of the hippies and Communists in advising college students on how to reform the "Establishment" (the church) from within bymeans of "cell groups" whose members run to and fro to make contact with young people in other congregations to spark a much-prayed-over revolt against the status quo. He says the Holy Spirit has come into' his heart, but there are those who thinkthis is a case of mistaken identity on his part. Hewants the young people to do "our thing" of promoting unity while ignoring differences in convictionon the work, worship, and organization of the church. In reply to a student who asked, "What can a groupof concerned students in a non-instrumental oriented Christian college do to further unity as you see it?",Ketcherside laid down the blueprint for his fifth column as follows:

(1) "I suggest to the concer ned ones that thefirst meet as a cell group. . ." (Here he borrowsCommunist terminology and practice used in political subversion. A "cell" is a close-knit, hard-core,group of individuals who appear to be good citizens while working to overthrow the government. (2) "They must revolt against our dishonesty and camouflage, . . ." (He does not indicate whose sins of dishonesty and hypocrisy he is confessing here, except by the pronoun "our." If he thinks he is like that it would behoove him to repent of it, but these are serious charges to level at all members of the Lord's church. Now that the Holy Spirit has "really"come into his heart, he is just about as reckless with his charges as he used to be when he argued that located preachers were "enthroned hirelings" and "interested only in money.")

Two Ways to Revolt

(1) "They must challenge the deductions and conclusions which are unwarranted by the scriptures ... In class ... And they must be prepared to suffer the consequences accruing to anyone of staunch conviction who challenges or bucks the Establishment." (Why form a "cell group" to object to anything thatis unwarranted by the scriptures? This is sort ofstandard practice with some gospel preachers andother saints who never heard of his "cell groups" or "fellowship of the concerned ones." (2) They should "continue to attend services on the Lord's Day morning where he has been accustomed to break bread with the saints . .. But on Sunday night, and at other times, I urge brethren who

are rising above their previous littleness to break out of the shell. Let them visit every congregation in the area — instrumental, premillennial, anti-institutional, one-cup, anti-class — all of them! . . . Make contact with the young people in all of these, anwhen po ible set up informal discu ion groups with them." (You will note that Ketcherside is advisingpeople to stay in congregations where they do notagree with the doctrine taught and work fromwithin, and not "flake off or flack out," he says. Hfurther warns that they "will be branded as radicals," and must be prepared to "suffer the consequences accruing to anyone . . . who . . . bucks the Establishment."

This hippie language and instruction in rebellion surely is not found in the Bible! Why should anman who claims to be a Gospel preacher seek to incite rebellion among the young people of the church,who are too immature to a ume the direction of their own lives, much less the leadership of thchurch of God? Parents and older people are not always right (Carl Ketcherside being a case in point!),but in God's scheme of things they have the rightand responsibility of bringing up the young in theway they should go, and the young need their association and counsel. Such instruction as the above serves but to widen the so-called "generation gap" and lead young people to think of themselves as aspecial class with special needs which cannot be supplied in the fellowship of adults. Hence, they should suspect their elders and launch out on a furtive revolt to destroy what they have built! This is Ketcherside's "Fifth Column," and may the Lord deliver our young people from the likes of him.

1959 Barberrie Lane Decatur, Georgia 30032

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED IN PROOF OF EVOLUTION

Natural Selection (No. 3)

ITS INADEQUACY. In the past two i ues weconsidered the origin, definition and importance oNatural Selection to the theory of Evolution. Wenow propose to show that Natural Selection is inadequate — it cannot do what it is supposed to do, and MUST do, if the "theory" of Evolution is true. G. G. Simpson tells us what is required in Tempo AnMode In Evolution, p. 80, "The synthetic theorythus finds itself, like Darwinism and the Mutation theory, obligated to appeal to SELECTION. Onlmutation supplies the materials of CREATION but in the theories of population genetics it is SELECTI ON that is T RULY CREATIVE, BUILDING NEW ORGANISMS WITH THESE MATERIALS." (Emphasis mine. P.F.) Let us really examine whatauthorities say about Natural Selection being ablto do this.

Price says (Q.E.D. pp. 80-81), "An organ must already be useful before Natural Selection can takehold of it to improve it. Selection cannot make athing useful to start with but only (po ibly) make more useful what already exists" — Or to use the pungent words by Hugo de Vries in 'Species andVarieties' (pp. 825-826), "Natural Selection maexplain the survival of the fittest, but it cannot explain the ARRIVAL of the fittest." And Prof. Osborn in ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF LIFE, preface XIV, quotes Cope as saying "THE SURVIVAL of fitness and the ORIGIN of fitness are two VERY DIFFERENT PHENOMENA" (Origin and Destinyof man, p. 84).

Alex. Graham Bell in WORLD WORK, p. 177, said,"Natural Selection does not and cannot produce NEW species of varieties or cause modifications of living organisms to COME INTO EXISTENCE. Onthe contrary its sole function is to prevent evolution. In its action it is destructive — not constructive — causing death and extinction, not life and progression. Death cannot produce life; and though NaturalSelection may produce the death of the unfit, it cannot produce the fit, far le improve the fittest. Itmay permit the fit to survive by not killing them off,if they are already in existence; but DOES NOT BRING THEM INTO BEING or produce improvement in them after they have once appeared"

(Q.E.D. p. 81). Prof. McMurrich says the same (Science Jan. 1924), "Nature plays an important role in the suppression of the unfit rather in the survival of the fittest but it can act only on variation sufficiently pronounced to determine life or death" (The Phantom of Organic E volution, p. 194)

Prof. Graebner affirms, "Natural Selection is a NEGATIVE process at best. IT CAN PRODUCE NOTHING. It merely states that what cannot survive, perishes — which is a truism (Boodin)." Prof. Lock of Cambridge University likewise affirms, "Selection, whether natural or artificial, CAN HAVE NO POWER IN CREATING ANYTHING NEW" (Species and Varieties, pp. 825-826, God And The Cosmos, pp. 296-297). Byron Nelson, discussing Darwin's Natural Selection, says, "Darwin's theory begs the question entirely — that these things WERE IN EXISTENCE and the better of them were selected for survival and the poorer for extinction. For example, if two apples are on a plate, a man can select one and eat it. In so doing he leaves the other apple.This SELECTION, however, does not explain heeither apple CAME TO BE IN EXISTENCE. They were there before the man started to eat" (After Its Kind, p. 94). Nelson also says, p. 99, "However much Selection Nature may have done in the past, its selecting has never been able to ORIGINATE anything. Natural Selection can only be a mechanisfor the elimination of WHAT ALREADY EXISTS." Bales and Clark, Why Scientists Accept Evolution,

p. 48, declare, "We certainly understand how thepresent laws of NATURE can kill a man but thepresent laws of nature give no evidence that thecan CREATE a man. An accident can destroy a car but it cannot CREATE a car. A car can be the result of DESIGN and its destruction can be an accident."

In DR. JULIAN HUXLEY'S 'GLORIOUS PARADOX' the Scientist Dewar writes (Ev. P.M. p. 1)"Dr. Huxley a ured the readers of THE EVENING STANDARD that 'In the past of geology the slow, wasteful and blind forces of Natural Selection have created the marvelous, living, mechanisms of ant,bee, bird, horse and man out of LIVING SLIME.' This is nonsense. With as much truth might a man,who has just drowned three of a litter of kittens,held up the fourth and cry, 'See! I have CREATED this.' Natural Selection CANNOT CREATE ANYTHING. It cannot cause the variation in animals and plants. IT IS NOT A CREATIVE AGENCY."

Another writer says about the same thing, witthis illustration, "Natural Selection or 'Survival of the Fittest' NEVER PRODUCES ANYTHING NEW. BECAUSE A LIVING THING HAS SURVIVED, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT EVOLVED. If a hen hatches a dozen chicks, andsome are killed by predators, does that indicate theyEVOLVED? No, all it indicates is that some chicks survived while the others died. This 'selection' by'nature' IN NO WAY CHANGED THE CHICKS TO SOMETHING ELSE" (DID MAN GET HERE BY EVOLUTION OR CREATION? p. 67). The same work quotes the Science Digest, Jan. 1961 as follows,"Natural Selection is nothing but BLIND MORTALITY WHICH SELECTS NOTHING AT ALL." Jean Rostand in THE ORION BOOK OF EVOLUTION says, "In any case they (N.S. and Mutations -P.F.)NEVER produce anything NEW, or original, in thorganic scheme, NOTHING that one would consider the basis for a new organ or the priming for a new function. — No, decidedly I cannot make myself think that these 'slips' of heredity (mutations) havebeen able, even with the cooperation of natural selection, and even with the advantage of the immense period of time in which evolution works on life, tbuild the entire world, with its structural prodigality and refinements, its astonishing 'adaptions,' —cannot persuade myself to think that the eye, theear, the human brain have been formed in this way"(ibid. p. 20).

(To Be Continued)

THE NASHVILLE DENOMINATIONALCHURCH OF CHRIST

T his month I continue to review some of the

things which brother John McRay said in a sermon

at the Otter Creek Road church in Nashville, Tenn.

on May 12, 1968. Four articles have preceded this

one and one will follow.

Speaking about unity on page 4 McRay says,

"There is no hope for unity as long as brethren are

castigating and lampooning one another in brother

hood papers; hurling epithets at one another and

refusing to allow for human frailty within the hu

man being." This is just another of the soft and

sweet spirits that has crept into the thinking of

some brethren and churches.

It is true that all of us are human, therefore, wewill make mistakes from time to time. Peter saysthat "above all things have fervent charity amongyourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude ofsins" (I Peter 4:8). We should be kind and considerate of others when they sin for we might later yieldto the same temptation. Because of our love for a brother, we often overlook his faults or failings. No,we do not excuse sin; we learn how to get along withhim and his faults just like he learns to get alonwith us and ours. This accounts why some are able to be friends with people that others are not so able. Because of our friendship we bear with each other. Some are not able to be friends because they demandthat others be perfect while they want them to putup with their imperfections.

However, this does not mean that when some

brethren begin to teach false doctrine and carry the

church of Jesus Christ into denominationalism like

some preachers are doing that I must sit by in silence

and say nothing. It is a strange standard to me that

will permit a man to enter the pulpit or write on

the printed page whatever he wants to regardless of how much error it contains, but once he has spoken no one has the right to call in question a thing he has preached. These liberals in the church under the guise of love and unity are demanding for themselves the right to sow the seeds of error among brethren while no one has the right to uproot it. As long as error is planted I have the right to uproot it and if the liberals do not like it, then let them stop preaching error. There are a host of faithful gospel preachers in this country that do not intend to be

told they cannot uproot error.

McRay further says, "When a brother dared to

disagree with Paul, his procedure was not to write

him up in a brotherhood paper; his procedure was to

go directly to that brother in kindness (Gal. 2:14)."

What McRay is trying to say is that nothing public

was made of this. However, Gal. 2:11 says, "But

when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to

the face, because he was to be blamed." Paul with

stood Peter. This can not be denied. He was to be

blamed. Paul did it to his face. Gal. 2:14 says,

"... . I said unto Peter before them all, . . ." Peter

received a public rebuke from Paul for his error.

When a brother today preaches a sermon before

hundreds, or speaks on radio or T. V., or writes in a

journal that has a nation-wide circulation, this pas

sage does him no good in seeking to show that one

should not tell anyone else or even him so someone

else would hear.

Jesus Christ, His apostles and evangelists of theearly church went forth preaching the gospel. They crossed swords with every false teacher and putthem to flight. They asked nothing of the Devil and the only things they gave him and his servants were to expose their error. We should do the same today and will if we follow in their examples.

Watch next month for the final article in review

of this sermon as we see this preacher say we must

come half way with the denominations if we want

unity.

CLUB RATE SUBSCRIPTIONS FOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR ONLY $10.00

"HOLY," (HAGIOS) Cognate Words The Greek adjective hagios ("holy") is a member

of a rather large family. There are several other

kindred words: "sanctify," "sanctification," "sanc

tifying," "hallowed," "saint." Hence, when we speak

of "sanctifying" something we are saying that it is

being made "holy." When we pray "hallowed be thy

name" we are saying "may thy name be holy."

It should be noted that there is no Greek word as

such for "saint." The term "saint" is merely the

substantive use of the adjective "holy"; that is, a

"saint" is, literally, "a holy one."

Hagios in Secular Greek

It seems that the adjective hagios first appears in Herodotus, the fifth century B.C. historian; however, this point might be somewhat argumentative. The evidence indicates that hagios was anciently used in description of religious sanctuaries. In later Greekthe term also came to be descriptive of the gods aswell. Most authorities agree that hagios comes from an older form that originally denoted an object thatinspired awe, either in a good sense or bad. It does not appear, however, that hagios was anciently used to describe the men who worshipped the gods. It will be seen in this study that hagios is used in Biblical writings to describe men as well as God. (For a further study of hagios in secular Greek one might consult vol. 1 of Kittel's Theological Dictionary of theNew Testament.)

Hagios in the Bible

In the Bible, God is "holy," Rev. 4:8, etc.; hencewhatever is particularly set aside for God's use or service is also "holy." In this sense, anything that is the very opposite of anything that is "common" (koinos). In a future study I wish to present some thoughts on the term koinos, but suffice it now simplyto say that when some object was koinos it was understood that such an object was open to man's use and not restricted to God's service. It should be noted that this distinction was made under Moses' Law. No such distinction, as such, is found in Christianity.

What is "Holy" or Hagios?

It has been noted that since God is holy it follows that whatever might be employed by God is also holy; therefore, we can read in the Bible about aholy day, Gen. 2:3; holy ground, Exodus 3:5; holycity, Isa. 48:2; holy Temple, Isa. 64:11; holy bread,I Sam. 21:6; holy child, Luke 1:35; holy Spirit, Acts 2:38, etc.; holy mount, II Pet. 1:18; holy people,I Cor. 3:17; I Pet. 2:5, etc.

It is evident, therefore, that the term "holy" does

not denote one who has been made sinless by a so-

called "second work of grace." Sinle ness, or the

lack of it, is really not the central idea of "holine ."

Else, how could the Bible speak of a "holy" day or

"holy" ground?

THE LAND OF PROMISE

God caused Israel to reside in one of the most stra

tegic areas of the ancient Near East. The boundaries

of the Promised Land extended from the western

bend of the Euphrates River in the northeast to the

River of Egypt in the southwest (Gen. 15:18) and

from the fringe of the Ar abian Desert in the east

to the Mediterranean Sea, "the great sea toward the

going down of the sun" (Josh. 1:3-5), in the west. In

brief, it stretched along the Fertile Crescent from

Syria to Sinai.

The Promise Fulfilled

The Bible affirms that David "went to recover his

dominion at the River" (II Sam. 8:3), namely, th

Euphrates; and that "Solomon ruled over all the

kingdoms from the River unto the land of the Phil

istines, and unto the border of Egypt" (I Kings

4:21). The territory of David and Solomon extended

to the approximate frontiers marked by slanted

lines on the map below.

Unquestionably, therefore, the land promise God made to Abraham, to Isaac, to Jacob, and to their descendants whom Moses led out of Egypt was fulfilled. Israel possessed the Promised Land!

Confusing Terms

Two observations should be of interest to Bible

students. First, the expression "the River" always

refers to the Euphrates. One might be tempted to

misapply the term to the Jordan River because the

Jordan is associated with the Bible lands more fre

quently than the Euphrates. Second, the "River of

Egypt" never means the Nile. T he River of Egyp

cuts through the middle of the region of Sinai that

lies between Canaan and Egypt. The modern nam

for it is Wadi el-Arish. Wadi is a Near Eastern term

used to describe the bed of a river which is dry ex

cept in the rainy season. The proper identification of

terms such as the ones that have been discussed will

help to eliminate confusion in Bible study.

The Land of Canaan

Now attention must be directed to that portion of

the Promised Land called Canaan (the area enclosed

by the rectangle in Figure 3). People named th

country Canaan because of the Canaanites who

dwelt there (Gen. 12:5; 15:18-21). The Canaanites

were "traders" or "merchants" (Prov. 31:24; Job

41:6; Zech. 14:21) who became famous because they

sold purple, a beautiful cloth colored with red-purple

dye. This dye was produced locally by the Canaanites.

Today one may see among the excavations at Byblos

in northern Phoenicia (in modern Lebanon) the re

mains of a factory that contained large vats for

making purple dye. The Phoenicians descended from

the Canaanites. The term Phoenicia is derived from a Greek word that means "red-purple."

The selling of purple continued for centuries to be an important business in the Near East. Lydia,

woman mentioned in the New Testament, was a

seller of purple (Acts 16:4), although the Thyatiran

purple that she sold was made from the madder root

instead of from the murex shellfish used by the

Canaanites.

Palestine

Another common designation for Canaan is Palestine, a name given to the country because of the Philistines who lived along the southern coastline (Ex. 15:14). The Philistines, as well as the Canaanites, were to be driven out by Israel during the occupationof the land (Josh. 13:1-6). Failure to accomplish this task had bitter consequences. T he Philistines troubled God's people with wars and oppressions

from the earliest period of the Judges until the

time of David's conquests.

HAVE YOU RENEWED

Please check your expiration date indicated onyour address place and if your subscription has expired, send your renewal today. This willassure continuation of Searching The Scriptures for another year.

DO IT TODAY!

HOW MANY LAWS OF PARDON?

Robert J. LaCoste

It seems that ever so often the brethren are not content to preach the gospel as it was given in allits glory and simplicity (II Cor. 11:3), but must either try to make some new law or add somethingto the law already given. All who make this mistake are either unaware of the punishment for doing this or they just don't care (Gal. 1:6-9).

A new rumbling is being heard on the horizon that states there are three laws of pardon. One for thealien sinner (if he qualifies in the personal judgmentof the preacher) and two for the erring brotherThis new doctrine (Acts 17:19-21) makes a distinction between the Christian who has sinned in such ways as: mi ing the services willfully, stealing,adultery, go iping, etc., and demands they admithat they have sinned and ask the church to prayfor them. This will automatically put the erringchild back in fellowship with the church.

However, if disciplinary action has been administered by the church, this new doctrine insists THIS IS DIFFERENT and the ordinary law of pardon for the erring child does not prevail. But the erring child must come confe ing publicly ALL his sins — that these sins must be itemized on a sheet of paper and signed by the repentant child of God. Who cabelieve it?

Does Acts 8:13-24 teach this ? Is this even inferred in Luke 15:18-21? Does I Cor. 5 call upon the offender to do this? As I understand the plan of God,there are just TWO plans of pardon given. One for the alien sinner, who doesn't have to meet the demands and satisfaction of the preacher other than to believe that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 8:32-39),and one when the child of God sins, as did Simon(Acts 8:18). He is called upon to REPENT (changehis heart) and pray to God for forgiveness (Acts 8:22-24)

The word of God then calls upon the members of the church to RESTORE the erring one in the attitude of meekness (Gal. 6:1). The Bible nowhere delegates to the preacher, elders, teacher, or a committee of any kind to give the repenting child of Godthe third degree so they can determine if he hastruly repented. His repentance is between him andAlmighty God!

Brethren! This is usurping the authority of Christ and is false doctrine (Gal. 1:6-9). Those who teachsuch as the gospel of Christ are guilty of "Heresy"and need to REPENT!

God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34)-and calls upon all His erring children to be forgiven bythe same plan. Sin is sin! Whether it be murder,covetousness, stealing, lying, go iping, or teachingfalse doctrine (I John 3:4) and the offender must come to God on His terms (Acts 8:22)

Let's just preach the word (II Tim. 4:2) as it is without adding anything or taking anything awafrom it (I Cor. 4:6) so as not to invoke the wrath of God upon us (Rev. 22:18).

P. O. Box 1373 Globe,Arizona 85501

THE NEWS LETTER REPORTS

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

George J. Powell, Ontario, Calif. — The congregation at Montclair, California is looking for a preacher,one who stands for the truth and is willing and ableto do personal work. We have a very nice buildingand are able to support a preacher who can devote full time to the work. I have been preaching for the church on a part-time basis, but I'm in the insurance busine , and I do not have the time to devote to the work that is needed. Those interested please contact: Church of Christ, 5360 San Jose, Montclair, Calif. 91763.

Paul Branch, Palmetto, Fla. — The church in Palmetto is showing signs of spir itual growth. We had a lectureship type gospel meeting in late March. Speakers were, in their order: Paul Branch, J. FrankIngram, James P. Miller, Roland H. Lewis, James R.Cope and Roy E. Cogdill.

Recent responses: 1 baptized, following the meet

ing. April — one restored; May — 1 restored, two

baptized.

Don Martin, Box 3, Pineland, Texas 75968 — We

have been working with the church for approxi

mately one year. During this period we have cer

tainly seen evidence of growth. The increase in the

contribution, I believe, has been indicative of both

spiritual and numerical growth. In the past five

months, the congregation has been able to relieve

a substantial amount of outside support. The con

gregation has relieved $160.00, or about two-thirds

of the outside support. I believe this area affords

great potentialities in evangelism. When in the Sam

Rayburn or Toledo Bend area, worship with the Pine-land church of Christ.

Dan S. Shipley, 1200 Daffodil, McAllen, Texas 78501 — In June, after almost three pleasant years with the Laurel Heights church here in McAllen, I will be moving to Prescott, Arizona to work with the Miller Valley church. My new address will be:

P. O. Box 2553, Prescott, Ariz. 86301.

Marshall E. Patton, 806 Muriel Dr., S.E., Huntsville, Ala. 35802 — My meeting at Spring and Blainein St. Louis, Mo., resulted in eleven baptisms and one restoration. This makes a total of thirty baptisms in three meetings this spring. It is my observation that brethren in general are less disturbed over brotherhood conditions; are more resigned to thfacts of the situation; are more steadfast in hopeand are abounding more in the work of the Lord than they have been in recent years. Spring anBlaine is a good example. In spite of some adverse conditions, including one common to several in a downtown location (people moving to suburban areas) they have maintained a good program ofwork, good interest, and are growing. This church has an excellent eldership together with a faithful,untiring, energetic preacher, Jimmy Tuten. This combination accounts for much of the success of this

fine church.

Don Keele, 312 Bay Vista, Osprey, Fla. 33559 — The Osprey church of Christ is in need of a preacher. If you are considering a move and would like tlocate on the West coast of Florida, please contact us by writing to: Osprey church of Christ, Osprey,Fla. 33559. Phone: 966-2285.

Ralph R. Givens, 10C7 North 5th, Pekin, Ill. 61554

— I have move from Berea, Ohio to work with the

13th Street church in Pekin. During the 17 months

in Berea there were seven to confess wrongs and

nine baptized.

Michael A. Tanner, 5535 Clinton Boulevard, Jackson, Miss. 39209 — Two months have passed since I began working with the Clinton Boulevard congregation in order to enable A. H. Payne to spend the summer conducting meetings. From my point oview, they have been a profitable two months. So far the work of brother Payne and the brethren where he has held meetings has resulted in thirteen baptisms, while one was baptized and another restored at Clinton Boulevard. Plans are now being made tbegin a program for the development of the brethren here into personal workers. We will appreciate anysuggestions from those experienced in such work.

My plans for this fall tentatively include going

to Abilene Christian College, but I am more in

terested in preaching regularly and going to school

as the time permits. Therefore, I am interested in

talking with the brethren of any congregation which

is in need of a preacher and is in or near a college

town. If you think that we can fill each others needs,

please write me as soon as po ible.

Jerry L. Dennison, Bowling Green, Ky. — On June 12, 1969, brother James Holder, preacher for the Adairville church of Christ, Adairville, Kentucky,attended the gospel meeting at the Millertown church of Chr ist, Adairville, Kentucky. At this time hecharged brother Jimmy T homas, Hueytown, Alabama, of teaching error in stating that those whosend support directly to the preacher and not through a sponsoring church are following the safe course.

The following day, brother Holder and brotherThomas signed the proposition for a debate to be held at 2 p.m. Sunday, June 15, in the Millertown meetinghouse. Brother Holder was to affirm "That churches could scripturally pool their resources to preach the gospel as is done in the Herald of Truth arrangement." They agreed to each select his own moderator and time keeper and to give three 20 minute speeches.

About 1:50 p.m. Sunday, brother Holder arrived at the meetinghouse accompanied by his wife andone of the Adairville elders. He said that it was not an honor for him to be there; that he was going to speak only one time then he would either stay oleave, whichever seemed proper at that time. Healso stated that the elder was there, not in his support but to witness his conduct. After speaking for about 25 minutes, he left without giving brother Thomas an opportunity to ask any questions con

cerning his speechWhen we see "Christians" refusing to study an

discuss the word of God today, are we not seeing

the same attitude demonstrated that the Jews mani

fested in their refusal to hear Christ and the

apostles? We are exhorted to contend earnestly for

the faith in Jude 3. If we fail to do this are we being

the ministers of God or of the devil ? Note: Brother

Jerry Dennison is one of a num-ber of fine young

preachers who live in Bowling Green and preach

for congregations in central Kentucky. The

experience at Millertown should open the eyes of

brethren in this part of the state. The tactics

used by the liberal brethren are the very methods

they condemned with the sects. — James P. Miller.

E. K. Brown, Miami, Fla. — Preacher needed byfall — Miami Shores church of Christ, 103rd Street and N. E. 2nd Avenue, Miami, Fla. We have a neair-conditioned building complete with cla rooms, preacher's office and a three-bedroom, 2-bath homedebt free. Please write for more information about

the work here.

BIBLE LANDS TOUR CANCELED

Having talked recently with one who has toured these lands several times in the last year or two and being informed of the tension there it is not ourdesire to lead a group into these lands with ourpresent knowledge of things, plus brother Connie W. Adams who was to lead the tour with me will have to be hospitalized about this time, we cancel our tour scheduled for August 4-18 of this year.

Thomas G. O'Neal

Murfreesboro, Tenn.

Bill Haynes, 503 Capps St., Marlin, Texas 76661

— We have established a congregation in Temple

and I am doing the preaching. We are meeting in

the recreational hall of the Tern-Bell Homes at 206

W. Avenue R. It is just one block west of the old main gate of the V.A. Hospital. The attendance isabout 20 at all services. Anyone in Temple can con

tact me at phone 773-1461 for more information.

Sam Binkley, Jr., 58 Locher Ave., Reservoir, Vic.

3073, Australia — The work of the Lord is making

progress here, but there is still a need for more

men. To do an effective work it is necessary for

those of us who are here to do a lot of traveling to

keep in contact with some whom we have taught and

who will receive us favorably.

James H. Parsley, Santa Clara, Calif. — I will

terminate my work in Santa Clara, Calif, the first

of July, and will begin laboring with the church

which meets at 3433 Studebaker Road, Long Beach,

Calif. Jady Copeland has been laboring with the church at Long Beach, and will be moving to work with the chur ch in Sepulveda, Calif. Please send all correspondence and bulletins to: James H. Parsley, 3433 Studebaker Road, Long Beach, Calif. 90808.

Larry R. DeVore, 1802 Caroline St., South Bend,Ind. 46613 — Since moving to South Bend, Indiana on June 23, we have had three restored, one baptized,and two to place membership. Brother WimmialWallace of Lufkin, Texas will be here in a meetingSeptember 15-24. I certainly do enjoy the paper;there are many edifying and instructive articles in it each month. Maurice Barnett's articles on the "J.W.'s" are very good. Eugene Britnell's column is very good, as are all the others.

C. R. Gurley, 204 Velma St., Dequincy, La. 70433

— A liberal element has come into the church where I preach which I cannot support. Any conservative church needing a preacher contact me. I am forty-two years old, have a wife and three children at home. I have had twenty years' preaching experience. I have been preaching for the more liberal churches but am convinced that they are practicingthings unscriptural. My address is: 204 Velma St.,Dequincy, La. 70433; phone: (318) 786-7213.

Rodney Miller, 6101 Linton, Haltom City, Texas 76117 — Our meeting with brother Ward Hoglandwill begin August 18-22. All who can come are invited. The work here is going very well. We continue to make steady progress in areas of attendance andcontribution. I am now into my third year of work with these brethren. We all appreciate the hard work that goes into the paper.

Hugh W. Davis, 310 Little Road, Marietta, Ga.30060 — To those who may be planning a visit to the metropolitan area of Atlanta, Georgia:

After three years of meeting in the old YWCA at 181 Church Street in Marietta, we will soon moveinto our new meeting house. We hope that this move can be made by August or September, though delayin arrival of our pews could postpone this move. If you plan to worship with us in the near future, wesuggest that you telephone one of the brethren listed below and inquire about our place of meeting

at that time.

Our new building is located at 2651 Powers Ferry

Road in Marietta, less than 5 minutes from 1-75.

Take the Lockheed-Dubbins AFB exit and follow

this exit road east until it dead-ends into Powers

Ferry Road. A left turn here will take you to the

building very quickly

If you know of anyone who is stationed at Dobbins

Air Force Base or who is working at the giant Lock-

heed of Georgia plant, please tell them of our meet

ing place and send us their address here. We wel

come them and you to worship with us.