CALVINISM EXAMINED

John Calvin did not believe many of the doctrines that were attributed to him. In these lessons,however, we want to examine some doctrines that Calvin espoused.

John Calvin was a Frenchman, born in 1509 and died in 1564. He was one of the foremost leaders in the movement to reform Roman Catholicism. His whole thought revolved around a misconception of thesovereignty of God.

I for one, do not deny the sovereignty of GodHowever, I do deny the conclusion to which Calvin came on this subject. He believed that the absolute fixedness of everything is affirmed on the basis of the omniscience and foreknowledge of God; that nothing is contingent upon existing circumstances or human decision. I challenge the very premise upon which thisdoctrine is founded. To state that God foreknew everything that would come to pass is not to affirm that God fore-ordained everything and unchangeabldecreed it to be that way. Actually, there are some things that God did not choose to foreknow.

In Genesis 22:21 Moses wrote, "And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything untohim: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thouhast not withdrawn thy son, thine only son from me." God's statement points out the fact that God hadobviously not chosen to foreknow this about Abraham. The testing was to prove that he feared God. If we had no other example of this, we would see that God doesnot choose to foreknow, much less fore-ordain, events that took place.

God Changes His Plan

God in dealing with his people told Jeremiah, "At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, andconcerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down,and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of theevil that I thought to do unto them. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning kingdom to build and to plant it; If it do evil in mysight, that it obey not my voice, then will I repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them" (Jere. 18:7-9). So the very thing that Calvin denied is the ver y point that Jer emiah is making. God'dealings with man are based upon man's actions.

Also in Ezek. 3:17-21 we read, "Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, Thou shall surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, tosave his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedne , nor from his wicked way, he shall die inhis iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. "Again,when the righteous man doeth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay astumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, andhis righteousness which he hath done shall not beremembered; but his blood will I require at thinehand. Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous manthat the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul." The reason for citing these passages should be obvious. There are some things that God did not fix with such certainty that thecould not be changed if man is willing to do some things, John Calvin notwithstanding. Another goodexample of this is found in Jonah 3:4. "And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and hecried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall beoverthrown." Yet, God never carried out his judgmentagainst the city of Nineveh, Because They RepentedAt The Preaching of Jonah. Thus as we suggested,there are some things that are not fixed with such certainty that they cannot be changed.

OUR CHURCH BULLETINS

Many of our brethren publish bulletins and this is right. The church of our Lord should do all that it can to publish the good news of the gospel and the printed page is one way that this can be done. Many of the articles are fine and deserve a wide circulation. It is not uncommon for the mailing list to run into thethousands and a number of churches mail out eight or ten thousand copies. This covers the brotherhood from one part of the country to the other. I am writing this article not to find fault but to encourage brethren who have the responsibility of these publications to write more original material.

Many times in the course of a week or two we will receive the same copied article a dozen times from different bulletins. This may be all right for themembers who are paying for such but it is needless repetition as far as the rest of the church is concerned. The cost of the weekly bulletin, the time involved, the number of readers justify the best that can be doneand think how much more effective this would be if each was original and different.

There are times when having a way to state aposition or make a defense is necessary. Having apublication at the disposal of the church at such times is imperative. This is why they were born and why they continue. Local affairs do not need to bebrotherhood wide in publication. On SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES this was always our policy. Never to give brotherhood attention to purely local affairs, but to give happenings their just place. Be sure that the articles are for brotherhood reading. The brethren do not know sister Wiggins and did not know she had been in the hospital. This is not brotherhood news. Brethren let us take every means that is scriptural to preach the gospel but not to waste the Lord's money by useless repetition.

OUR OPPORTUNITY

We are constantly reminded by both secular and religious press of the deplorable conditions in ourworld. This paper and others like it have found it necessary at times to deal with questions over which Christians disagree and sometimes divide. We offer no apology for these efforts, though we do regret thecircumstances which constrain us to speak out on what we consider vital issues.

What a tragic mistake we would make if we became so involved in discu ions among ourselves that weclose our eyes to the opportunities which are before us to preach the gospel and bring the lost to the Saviour of men. The world in which Jesus lived was in a terrible me . Government was corrupt at every level.Men were in bondage to other men. Multitudes were hungry. Hypocrisy blemished the lives of those wholaid claim to special favor with God. Yet, in spite of allthat, Jesus sounded a note of optimism. "But when hesaw the multitudes, he was moved with compa ion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. Then saith heunto his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, butthe laborers are few; Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth laborers into his harvest" (Matthew 9:36-38).

In spite of trials "which shall come upon all theworld, to try them that dwell upon the earth," the Lord set before the church at Philadelphia an "opendoor" (Revelation 3:8-10). Good could still be done inthe face of such, circumstances. Providentially, God opens doors. The Jerusalem persecution which scattered the saints, resulted in the word beingpreached everywhere they went (Acts 8:1-4). Paul's arrest, lengthy detention and treatment as a prisoner but opened doors of opportunity for the gospel to bepreached. He said "But I would ye should understand, brethr en, that the things which happened unto mhave fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the gospel; So that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all other places; And many of thbrethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear" (Philippians 1:12-14). Truly, man's extremity is God's opportunity.

OPEN DOORS

(1) In Foreign Fields — There are some countries where gospel preaching is reaping the kind of results we used to see in this country. Nigeria, the Philippines, India, to name a few, have seen thousands obeythe Lord in recent times. Native preachers are carrying the message of truth to their own countrymen with glorious success. We are entering an eraof relaxed tension between major world powers. This offers greater opportunity to send the gospel messageinto areas of the world which have been difficult to reach in r ecent times. Our countr y is blessed withmaterial abundance. We have both the means and the men to help reach the untaught of the earth. Now the door is open in many places. How long it will remain open cannot be determined. But it will be a crime of the greatest magnitude if we do not enter these opendoors. I see an attitude toward foreign evangelism whichtroubles me. While more and more brethren are opening their hearts and their pocketbooks to get owith this work, still there are some who tell us that ther e ar e too many heathen at home to spendthousands of dollars to send and support men in other lands. They fail to understand that it is up to those of us who live in a given place to exert our efforts to save those in that place. How did people in that place learn the gospel? Was it not because someone came from elsewhere and brought the news? Further, there is amistaken concept as to the divine principle in supporting a gospel preacher. Some ask "Why should we support the work in Africa or Australia when there are counties in our own state where no work is beingdone?" The Bible principle is that churches support men who are faithful and able to teach. If a man is thought worthy of support, then he should receive itregardless of which place he decides he is needed most. If brethren would stop worrying about supporting a place and think in terms of supporting the man who preaches, wherever he preaches, then we would be on the right track. (2) At Home— Even the casual observer knows that multitudes in our land are disillusioned because of what is happening among the "mainline" churches. One man asked me recently "What has happened to allthe churches? Have they all gone crazy?" The more liberal churches of the day are losing members. Hungry souls are being starved on diets of politics, the social gospel, fun, food and frolic. They are being fed the empty husks of sceptical theology when they longfor something which will satisfy the searchingquestions as to who they are, why they are here and where they are going in the life to come. Disappointedin such hopes, many young people have turned to the Jesus Movement for answers. Much of the hippiemovement was in reality a cry for help. Others have simply dropped out with no attempt at replacement

There are many in denominational churches rightnow who know something is badly wrong. They are better prepared to listen to an alternative which thewould not have considered just a few years ago. While

some brethren, even some preachers, are lamenting that "nobody is interested" in discussing religion or the Bible, there are annumber of gospel preachers, plus other dedicated Christians, who regularly are converting to Christ some of these who "won't listen." Yes, they willisten. I hear gospel preachers bemoaning thfact that we are not converting people any more in gospel meetings. My experience the last few years has been the opposite and I know of several other gospel preachers who are finding similar results where they go. Certainly, there are congregations which still look on meetings as routine and makelittle preparation. But in the last few years it has been the exception when there were not several to obey the truth in meetings. I note an increasingnumber from the ranks of denominationalism.

Efforts in private home studies are bearing more and more fruit. There is nothing which catake the place of face to face study sessions where truth is taught, questions are answered with an openBible and where honest people are asked the simple question at the conclusion of such studies, "What hinders you from being baptized, now?" Yes, theworld is in a sorry me . The lives of millions are ensnared in sin. But after all, Jesus said he came to "seek and to save that which was lost" and that the sick "need a physician." The gospel is still "the power of God unto salvation" (Romans 1:16). Two shoe salesmen went to a primitive country to work.Soon, one of them wired his company that he was coming home because "nobody here wears shoes." The other one sent a different kind of wire. He said "What a market, everybody here needs shoes!" Well, everybody here needs the gospel. Let's get on with it, brethren.

H. E. PHILLIPS -A MAN OF INTEGRITY

On August 17,1967,1 received a telephone call from brother H. E. Phillips inviting me to become a regular writer for SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES. He could have called upon many brethren who are more capable writers and able students of the word,nevertheless I appreciated the invitation and acceptedthe responsibility and opportunity

In a letter to me the same day, he said: "Let mesuggest that you write so that the average person can understand; this is the person we are trying to reach with the truth. This has always characterized your writings. You are free from any editorial censor towrite whatsoever you believe will do good. We want toedify and teach to the glory of God. Any charges against anyone in error should have documented proof of the charge. I have no doubt about your articles doing this."

I give this quotation only because I feel that itreflects the kind of man he is and the editor he has been. He endeavored to be clear, simple, fair, instructive, forceful and factual as a preacher, writer and editor, and he expected the same of others.

I talked with brother Phillips in his home in Januaryof this year as he was making plans to give up thispaper, and it would have been difficult to find a man more deeply hurt over anything. He was turning fromthat which had become a part of him, and it was difficult to do. The Lord only knows the many hours spent in working and thinking about this paper, and the same is true of its influence for good. I know of noman who could have done a better job in bringing this paper to its present position of influence and respect

I love and appreciate H. E. Phillips. He is a good man. I'm thankful that I have had the privilege ofworking with him. As one looks back through theyears of controversy and editorial responsibility, his judgment has been amazing and his integrity inspiring.

Although his health has forced him to curtail some of his activities, I pray that he may have many years in which to preach, write, and otherwise exercise his righteous influence for the glory of the Master.

A SALUTE

H. E. Phillips has distinguished himself as the editor of Searching the Scriptures. Many publications havecome and gone since he began what was then a little and untested religious journal, but which has grown to a position of great influence. In no sense was hissuccess accidental. His termination of editorship and ownership may be (and no doubt is) wise and properdue to his health but it is nonetheless viewed with sadne , for he did it well and loved it much. An expression of appreciation is altogether in order.

It started with a concept. In the last i ue brother Phillips reflected on the course of Searching theScriptures from its beginning to the present, emphasizing the original cause and concept. One's concept always determines the direction and is therefore a critical point. It was pressed with dedication. Ambitions abandoned or even neglected are destined to fail. It takes more than a flair for writing to be an effective editor of a responsible journal. The plain hard work and toilsome effort essential to the success of such an undertaking wafreely expended. The years marched by. Persistence unflaggingly followed. Disappointments and discouragements, both economic and physical, combined with the weariness of contending for the faith in the face of never ceasing opposition, failed to diminish his dedication or interrupt his persistence. Mistakes are inevitably made in all human endeavors, but stability and firm course were maintained, and this stability is a solid plus. Some men of brilliance andpast usefulness become enraptured with doctrinalfancies or preoccupied with side i ues or abuses, andlose their perspective and equilibrium. Fear mounts as to what they will say next and as to what horse theywill be riding in which direction. Our brother's wr itings have consistently ser ved to answer questions, confirm faith, dispel doubts, instill confidence and increase knowledge. This is so muchpreferred to the fanciful "thinker" or vain speculator who sends up doubtful questions as balloons that can only confuse the weak and distract and discourage thefaithful. Humility was a companion. His pen did nocall attention to his person, but the subject at hanand what The Book had to say about it.

One final observation in this brief but sincere salute. He supplied an impetus and opportunity for perpetuation of journalistic reliability and excellence. Hecould have held on indefinitely, but at the risk ofbreaking health with a lessening of the momentum andpotential as a result. In Connie W. Adams, the new owner and editor, brother Phillips found a man eminently qualified as to ability, experience, reputation, and soundne . The medium he started and built is in good hands. It will really be a newpaper, however — the same name, format, many of the same writers etc., but the Phillips' era is now (we sadly say) past; the journalistic medium calledSearching the Scriptures now belongs to and its course will be chartered by (we gladly say) Connie W. Adams. And now I conclude with a grateful salute to

H. E. Phillips for the past, and a handshake of confidence and encouragement to the new editor in theprospects of a sound and edifying publication whose influence will be great and good.

QUESTION: Did Timothy have two gifts of the Spirit, one by the laying on of the hands of thepresbytery (1 Tim. 4:14) and another by the layinon of the hands of Paul (2 Tim. 1:6), or do these verses refer to the same gift? If the latter, why twolaying on of hands? Also, if one of these gifts was the gift of prophecy, why was Timothy exhorted to "give at-tendance to reading, to exhortation, todoctrine," and to "Study to shew thyself approved unto God" (1 Tim. 4:13; 2 T im! 2:15) ? Would not the supernatural power by virtue of the gifteliminate the nece ity of such effort?-B. C.

ANSWER: Our querist, with his questions, has certainly gone to the very heart of the issuesinvolved in the verses cited. I do not know that one can be absolutely certain in his answers to the above questions. No doubt, my position will differ somewhat from some learned men. However, based upon all that is revealed, I have formed some reasonable conclusions which I hope will be helpful to others.

The word translated "gift" in 1 Timothy 4:14 and2 Tim. 1:6 is the Greek "Charisma," which means "agift of grace, a favor which one receives without any merit of his own; in the N. T. . . . the gift of divine grace" (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon). A studyof the use of the word in the New Testament shows that it does not always refer to spiritual gifts or supernatural powers. Sometimes it refers to natural gifts: "Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching: Or he that exhorteth, oexhortation: he that giveth, let him do it withsimplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness" (Rom. 12:6-8). Again, "As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as goodstewards of the manifold grace of God. If any manspeak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if anman minister, let him do it as of the ability whicGod giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise anddominion for ever and ever. Amen." (1 Pet. 4:1011). In these verses both spiritual gifts (supernatural) and natural gifts are referred to by use of this word. The office or function of individuals in service to God is identified by the same word. It follows, then, that the word itself does not necessarily mean some gift of the Spir it.

Furthermore, the matter of "laying on of hands" does not always imply impartation of supernatural power or spiritual gifts. Acts 13:1-3 affords proof of this: "Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas,and Niger and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, whichhad been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, theHoly Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away." Surely Paul's inferiors did not impart any spiritual gift to him. He was already an apostle with full credentials (signs, 2 Cor. 12:12) of such. In this instance, the "laying on ohands" clearly signified their endorsement of and obedience to the Holy Spirit's command to "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." It often meant nothing more than ameans of designating one to a service (Cf. Acts 6:1-6). Even when supernatural powers were imparted, itwas a means of designating one to such service. The context must determine whether the service to which one is thereby separated or set apart is natural or supernatural.

The expression "which was given thee by prophecy" simply means that the gift, whatever it was, wadesignated or made known by the Holy Spirit through some prophet, probably the apostle Paul.

In the light of the above, it is very reasonable toconclude that 1 Tim. 4:14 refers to the presbytery or eldership of Timothy's home congregation doing thesame thing for him that Antioch in Syria did for Barnabas and Saul (Acts 13:1-3). By the "laying on ofthe hands of the presbytery" there was signified their endorsement of and obedience to the Holy Spirit's instructions through the prophet. In this case, th"gift" would be the work of the ministry whereunto he was separated. This was probably done when Timothyjoined Paul and Silas on Paul's second journey (Acts 16:1-3)

In harmony with the above, I conclude that 2 Tim.

1:6 refers to the same gift— the ministry to whichTimothy was set apart. The laying on of Paul's hands signified his endorsement of and obedience to theSpirit's instructions to so designate Timothy. Paul's acceptance of this young man at this time as a companion in the work which he and Silas sought to do may appear somewhat strange, especially in view of his recent experience with John Mark and thedissension between him and Barnabas over the matter (Acts 15:36-51). However, when we remember that this action was "by prophecy" (revealed by the Spirit),we can understand why Paul so readily obeyed thheavenly instructions.

The reason for exhorting Timothy to "stir up thgift" is suggested in the context. When Paul remembered the faith of Timothy's grandmother and mother (v. 5), he wanted to make sure the same faith continued in Timothy. Verses 7 and 8 amplify the reason: "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear;

but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lordnor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of theafflictions of the gospel according to the power ofGod." When we remember that Paul, at this writing, is a prisoner in Rome; that he is about to suffer martyrdom; that the Roman Empire is now bringingpressure to bear upon Christians, we can understand why Paul exhorts Timothy not to be filled with fear, nor be ashamed of the gospel, but "to keep fanninginto live flame the charisma of God." In verse 12 Paul refers to himself as an example, saying "For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

The problem posed by our querist relative to 1 Tim.

4:13 and 2 T im. 2:15 is altogether eliminated by theposition affirmed in this article. I find no conclusive evidence that Timothy possessed the gift of prophecy.While it may well be true that he possessed other spiritual gifts, I find no conclusive evidence of it.

THE CHRISTIAN CANNOT SINWeldon E. Warnock

The apostle John wrote, "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God" (1 Jn. 3:9). There have been various and sundry interpretations of this passage

(1) Some have contended that John is speakingabout specific sins of a heinous and notorious nature, such as murder, theft, drunkenness, etc. Catholic theologians have the verse prohibiting mortal sins as opposed to venial sins. Catholics define mortal sin as a grievous offense while a venial sin is a slight offense. The Bible makes no such distinction, however. There is nothing in the text under consideration, nor in the context, that limits it to specific sins rather than sin in general. (2) Others have proposed that God does not impute sin in the life of a Christian— only in the life of an unbeliever. Hence, a Christian doth not commit sin. But this is contrary to the definition. I John 3:4 states, "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also thelaw: for sin is the transgression of the law." Whether it be the Christian or the alien, whosoever violates the law of God, sins. Too, this concept contr adicts the passages that teach that a Christian does sin. (3) A distinction has been made between the carnal and spiritual natures of the believer. We are told that the spiritual nature of man does not sin but the old or carnal nature does. This view isolates the person from his nature, and, therefore is untenable. The child of God could declare, "It is not I that sins but my carnal nature." If wickedness may only be attributed to the carnal nature, then righteousness may only be at

tributed to the spiritual nature, hence the person does nothing good or bad. The person cannot be extricated from his nature. John said, "he (person) cannot sin," not "it (nature) cannot sin."

(4) A mor e widely accepted view is that John is setting forth an idealistic situation rather than speaking realistically. The proponents of this view tell us that John knows that Christians will sin, but here, theoretically, he proposes what Christians ought to be.Ideally speaking, a Christian does not sin for he is born of God. However, in light of the Gnostic heresy thatJohn was refuting, he was interested in facts— not "ideals." The verse is concrete, practical and attainable. (5) Similar to the "idealistic" view is the relative realistic approach. The closer one is to Christ the more holiness he possesses. If a person abides in Christ (IJn. 2:28) and does not disobey him, having reached maturity, it could be said of him that he sins not, relatively speaking. But John is not writing relatively,but rather, absolutely. He says, "Whosoever is born of God (novices and matur e) doth not commit sin." (6) Another explanation is that John is condemningdeliberate and wilful sins. It is proposed that Christians sin involuntarily by yielding to weaknesses and temptations but the genuine Christian cannotcommit a wilful sin against God. This interpretation disallows for a genuine Christian on the face of the earth, for where is a Christian who has not committed wilful sins? (7) Finally, there is the interpretation that theverse is prohibiting habitual and persistent sin. This is what I believe John to be teaching. The Christian is a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17). God's seed (principle ofdivine life) dwells in him (I Jn. 3:9). His mind is set on things above (Col. 3:2). Paul wrote, "How shall we,that ar e dead to sin, live any longer therein" (Rom.6:2)? Thus, John is stating that the regenerated manno longer commits sin or lives in sin, yea, he cannot sin. The word, "cannot," suggests that the Christian may not continue sinning or walking in sin. The word does not imply that it is impo ible for the child of God to transgress the law of God. I John 2:1 explicitly shows that a child of God can sin. It rather denotes that the Christian may not permi ively sin in keepingwith his new manner of life.

There are several examples in the Bible where theword, "cannot," is used with no implication of impo ibility. Lot said, after being told to leave Sodom,"I cannot escape to the mountain, lest some evil take me, and I die" (Gen. 19:19). Was it impo ible for L ot to go to the mountain? Certainly not! His going wouldnot have been for his own good. In Gen. 44:22 it is said of Benjamin, "The lad cannot leave his father: for if he should leave his father, his father would die." Does "cannot" here mean impo ible? Not at all! It suggests that if he left his father, his father would die. Manyexamples could be multiplied but these are sufficient to show how the word, "cannot," may be used.

1021 Welford Drive Xenia, Ohio

ARGUMENTS FOR THE INSTRUMENT IN WORSHIP

Thus far in this series of articles on the general theme of instrumental music in the worship of theNew Testament Church we have learned that God has said "sing" and to this the voice of world scholarshipisgenerally agreed.

However, we want to consider some of the arguments made in defense of instrumental music in the worship of the New Testament Church. To deny or seek to leave the impression that no affirmativearguments are made would be less than honest. There are arguments made both for and against organic evolution. There is an answer for every argument for organic evolution because the Bibleteaches God created all things (Gen. 1 & 2). There is an answer to every argument made for instrumental music in the worship of the New Testament Church since God hastold usto "sing."

We will not give detailed space to all arguments which we have ever heard made but rather will note some of the more commonly made ones.

"PSALLO"

In my study it appears to me that the most often made argument for instrumental music in the worship of the New Testament Church has been that the in-strument is inherent in the Greek word,psallo, translated sing in the English New T estament.

Through the years as gospel preachers havediscussed this with denominational people andpreachers, sooner or later, after giving up on everyother argument they have fled to psallo. I would saythat this is not only the most often made argument,but if any argument for such could be called a strongone, this would be the one.

In the reading I have done it seems to be admitted that the instrument cannot be justified from theEnglish text and so a pseudo-scholarly effort is made to justify it from the Greek language, with those making the argument knowing that most of us know little if anything at all about the Greek. They hopby their just saying so, people will accept that thinstrument is in the Greek, psallo.

CLASSICAL GREEK

It is admitted that in the Cla ical Greek languagethat psallo often included an instrument. One can find Classical definitions from lexicons to this effect.

Thayer gives the Cla ical definition as "a. to pluck off,pull out: . . . the hair . . . b. to cause to vibrate btouching, to twang . . . spec, to touch or strike thechord, to twang the strings of a musical instrument so that they gently vibrate .. . to play on a stringed instrument, to play the harp ... to sing to the music of the harp." (page 675) For an excellent discussion of this point, the reader should read the debate, Both Sides of the Music Question, which Brother Bob Bunting had with a denominational preacher several years ago. The price is 25cand may be ordered from: Religious Supply Center, P.O. Box 13164, Louisville,Ky. 40213.

NEW TESTAMENT USAGE

However, in our study we are interested in psallo asused in the New Testament. The Koine Greek or the Greek language in which the New Testament was written had evolved to the point that the instrument was not inherent in psallo.

What does the word psallo mean when used in the New Testament? That is the question. Of it, Vine says,"in the N.T., to sing a hymn, sing praise .. . Eph. 5:19,Rom. 15:9; 1 Cor. 14:15; Jas. 5:13." (Vol. 3, page 58)(Emphasis mine, TGO) Thayer says, "in the N.T. to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praise of God in song,Jas. 5:13... Eph. 5:19, Rom. 15:9,1 Cor. 14:15." (page675) (Emphasis mine, TGO) These two world recognized Greek authorities say that psallo in the New Testament means to "sing."

IF If psallo means to accompany with an instrument,then it is commanded and one could not leave it off without disobeying God. The instrument would have to be used and would not be a matter of choice. If psallo includes the instrument, then each individual would have to play upon one because everyone is to psallo. One or two instruments for a whole congregation would not be sufficient.Col. 3:16 says "singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." The instrument God has specified that is to vibrate when one sings is the chords of the humanheart. A desperate effort is made on psallo when all other attempts have failed to justify mechanical instruments of music in the worship of the New Testament Church. Denominationalists would not give up so easy on other arguments and run to psallo if they had any faith intheir other arguments. When psallo is taken from them, they have nothing left. Thus, they are outside the doctrine of Christ and do not have the Father and Son. (2 John 9-11)

On May 22-24, Raymond Bishop of Myrtle,Mi i ippi, represented the Apostolic Church Of The Lord Jesus Christ in a debate with Kenneth Green of Louisville, Kentucky, who represented the Church ofChrist. The discu ion took place in the Apostolic building in Jeffersontown, Kentucky. The Godheadand Holy Spirit Baptism were the subjects of discussion. It was my privilege to moderate for Ken.

It is not my purpose to give an argument-forargument review of the debate but just to present what appeared to be the major arguments. Since the first two nights were on the Godhead we will discuss both of those nights together. Ken defended three persons in the Godhead and Mr. Bishop defended one person.

Ken laid his foundation for the complete debate by affirming that the Bible only was sufficient for men today and that there is no need or value in latter day revelations (most holiness groups accept 1914 as the date when the Bible "became a new book" when the Holy Ghost was again outpoured and the truths about the Godhead were uncovered, according to the United Pentecostal Church Manual)

John 10:30; 17:11, 21, 22 were introduced by Ken toshow the sense in which the Father and Son are one. Jesus prayed that believers might be one even as he and his father are one— one in unity, not one in person. A chart was presented for Mr. B to check whether Christ wants us to be a united one (in agreement) or an absolute one (one person). Since Mr. B believes the father and son were one person this proved to be dilemma for him. This chart was introduced in nearly every speech of the debate and was quite effective in showing what is meant by the oneness of the father and son. Mr. B replied that chapter 17 had nothing todo with the Godhead but was talking about the unityof the church. Ken showed that while this may nohave been the main point of discussion the context did discuss deity in verses 1, 5, 11, 21, 22. Mr. B then accused Ken of comparing the Godhead to humanitand said it could not be done. Ken showed that Jesus compared humanity to the Godhead in no mistakable terms (Jn. 17:21, 22). He also pointed out that different words are used in the original language tdistinguish between an absolute one and a united one.

Another key argument made by Ken was on Mark

13:32 where Jesus said the son did not know the day ofhis coming and of the end of the world, but the father only. Mr. B replied, "Can you imagine deity noknowing ... he has one inferior to the other . . ." as though that answered the argument. Ken countered by noting that he had just read the passage and Mr. B was denying what the verse plainly said— that there was something the father knew which the son did not know, thus a plurality of persons.

Luke 23:46 was another strong argument. If Jesus was the fulness of God to whom did he give his spirit when he said "Father, into thy hands I commend myspirit"? Mr. B said Jesus gave the human spirit to the eternal spirit. Ken then asked if there were two spirits and what became of the human spirit? He took theopportunity to point out that there was adisagreement among the Apostolics as to whether the sonship of Jesus has ended.

When Mr. B was in the affirmative he asked "If there are three separate and distinct persons in theGodhead, why did John see only one in Rev. 4:2?" Ken showed from the context (Rev. 3:21) that Jesus said to him that overcometh "I will give him to sit down with me in my throne, asI also overcame and sat down with my father in his throne." And further, that thougJohn saw one on the throne, it wasn't Jesus. Jesus was the Lamb who took the book out of the hand of him who sat on the throne (Rev. 5:6-13).

Mr. B made an argument on Isa. 9:6, asking if Jesus could be the Son and the everlasting father at thesame time. Ken rebutted by noting that the Bible saysJoseph was a father to Pharaoh (Gen. 45:8), Job was a father to the poor (Job 29:16— which meant he was a provider and protector), Abraham is the father of us all (Rom. 4:16)— all of which showed that the word father is used in different ways and does not alwaysmean a paternal parent.

Col. 2:9, 10 ("In Jesus dwells all the fulness of the Godhead") was Mr. B's strong argument. He pressedthe point that it says "in him", not "in them". Ken called the audiences attention to Eph. 3:1which states that we might "be filled with all thefulness of God." Does that make us deity or one and the same being as God? He noted that in John 14 Jesus said he would pray to the father and the father would send another comforter (who was supposed to beJesus, according to Mr. B). Ken asked if the fulness of God being possessed in Jesus meant that Jesus was all there is to deity, how could more of Jesus be sent bythe father? Did Jesus pray to himself to send himself? Ken exposed this absurdity with an illustration: Suppose a friend of Mr. B's called him on the phoneand said "can you come and see me"? And Mr. B says"I'm sorry but I can't come but I'll speak to me andsend me over."

It was effectively shown that the apostolics reallydid not know what they believed because part of the time they would take the Sabellean position (manifestation theory, that Jesus was acting out theparts of three members), the Marcellean positio(dilatation theory, that Jesus extended himself like aplastic man— was in heaven and earth at the same time), and the Nestorian position (the duel nature theory, that there were two persons and wills in Christ) and that their doctrine actually ended in amass of confusion. A chart on the baptism of Christ (Mt. 3:16,17) made this quite clear. There are onlthree po ible positions one can take regarding thbaptism scene: (1) that there were three separate persons (Father— voice from heaven, Son— in the water, and Holy Spirit— in form of a dove), (2) Each one was but one-third of God, or (3) Jesus was aventriloquist and deliberately deceived John bthrowing his voice up to heaven. Mr. B claimed that he took none of these positions, but that the only person there was Jesus. Ken pointed out that this actuallyamounted to his taking position number three.

The last night of the discu ion was on Holy Spirit baptism. Ken affirmed that it was confined to theapostolic age and not for believers today. A list ofquestions was given to Mr. B, among which was: Where is Jesus (the fulness of God) now? Mr. B refused to answer saying it was not on the subject.Ken showed that it very definitely was on the subject by asking "How can there be an out-pouring of deity(Holy Spirit) if all the fulness of the Godhead is in Jesus (according to Mr. B's concept)?" Still no answer. Mr. B was also asked if it is true that in 1914 came the revelation on the truth of the Godhead when it is claimed that the Holy Spirit was again outpoured (according to the UPC Manual)? Again, no answer. He was asked "What will happen to a person who receives water baptism but dies before he receives Holy Spirit baptism?" Mr. B said the person would be lost. Kenresponded by showing that if such a person was lost then it would be God's fault for not keeping his promise. Mr. B ridiculed salvation without Holy Spiritbaptism, saying Simon the sorcerer would be a member of Mr. Green's church. Ken showed that Jesus said "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mk. 16:16) and that Simon had met Jesus' requirements (Acts 8.13)

Ken's chart on Eph. 4:4, 5 showed that the onebaptism had to be water baptism (I Pet. 3:21). Mr. B never did say which one he was going to give up(water baptism or Holy Spirit baptism). It was shown that Jesus was the administrator of Holy Spirit baptism but men were the administrators of water baptism (Mt. 28:18-20; Mt. 3:11). Water baptism was a command to be obeyed, not a promise to be received (Acts10:47,48)

The Apostolics believe that the baptism of fire also came with Holy Spirit baptism. Ken showed that the baptism of fire was damnation and was mentioned as a general promise of the work of Christ but when thepromise was made to the apostles alone the baptism of fire was left out (Acts 1). Mr. B said there were two fires of Lk. 3:16,17 and that John did not know who the apostles would be. Ken presented Matthew's parallel account (Mt. 3) which showed that the wickedPharisees were also there and called on Mr. B to tell us if they received the promise of Holy Spirit baptism. This was finally dropped. Charts on the context ofActs 1 and 2 showed the apostles being the ones who received Holy Spirit baptism.

Mr. B tried to make it appear in Acts 10 and 11 that the rejoicing was because Cornelius had received HolySpirit baptism but Ken showed that the Bible said no such thing but that the rejoicing was because "Godhad granted unto the Gentiles repentance unto life" I Acts 11:18).

The audience answered out loud when Ken asked if they could heal like the apostles did. They said "yes"but when two people were presented who obviouslyneeded physical healing the audience hushed.

There were some outbursts but the overall conduct of the audience was good. A sincere appeal was made for them to accept the truth, that this was a serious study and that we were not trying to insult the intelligence of anyone. Perhaps it has been characteristic of debating that each representative tries to hold his own members by insulting his opponent rather than sincerely trying to convert the opposition. However, we believe the Apostolics had a great deal of respect for Ken when the debate was over because of the attitude he displayed

The Apostolics plan to print the discu ion in their paper, The Apostolic Witne .

P.O. Box 651 Central City, Kentucky

LARRY R. DeVORE, Box 86, Roseville, Ohio 43777.We moved here from Portage, Indiana, on March 26th. Since moving here we have had 3 baptisms (2 in ameeting with Jesse Wiseman, April 22-29) and onerestored. Bill Reeves will hold us a meeting June 24

29.

DAVID SMITHERMAN, P.O. Box 1973, VictoriaTexas 77901. For the first time in its history thGlasgow Street church of Christ in Victoria, Texas is a self-supporting congregation. Its preacher no longer depends upon the financial aid of other local churches. This church has determined to carry its own load.Hopefully, no preacher in the future who comes to work with these good brethren will have to dependupon outside help. This step is attributable to achanged attitude on the part of the members and awillingness to sacrifice. When traveling in the Victoria area you have a most cordial invitation to come andworship with us.

VERNON LOVE, 107 Sycamore Street, Marked Tree,Arkansas 72365. After nearly three years we are moving to work with the church at Clermont, Florida. Our new address will be 715 Sunny Dell Drive,Clermont, Florida 32711. The Marked Tree church is looking for a preacher to move here. Any who are interested contact Al Hale or Shaver Dunn, 40Broadway, Marked Tree, Arkansas 72365.

BILL SIMMONS, 512 Columbia Ave., Whitefish,Montana 59937. Since last September, Mark Raulerson has been trying to secure support to "go" tothe Northwest. He has written or phoned scores with no wages or expenses resulting. Mark is a most capable preacher with several years of full time work. The last ten years have been with the church inMonticello, Florida. They and many others recommend him. Mark is convinced able workers are desperately needed up here in the Northwest U.S. and Canada. He is aware the few preachers up here cannot get to all the Christians who have asked for teaching! Therefore, Mark, Lorraine, and five children are moving this summer to help us in "sowing the seed" uphere. He has no support or job promised! He is leavinga good job as a telephone company executive and good congregation. Mark will need about $800 forsalary, $200 for housing, and $1,000 for moving expenses. What he doesn't get from individuals or churches, he will try to get by "tent-making." Theywill live with us until they are able to get a place of their own. There are several small churches he needs to work with as soon as he gets here. Please prayabout this, and if you can send anything, send to: Mark Raulerson, P.O. Box 416, Lloyd, Florida 32337, or phone 1-904-997-5630.

THAYER STREET FALL LECTURESSEPT. 17 -20

For several years now the Thayer Street church in Akron, Ohio has conducted a fall lecture series. Attendance and interest mount year by year as capable speakers present timely le ons.

Monday, Tuesday, Thursday

EVENING

7:30 — The Charismatic Movement— John Clark

8:35 — Personal Evangelism— Harold Dowdy

Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday MORNING

9:30 -Faith-Andy deKlerk 10:35 — Congregational Cooperation— Robert

Crawley AFTERNOON

1:30 — Music in Worship— Paul Earnhart 2:15

— Song Service — This will end at 2:45 Housing is available in homesof area Christians.

PREACHERS NEEDED

Self-supporting congregation at 23 Margaret Street,JOLIET, ILLINOIS is in need of a full time preacher as of August 1, 1973. Call 814-478-3929 or 815-726-2862 after 5:00 P.M. _____

The church of Christ in GLEN BURNIE,MARYLAND is seeking a faithful gospel preacher to work with us for the cause of Christ in our area. The Glen Burnie area represents quite a challenge foChristians ambitious in the work of the Lord. We have an average attendance of 85 and are fully able tosupport a man to fill our need. Please contact Tom Cain at 104 Baylor Road, Glen Burnie, Md. 21061.

NEW WORK TO BEGIN

With a nucleus of thirty families who now worship at Manslick Road in Louisville, Kentucky where the editor presently preaches, a new congregation is to begin meeting in the Hebron Junior High School oSeptember 9, 1973. This new work will be located half way between Louisville and Shepherdsville, Kentuckyin the north end of Bullitt County and will be known as the Hebron Lane Church. The editor will work with this new congregation, supported by Manslick Road until the new work is self-supporting. Prospects for growth in this booming community are excellent. The work will begin with a tent meeting on the lot onHebron Lane which has been purchased for a buildinglocation.

Julian Snell, of Abilene, Texas, is coming to workwith the church at Manslick Road. The new work is a planned and peaceful "swarm."

AVAILABLE FOR WEEKEND SERIES

Yater Tant, former editor of the Gospel Guardian has resigned his work in Birmingham and is now available for gospel meeting work, but wishes to conduct mainly weekend meetings featuring teachingto motivate brethren for their gospel meetings or to teach on issues, past and present which concern Christians. He has announced these subjects for this latter series: The Pattern of Apostasies, The Question of Fellowship, The Church and the Social Gospel,The Church of Christ: 1920-1970; Congregational Cooperation, and Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory.

HOYT H. HOUCHEN, 12528 E. Alaska Place,Aurora, Colorado 80012: Our work at Boston Street in Aurora continues to do well. Last February Arnold Schnabel of Portland, Oregon was with us for a series of lectures on "The Bible and Science." Both the auditorium and balcony were well filled on the last Sunday afternoon when brother Schabel spoke o"Evolution." Congregations would do well to secure the services of this man who is both a Christian and a scientist.

Several have been baptized here at Boston Street in recent weeks, including a young woman who was aCatholic. We are planning a Vacation Bible School inAugust.

I have preached in several gospel meetings this year. My next meeting will be at Eugene, Oregon,where our son Larry preaches, and then Portales,New Mexico (University Drive) September 3-9, anClovis, California Sept. 30-Oct. 5. This will completemy meeting schedule for this year.

We have many visitors at Boston Street and especially during the summer months. If you plan tvisit Colorado this summer we shall be happy to have you worship with us at Boston Street, Aurora.

IRVEN LEE, P.O. Box 866, Hartselle, Alabama 35640

East Gordon Street church in Valdosta, Georgiadivided last summer with rather bitter charges andcounter charges. One group went to a dwelling house on Force Street between Ashley and Patterson inNorth Valdosta. Nathan Hagood preaches there.

Dallas Blevins and others of the congregation havepreached for East Gordon Street. Recently thecongregation that met on East Gordon moved to its new building on St. Augustine Road near 1-75.

On Sunday, June 17, 1973, the men of the North Valdosta church and St. Augustine Road church met inthe same building for about two hours discu ingdifferences and working toward peace. This was not their first such meeting. There had also been private discu ions. Conway Skinner, J. Edward Nowlin, and I met with them. The men reached accord to the extent that each will announce gospel meetings, special services, etc., at the other place and feel free to attend such services. Each place is expected to use good menin such meetings.

Let us hope and pray that the future may be brightfor these two churches. Stop by either place whentraveling through Valdosta.