THE DANGERS OF NEW TRANSLATIONS

For many years all translators handled the wordof God with respect. The King James version wasgiven to the English world by forty-seven of theworld's finest scholars. It was given at a time whenthe English language was at its fullest flower. Thistranslation gave us the restoration of the blood-bought church of Christ and is the most commonversion of the Bible until this day. It is true thatAlexander Campbell published a translation called "The Living Oracles," but it was little used and Campbell continued, as did other restoration preachers, to Use the King James version. Although some of the words used in the King James havechanged their meaning, it should be rememberedthat no translation is made of words that all understand. A good dictionary overcomes this problem in short order. The pronouns such as "thee" and "thou" are not archaic for all know them and what is meant by them.

The Revised Version was given to the public in1881 and was the first serious attempt to improve onthe King James. It was followed in 1901 by theAmerican Revised, thought by some to be the mostliteral translation ever made. All of these versions handled the word of God with respect and the truthof the gospel could be established by any of them. Translations such as Goodspeed, Phillips,Weymouth, and Williams posed little threat to thechurch of the Lord for they were used mostly for comparison and study.

In our day, however, this has not been the rule.The market is being flooded with modern translations that do not regard the word with respect, hence teach all kinds of false doctrine. TheAmerican Bible Society has joined in an effort topass these translations off to the public as the wordof God. The most serious of these is a translation called "The New English Bible" which was used by the American Bible Society in the version, "Good News for Modern Man." In translating Acts 20:7 itreads, "On Saturday night in our assembly forthe breaking of bread."

I am sure I do not have to point out what thiswould do to God's people. They would not knowwhen to partake of the Lord's supper. It has beenpointed out time and again that we know when bythis divine apostolic example. Paul waited a full week to be present on the Lord's Day. It was on thisday that the church of the Lord had its beginning,on this day that the Holy Spirit filled the apostles,on this day that about 3,000 were added to thechurch. See Isa. 2:3, Joel2:28, Dan. 2:44, Acts 2:3847, etc. There is not a Greek text on earth that would justify the translation, "On Saturday night."This is not what Luke said and is contrary to theGreek, and to all "church fathers" who testified it was the practice of the early church to observe theLord's Supper every Lord's Day.

The question as to why any translator wouldrender it Saturday night may be clearly answered:modern scholars give their interpretation of whatthe verse means instead of a translation. The Lord's Supper is of small importance to them. It makeslittle difference whether it is observed on Saturdaynight, Sunday, or not at all. They do not regard it is important. The alarming thing is that the AmericanBible Society would push such a work. If the churchof the Lord does not "give diligence" to make itscalling and election sure, we will have a generationthat does not know the difference in an interpretation and a translation and therefore a generation that does not know even when the Communion should be observed. I marvel.

SCHOOLS AND PAPERS

All through the stormy days of conflict withthose brethren who advocated the right of congregations from their treasuries to contribute toschools and other private enterprises, conservative-minded brethren generally granted the right of individuals to operate, support and/or utilize the services of privately operated service-type businesses.In recent years a few men have begun to raise theirvoices, rather loudly, in opposition to the right ofChristians privately to contribute to a school which has a Bible department. Some deny the right ofparents and students to utilize such service. According to some of these men, such a school can beoperated by Christians but they cannot teach theBible in it, for that becomes another "collectivity" topreach the gospel.

The Bible teaches that it is the work of the congregation to support the preaching of the gospel.It is also the duty of individuals in the home, school,business or wherever their influence may be exerted,to teach the truth.. It is the duty of parents to seethat their children are educated. Teaching school isan honorable profession and when Christians run aschool, if they honor their calling at all, then the environment they create will reflect the influences ofthe gospel in their own lives and they will surely usetheir opportunity to teach the Bible.

Daniel Sommer waged warfare on the schools for many years "in the AMERICAN CHRISTIAN REVIEW. He argued that since we are "complete" inChrist, that the schools are not needed and said thatwhen a Christian gives to the congregation as heshould that he will have nothing left to give to aschool anyhow. Interestingly, he waged his war through his paper,, which was not the church, and did not seem to see that if his argument on contributionwas so, that his readers violated it when they paidtheir subscription to his paper.

A debate was recently held in Pasadena, Texas onthis issue (the debate will be printed) in which bothof these arguments were made. Frankly, I would liketo know how brethren who espouse this position can successfully carry their battle without a paper to givevoice to their views. If they operate a paper and sellit on a subscription basis, then they are selling ateaching service, which the school also does. Howeversimply they may organize and run such a paper, itwill fall under their own definition of "collectivity."

Every privately operated paper I know anythingabout is a legal entity, whether it is incorporated or not. They receive donations (whether money, time orservice from various ones), have names, mailing permits and can be sued. Even those not incorporatedare styled by law "quasi-corporations." We have notheard one argument against the school that cannot bemade with equal force against the papers and publishing houses. Indeed, "happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth"(Romans 14:22).

Yet, it is our conviction that these have a right tofunction in the realm of private enterprise and offertheir services for sale to any who need them. Wedeny the right of a local church to contribute to asingle one of them. But we affirm the right of individuals to run such businesses and the right ofinterested parties to make use of their services. Cancongregations or individuals buy tracts, class literature or books from a publishing house? Or doesthe "completeness" argument mean that they mustpublish their own Bibles, tracts and class literature?If these are purchased from brethren in such business, then have the churches or individuals become guilty of patronizing another "collectivity" topreach the gospel?

There is absolutely no excuse for this issue everdividing brethren unless some undertake to makelaws which the Lord did not and make their consciences the guide for others. We have neverthought less of a brother if he did not contribute to aschool or send his children there. That is his own affair. If we contribute or send our children, thenthat is our affair. If one does not wish to subscribe to this paper, then that is his choice and we will thinknone the less of him. But when brethren take to their pulpits to air such matters, take up space in churchbulletins, send for men to come and lecture before thecongregation for a week on the subject, and begin tosay that those who favor such activities are digressive, unsound and to be avoided, then factionalism has already started and "I pray thee,have me excused."

Supporters of schools or papers should not leavethe impression that they question the spirituality ofthose who do not see fit to use their services. We believe it is out of place to use church facilities orfunctions to advertise and promote schools or papers.Some promoters of such activities, in their zeal, may at times have become the objects of just criticism.But abuses do not rule against a just principle itself.

Many occupations are spoken of favorably in theBible. Further, the right of personal choice in the useof one's resources is also taught. Peter said to Ananias, "Whiles it remained, was it not thine own?and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power"(Acts 5:4)? Ephesians 4:28 teaches the honor of workfor the Christian "that he may have to give to himthat hath need." This implies personal choice in the use of honorably earned wages. Of course, every Christian should give as he has prospered to the congregational treasury in order for the work God gave the congregation to be accomplished. But it isnot the business of the church to run schools or publishing businesses. These fall into the realm of private activity and that is where they ought to stay.This writer sincerely hopes that other oral debates on this question will not be forthcoming for awhile. Weare not opposed to debates and have participated inseveral. Much good has come from them. But it appears to us now that further such discussion mightgenerate considerable heat and pose the threat offracturing peace and fomenting parties before enoughtime has elapsed for careful study to be given to the questions involved. Perhaps the papers would providea better forum for discussion of questions which involve private enterprises since that is really whatthe papers are anyhow. Meanwhile, there is a needfor careful thought, brotherly concern, long-sufferingand patience. Objectivity should mark all such studies and detracting personal remarks should beleft out entirely.

Paper To Be Enlarged

With the January, 1975 issue, SEARCHING THESCRIPTURES will increase its size from 16 pages to20 pages enabling us to include more teachingmaterial each month. We think you will be glad (andperhaps surprised) to know that we propose to dothis without a price increase in your subscription. We think this is a bargain in these days of ever-increasing prices. The bulk of the teaching articleseach month is by those men who have been asked tocover certain assignments. This means that other articles must wait until space is available. Because ofthis lack of space, many good articles have accumulated which we hope in time to print. AfterJanuary, we will be able to include more of these. Wewill also accept about 15 more church ads which will help defray this cost. Book advertising space willremain the same as it is now. Stay with us. By theway, when you renew, why not do someone a favorand subscribe for him?

WORSHIP

The account of the conversion of the man from Ethiopia, with which we are familiar, is recorded inActs chapter 8. Verses 26 through 28 bring into focusthe statements to serve as launching points for thisstudy. "But an angel of the Lord spake unto Philip,saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, the sameis desert. And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority underCandace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was over allher treasure, who had come to Jerusalem to worship,and he was returning, and sitting in his chariot and reading the prophet Isaiah."

Worship, defined very simply is, "reverence rendered to God." Obviously it involves both attitude and actions. The importance of worship iscomplimented in that it is required of all men whowant the proper relationship with God. It is inseparably connected with right relationship. Stressis placed upon meeting certain requirements in order to make it acceptable to God. The man of thistext obviously felt very keenly his responsibility toworship since he had traveled several hundred milesto do so. There are several lessons to be gleanedfrom this man's actions.

We might note the object of his worship from anegative standpoint for emphasis. He had not traveled this great distance to worship some man.Any reverence thus rendered would have been as misdirected as was Cornelius' action when he bowed down to Peter. That rebuke must still be heard,"Stand up; I myself also am a man" (Acts 10:26).Neither angels, idols, nor devils had brought thisnobleman from the lands lying south of Egypt torender reverence. Who then? Only Jehovah, the Godof heaven and earth. Jerusalem, the Site of the temple, synonymous with the presence of God,challenged the presence of the Jew each year in hisworship obligation under the Law. We cannot withcertainty state whether the eunuch was a Jew orproselyte of the Jewish religion. In any case he waszealous in pursuit of his religion, an admirable trait we should cultivate. The purpose of his visit to Jerusalem was "to worship" according to the Law ofMoses, for as yet he knew no other way.

He was returning homeward, probably by way ofEgypt, the first leg of his journey being fromJerusalem to Gaza. Gaza is in southern Palestine, in Judea, about 60 miles southwest of Jerusalem. As hewas riding along he "was reading." The word thus translated is "aneginosken" which means that he was reading aloud as Philip "heard him." Historians notethis was common for the Jew when traveling alone.Whether by command or by common practice suchreading was no doubt a pleasant and profitablepastime. May I suggest the lasting impression madeby his period of worship in Jerusalem activated thisnobleman in seeking greater knowledge. Prompted byhis worship of Jehovah he wished for a better understanding of His will and so he traveled alongreading from Isaiah the prophet. Question: "Are we motivated by our periods of worship today to seekgreater knowledge and understanding of God's will?" The eunuch teaches a profitable lesson here.

Worship involves three primary considerations: authority, place and the activity. The source of authority for both the eunuch, for you and me isGod. The statement of Jesus to the woman at the well was "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24).Two essentials are here emphasized, "spirit" and "truth." To worship "in spirit" involves our conscious attention and involvement in the significance of what we are doing. This requires concentration and self discipline. "In truth" comprehends the things divinely appointed. "Thy word is truth" (John 17:17). Neither aspect as herestated is unimportant that it can be ignored. Neitheris super-important to the neglect of the other. Eachof these requisites must receive careful attention tobe acceptable unto God.

"Meaningful worship" is a reference in common usage today and is apparently the object of muchsearching by some. To accomplish this some haveadopted the atmosphere of the spiritualist by turning out the lights, joining hands, engaging in chain prayers, spontaneous singing and a lot of other "tomfoolery." Mark it, meaningfulness will not befound among these or other externals. Worship, filledwith meaning, will be found where "spirit and truth"are combined in our expression of reverence untoGod.

The place of worship for this eunuch, a Jew stillbound to the Law of Moses, was Jerusalem. It was amatter of geography, a fact recognized by Jew andGentile alike. The woman speaking to Jesus at the well reminded that the Jews said, "in Jerusalem isthe place where men ought to worship" (John 4:20).Worship after the New Testament order, for you andme, requires rather than place, a relationship. It is inChrist, in the church, that men render acceptableworship unto God. This relationship embraces everytrue worshipper. Outside none can worship acceptably.

The activity of this eunuch in his worship of Godin Jerusalem was regulated by the Law of Moses.Ours today is undergirded by the "apostles doctrine"(Acts 2:42). Nothing more nor less than that circumscribed by the New Testament may be engaged in. Five distinct avenues of expression for the worshipper are authorized. I trust every reader

remembers these as singing (Eph. 5:19), prayer (Acts2:42), Lord's supper (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:23), giving (1 Cor. 16:1), teaching (Acts 2:42). These items comprehend the whole of God's requirement, His authorization for the worshipper. Involvement in these acts is personal and requires conscious attention, concentration and self discipline as we meet the demands of worshipping "in spirit." With minds centered upon God and hearts attuned to Hiswill we commit ourselves to these expressions of reverence.

If we could turn back the pages of time, wherewould men of faith in yesteryear worship? Men likePeter, Paul, James and John. Certainly not wherethe Old Testament is still held as the standard of authority. Not where Roman Catholicism is the system with its image worship, bead counting and papal domination. Not in some protestantdenomination, the name of which cannot even befound in the Word of God. I suggest, not even in alldesignated "churches of Christ." But where? In the place where every activity is backed by the authorityof the scriptures, where they could worship "in spiritand truth." Would this be where you worship, gentlereader? If so, would it be because of my or yourpersonal contribution to the worship atmosphere, or,in spite of it?

What about our worship? Yours and mine? Is itwhat it ought to be, what it must be? How do wecompare with the sterling attributes evident in thiseunuch? Favorably? He was of the people of God. He was a zealous worshipper, willing to overcome the hardship of time and distance for his God. He was astudent of the word of God, a sincere seeker, whowhen he found the truth obeyed it. Are you, am I, asincere seeker of truth? When confronted with truth will we obey it? Consider ye well!

Page 6

SPEAKING TRUTH

O. E. Watts

In trying to plead against the use of extreme (false) arguments it is easy to make statements which arestronger than we intend. In the article, "Much Grape Juice?", my statement about requiring "more of others than does the Lord" was one of these. We, ourselves,"oppose social drinking" so certainly do not regard allothers who do so as "extremists" and too "zealous".

But, my partners, some of your wild assertions and contentions are weakening the otherwise good and conclusive teaching you are giving on the subject. That is the point. Below are some examples.

The claim that ancients preserved fresh grape juice (withno trace of alcohol) the year around can not be proved.Recipes given will not work. Every sister who cansfruit juices knows that a little olive oil poured on topof a container of juke will not prevent fermentation. Herconfidence in a preacher is weakened when she hearshim claiming that it will.

There are those who use the "ancient preservation"argument for maintaining that early churches used freshgrape juice in the Lord's Supper. Then, they admit thatall of them did not do so all the time. Those readingor listening naturally ask, "What is the point?" Yes. Why go through all that?

We are pleased to see a good brother who did equate alcohol with poison now admit what historians andtravelers assert. The light wines of Palestine had enoughalcohol in them to purify them but not enough tomake one drunk ("unless you drank a barrelful"). This istrue now of those of the lowlands of Europe, of northernMexico, etc. Are preachers of the gospel there going toinsist that these be given up?

The contention that wine was leaven was shown to be false by an article in another gospel paper. But his persisting in that error will continue to weaken every good thing any brother might say against social or recreationaldrinking.

Personal references are sometimes necessary even though not profitable. Please be advised that this unknown from the cow-country has never been intoxicated. Never have we done any social drinking.When we attend professional banquets preceded by acocktail hour we go after the drinking is finished eventhough friends urge us to come and "drink a coke". Wedo not have a "drop of anything on the place". Never dowe obtain wine, brandy, or rum to use in cooking. Areyou teetotallers? We, more!

Yes, Brother Adams and Brother Holbrook, we oppose every drinking practice that you do. But do notinclude us among the believers in the fables of Josephus.We do not fall for those and we do not think that youshould either.

Box 895

Craig, Colo. 81625 (EDITOR'S NOTE: We are glad to give this space toBrother Watts to state his case and glad for all to

see that he opposes "social drinking." We are still of thepersuasion that some of his statements in his previousarticle "Much Grape Juice" were too loose and capableof misunderstanding. It was for that reason that we did not think it best to publish his article without a "disclaimer" attached.)

COVENANT — BERITH

The Hebrew word for covenant is BERITH. The meaning of the word is a real etymological problem. There are at least three suggestions: 1) it may berelated to the root BRH meaning "to eat"; 2) it may beconnected with the Accadian word BARU meaning "to bind"; 3) and it has been connected with the verb CHRTH meaning "to cut in two or cut off".

The word is consistently rendered by DIATHAKA inthe LXX except in Deut. 9:15 and I Kings 11:11. Theusual translation of BERITH is "covenant" but is rendered also by "alliance, bond, compact,disposition and treaty" (cf. Girdlestone, Synonyms of theO.T., p. 213).

The Hebrew concept of the word may be divided intotwo main groups. These are the nature of a covenant between man and man and the second between God and man.

Secular or legal covenants followed a basic outline: 1) ahistorical prologue, 2) a statement of the stipulations,3) an oath or document from each party, God of godsbeing their witness, 4) and curses and blessings (cf. Eerdmans Bible Handbook, p. 199). For comparison,study the covenants of Isaac (Gen. 26), Jacob (Gen. 31)and David with Jonathan (I Samuel 18; 20; 23).

The general thought of covenants between God andmen and those between men and men are similar. Not all covenants were contracted between parties of equality

(i.e. king-vassal relationship). In a divine covenant, God is the superior party and always initiates the covenant.Jehovah stipulated commandments and offers certain blessings or promises. Men accepted these conditions or commandments and recognized the penalties for disobedience. Some of the blessings are conditioned onthe obedience of men. The earliest covenant recorded between God and man is with Noah (Gen. 9:9-17). A covenant with the nation of Israel is made at Sinai (Ex. 19:5; 24:4-8) and reaffirmed in Moab (Deut. 29:1).The prophets spoke of a new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34).

THE UNMERCIFUL SERVANT Matt. 18:23-35

All of the parables recorded in Matthew are aboutthe kingdom of Heaven. In the parable of the sower,the seed represents the word of the kingdom (Matt.13:19). This same seed is identified as the word of God in Luke 8:11. When the word of God is preached, it produces the kingdom of Heaven, thereign of Christ, in the honest and good hearts.

The kingdom is likened to a mustard seed in Matt.

13:31. Jesus taught that the kingdom would be gradual in its development — not immediate and spectacular as the premillennialists would have it. Matt. 13:41,42 indicate that the second coming willnot be a time of establishing the kingdom, but a timeof gathering out of the kingdom those who offend.

The parable of the unmerciful servant also setsforth a lesson on the kingdom of heaven. It reveals aquality that must be found now in the lives of itscitizens. The central lesson is that recipients of gracemust be willing to show grace. The forgiven must bewilling to forgive.

Such is not an isolated lesson in God's word. In the model prayer, Jesus said we should pray: " . . . and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"(Matt. 6:12). He proceeded to elaborate: "For if yeforgive men their trespasses, your heavenly fatherwill also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

The ability and willingness to forgive others is asmuch a condition of salvation as faith, repentanceand baptism. Eph. 4:32 demands that we "forgive one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you." James 2:13 states: "He shall have judgment without mercy who hath shown no mercy . . ."

Like the Gentiles of old, there are many, even inthe church, who are "implacable" (Rom. 1:31). This means "constant in enmity, relentless, not to be pacified or appeased."

If you happen to cross such a person one time, youhave made an enemy for life. You can tell him youdidn't intend to offend. You can ask forgiveness. Butthere is nothing you can do that will reconcile you tosuch a one. These kind refuse to let bygones be bygones. They are implacable.

I feel sorry for such people because of the miserythey bring to their own lives and because they cannot be saved with their present attitude. Furthermore, I fear such people because of the damage they can cause the Lord's church.

Contrast their attitude with the teaching of Jesus: "Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him?till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not untothee, Until seven times: but, until seventy timesseven" (Matt. 18:22, 23).

Then He taught this parable. Let's take a closer look at it:

I. THE KING AND HIS CONDUCT — 23-27

A. The king was a man of great dignity and wealth. Though the size of his kingdom is not told,the amount owed him indicates great domain.

B. He was not negligent in the affairs of the kingdom. He expected an accounting from those who were indebted to him.

II. THE INDEBTED SERVANT: A. The amount he owed suggests he was not a slave in the usual sense. Perhaps he was a princeover a smaller territory, or one employed to collecttaxes who then squandered the money. B. Regardless of how he made the debt, he had no more ability to pay than most of us would have. 10,000 talents of silver would be equal to perhaps $3million. The same amount of gold would be much more than that. "He had not to pay." III. THE COURSE ADOPTED BY THE KING: A. He demanded payment, v. 23, 24. B. He ordered punishment, v. 25. The family would be sold into slavery and the king would get asmuch as he could in payment of the debt. This was his legal right. Justice demanded punishment. C. He freely forgave, v. 26, 27. The servant didnot deny the debt. He threw himself on the mercy ofthe king and begged for patience. The king had compassion and extended much more than patience. He forgave the entire debt. IV. THE UNMERCIFUL SPIRIT OF THE FORGIVEN DEBTOR — v. 28-30: A. The debt of his fellow servant was small.. It was equal to about seven or eight dollars. B. The fellow servant could not pay. As the old saying goes, "you can't get blood out of a turnip."But you can take the turnip and that's what theforgiven debtor did (v. 30). C. In spite of the fact that the fellow servantbegged for patience, no patience was shown . . . notto speak of mercy and forgiveness. V. THE COURSE THE KING THEN ADOPTED — v. 31-34: A. The unmerciful servant was delivered to the tormentors until he should pay all that was owed.This would be for the rest of his life or until another paid the debt for him, an unlikely prospect. B. The real lesson is in V. 35: "SO LIKEWISE SHALL MY HEAVENLY FATHER DO ALSO UNTO YOU IF YE FORGIVE NOT EVERY ONE HIS BROTHER THEIR TRESPASSES." I cannot pay my debt to God any more than I could pay adebt of three million dollars. I must throw myself onthe mercy of God. If it were not for His grace, noneof us could possess hope.

C. He is willing to forgive. The terms of His grace are plainly revealed (Acts 2:37, 38). When Iagain sin and go into debt to God, I am to pray thatHe will forgive me as I also forgive those whotrespass against me.

Conclusion: Let us not be as the unmerciful servant. There can be no salvation for those who are unwilling to show forgiveness.

QUESTION: In Matt. 5:43 Jesus said, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt lovethy neighbour, and hate thine enemy." My referenceBible gives as a reference for the latter statement ofthis verse Deut. 23:6. Is this the verse Jesus referred to, or is there another more accurate? It seems to me that our Lord's quote is too generic to come fromDeut. 23:6 which is very specific (see verse 3).

— M.A.

ANSWER: Our querist is probably laboring underthe erroneous view that Jesus is here setting forth amoral law superior to the law of Moses. The truth ofthe matter is that Jesus was refuting and exposingthe errors of the Scribes, Pharisees, and teachers ofIsrael. While Jesus frequently referred to statementsfound in the law of Moses, he, nevertheless, wasexposing their perverted views and use of such.Hence, the contrast was between their traditional perversions and the truth. Matt. 5:43 is a good example.

There is no verse in the law of Moses that said: "hate thine enemy." Deut. 23:6 does refer to specific nations and how Israel was to treat them nationally.It has nothing to do with personal retaliation. Remember, reference columns and other reference systems in our Bibles have been supplied by men andshould be treated accordingly.

The popular concept of the Jewish leaders "hate thine enemy" grew out of their interpretation of the command to "love thy neighbour as thy self" (Lev. 19:18). They generally restricted the word "neighbour" to mean relatives, friends, those of their party, and at most those of Israel. The lawyer asked Jesus "Who is my neighbour?" (Lk. 10:29) in orderto "justify himself." Both the question ana! the motive of the lawyer pinpoint this particular error.Jesus told the story of The Good Samaritan which exposed the error of this restricted view of "neighbour" and showed it must be understood inthe unrestricted sense. The Jewish teachers not onlyrestricted the meaning of "neighbour," but also inferred therefrom that they should "hate their enemy." The latter

inference was but a very short and easy step fromtheir first error.

They should have known that the word "neighbor"is often used in the Old Covenant to embrace those not of Israel. Here are two examples: "Speak now inthe ears of the people, and let every man borrow of his neighbour, and every woman of her neighbour,jewels of silver, and jewels of gold. And the Lordgave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians...." (Ex. 11:2); "And if a stranger sojourn with theein your land, ye shall not vex him. But the strangerthat dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one bornamong you, and thou shalt love him as thyself: for yewere strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God" (Lev. 19:33, 34). The latter referenceshows clearly that the command to "love thyneighbour as thyself" embraced more than those ofIsrael. Thus, the command to "love thy neighbour" should have been understood as an obligation to love all men.

There is no difference between what Jesus taughtin Matt. 5:43-48 and what was taught in the Old Covenant: "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear anygrudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord"(Lev. 19:18); "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth,and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth:"(Prov. 24:17); "If thine enemy be hungry, give himbread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water todrink: For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon hishead, and the Lord shall reward thee" (Prov. 25:21, 22).

The life of the apostle Paul stands in the scripturesas a testimony of stedfastness and patience. Hecounted not his life dear unto himself but gave his lifeto minister the gospel of Christ even in the face of sureand impending bonds and afflictions (Acts 20:22-24).The apostle Paul suffered imprisonments, stripesabove measure, stonings, shipwrecks and many perils, hunger and thirst, fastings, cold and nakedness for Christ's sake (II Cor. 11:23-28).

However, on one occasion, Paul besought the Lordthree times to have a thorn in the flesh removed (IICor. 12:8). This thorn in the flesh was given to him bySatan to buffet him (II Cor. 12:7). He wanted to be ridof this affliction. The answer he received from Christ is one of the most meaningful passages to me in the scriptures of comfort. Jesus said to Paul, "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfectin weakness" (II Cor. 12:9a). The apostle Paul's response was humble and wise, "Most gladly thereforewill I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power ofChrist may rest upon me" (II Cor. 12:9b).

Our lot in life does not call upon us to meet suchopposition as did Paul. I doubt if any of us will ever bebeaten for proclaiming the gospel. But life to all Christians has its hard and difficult moments. And at times we wonder, "How can I possibly carry on?" We become sick and we search for comfort. Temptations to sin are strong and we wonder how we can overcome. Christians we know and love, many of themour relatives, turn away from God and His church andit makes us doubt and wonder. On and on the problems, small and great, confront us; what do wedo, where do we go? Jesus says, "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect inweakness" (II Cor. 12:9a).

"GRACE"

In this context, grace has its simplest meaning, asthe Divine help, the unmerited gift of assistance thatcomes from God. Into this grace the apostle Paulencouraged Timothy to be strengthened (II Tim. 2:1).God has granted us all things in this regard (II Tim.3:16-17; II Pet. 1:3). Hence, when afflictions arise and difficult times arrive, find your strength and comfortin Christ Jesus your Lord.

"SUFFICIENT"

The grace of Christ is sufficient and all we need.David said in Psalm 23:1, "The Lord is my Shepherd; Ishall not want." We will never be in spiritual want inChrist for God "hath blessed us with all spiritualblessings in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3).

"MY STRENGTH"

The Christian who tries to overcome and be strongin his own strength cannot be long sustained. Paulfound his strength in Christ; "I can do all thingsthrough Christ which strengthened me" (Phil. 4:13).

"PERFECT"

This passage is not teaching that apart from man'sweakness Christ would not be perfect in strength butthat the weakness of man has its perfect complementin the strength of Christ. The Greek word "TELEITAI" is the word translated "is made perfect."It is third person singular, present passive indicativeof TELEO. It literally says, "is being made perfect."Christ's strength is fully realized in the weakness ofChristians.

WEAKNESS"

Man is weak and full of infirmities. We need to be made strong. This can only be accomplished in Christ.The Hebrew writer said of some Old Testament worthies: "out of weakness were made strong" (Heb.11:34). They were made strong by their faith in God.

"GLORY IN MY INFIRMITIES"

Since strength is found in our weakness in Christ, we should rejoice, take joy in them. This does notmean try to be weak. We should grow strong but whenwe have trials, glory in Christ for the comfort andstrength in Him. Infirmity is translated from the Greek word ASTHENEIA which means, want of strength. The Holy Spirit said in Romans 5:3-4, "wealso rejoice in our tribulations: knowing that tribulation worketh stedfastness; and stedfastness, approvedness; and approvedness, hope." James saidby the Holy Spirit, "My brethren, count it all joy whenye fall into divers temptations; knowing this, that thetrying of your faith worketh patience. But let patiencehave her perfect work, that ye may be perfect andentire, wanting nothing" (Jas. 1:2-4).

"POWER OF CHRIST"

Once again, Paul is seeking the power (DUNAMIS)of Christ. The power of Christ can never come to theChristian who tries to rest in his own power. I Pet. 1:5says, "Who are kept by the power of God through faithunto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

"MAY REST UPON ME"

Literally this means, "may tabernacle over me." Paul was seeking the power of Christ to tabernacle over his life of weakness and affliction.

The grace of God calls for recognition on our part tosubmit to Christ and the glory of His power; to bestrong in Him.

9132 Sierra Ave.

Fontana, Calif. 92335

From the time the gospel began to be preached by the apostles until the present, the beautiful doctrine of God's grace has been perverted. Faithfulbrethren have vigorously fought the false teachingsregarding grace which have prevailed among the denominationalists. Now, however, some of our own brethren in Christ grossly pervert the scriptural teaching concerning the grace of God.

According to the concept of grace which some embrace, if brethren sincerely believe they are right,their erroneous teachings and practices regarding the worship, work, and organization of the church will not hinder their salvation; for, it is argued, God's grace will cover those sins.

It has been replied — and properly so — that in order for a Christian to obtain God's gracious forgiveness, he must repent of his sins, confess them, and pray for forgiveness (Acts 8:22, 1 John 1:9). A Christian cannot persist in error and expect God's grace to cover that error.

Impossible to Comply?

There are attempts to refute the truth that the Christian must comply with God's terms of pardon in order for grace to cover his sins. From the writings of some, I gather that they actually believeit is impossible to meet the terms of pardon for every sin committed. They seem to think that the necessity of seeking God's forgiveness implies that we must name every single sin specifically as we pray for forgiveness. I know of no one who so contends. Such would indeed be impossible. Surelyall of us sin from time to time, and none of us can call to mind each specific sin; but we can, as David,

pray for God's forgiveness for all our sins —

including those which we do not call to mind —

and do so with a determination not to commit such

sins again (Psalm 19:12).

In seeking to show the impossibility of meeting God's terms of pardon for every sin committed, theauthor of one bulletin article which I recently readpenned the following:

"According to this extreme position not one of ushas a chance of being eternally saved! How manysins of omission have we committed? And can anyman say that he has confessed each of these andasked for forgiveness (that is honestly) do so? This is what we are being told must happen to each andevery sin committed!"

Regarding the sins of omission to which my brother refers, I ask, does not this brother experience sorrow because of the knowledge thathe has from time to time failed in his responsibilityto do good; does he not determine within his heart tobe more diligent in the future; and does he notpenitently pray for God's forgiveness? I imagine hedoes, thus meeting God's terms of pardon for his sins of omission.

Perfect Law Keeping?

Some would argue that we who insist that God'sterms of pardon must be met by the erring Christianare depending upon perfect law keeping, rather thanGod's grace, for salvation. The author of the aforementioned bulletin article said, "This positionis nothing in the world but a dependence upon lawkeeping for salvation — perfect law keeping! The law demands obedience and when broken it demands recognition of that fact, confession of it, penitenceconcerning it and prayer for forgiveness."

I have never met the writer of that statement, butrealizing that he is a mature, experienced gospelpreacher, I was rather taken aback — shocked would be a more accurate word — that he would make such an assertion. It should be perfectly obvious thatthe very fact that forgiveness must be sought, thevery fact that sin has occurred, is proof positive thatthe law has not been perfectly kept. To say that onewho has broken the law is saved by perfect law keeping is a contradiction if ever there was one. Those of us who teach the necessity of seeking God's forgiveness cannot properly be accused of teaching salvation by perfect law keeping; for when we say that forgiveness must be sought, we are necessarily implying that the law of Christ has not been perfectly kept.

Brethren, our salvation is most assuredly by thegrace of God (Ephesians 2:8-9). To say that salvation is by God's grace is to say that we do notdeserve it. We do not deserve it because we have sinned. Thanks be to God that He gave His onlybegotten Son to shed His blood on the cross, so thatHe can forgive us our sins and we can enjoy the blissof heaven despite our unworthiness. They are slanderers and liars who accuse us of not believing inthe grace of God.

The Christian who maintains fellowship with God and who will eventually enjoy the glories of heavenis not the one who perfectly keeps the law of Christ,for all of us sin from time to time; rather, it is theone who has enough faith and love within his heart to do his best to live according to the teaching ofChrist and to continually pray with a penitent heart that God will graciously forgive him his shortcomings. This is the one who is walking in thelight and whose sins are forgiven (1 John 1:7-9,Acts 8:22). Although he sins occasionally, there is nocomparison between him and the one who persists insome sin, never repenting of it, never seeking God'sforgiveness for it; but, according to some of ourbrethren, the one who never repents of his erroneouspractices pertaining to the worship, work, and organization of the church remains justified by God's grace. The Bible does not so teach!

P.O. Box 147 Trumann,Arkansas 72472

NEW PAPERS SENTRY MAGAZINE, a monthly, edited by Floyd Chappelear began in September, 1974. Articles will stress living as Christians.Subscription price is «2 a year with group subscriptions at six for $10.

Correspondence should be addressed to 3910 Glenbrook, Fairfax; VA 22030. VANGUARD MAGAZINE, a 32-page fortnightly journal, will

appear in January, 1975 with Yater Tant as editor and David Edwin Harrell as featured columnist. The editorial staff lists Franklin T. Puckett, Homer Hailey, Peter J. Wilson, Hoyt Houchen, Robert Farish, Colly Caldwell, L. A. Mott, Jr., Sewell Hall and Clinton Hamilton. A sample copy will be sent to all interested persons. Subscription price is $7.50 a year. Write to VANGUARD PUBLISHERS, P.O. Box 3006, Memphis, TN 38103.

NEW CONGREGATIONS WALTER T. STEPHENS, 127 Lake Street, Nicholasville, KY 40356. On September 1, 1974 a new congregation met for the first time in Nicholasville, Kentucky. Several members of the UniversityHeights congregation in Lexington were living in this area and the work was planned and encouraged by University Heights. The writers' support will be furnished in part by University Heightsuntil the new work can be self-supporting. A gospel meeting is planned

for November 4-10. We are meeting at 127 Lake Street. If you know of people in this area we should contact, please let us know. JERRY L. JAMISON, P.O. Box 332, Locust Grove, VA22508. A

new congregation has begun in FALMOUTH, VA about two miles east of 1-95. We meet in the Fredericksburg-Stafford Park. Authority Recreation Center, 310 Butler Road, 1 block east of the junction of

U.S. 17 and U.S. 1. Attendance runs from 10-15 at present.

SAM BINKLEY, JR., 110 French Way, Athens, Alabama 35611. The debate between Carroll Sutton and Albert Hill which was scheduled for last May was postponed due to an accident whichinjured Brother Sutton a few days before that. He is now recovered and able to participate, though no date has been set. Contactswith the brethren at Hobbs Street have met with the response that they are so busy in the process of finding another preacher and othermatters that they do not have time to even think about when theycan get together to discuss another date for the debate. If, and when,the dates are reset, we will try to let you know.

DON HASTINGS, 403 College, Waycross, GA 31501. After four years in Sarasota, Florida, I have moved to work with the church in Waycross. If you have friends in this area we can contact, please notify me. Along with a teaching column in the newspaper, a daily 15minute program is conducted. We have hopes for a paper to use in teaching. If you are visiting in the area, worship with us.

DEATH OF FARRIS J. SMITH

With sadness we note the death of our friend and brother, Farris

J. Smith, preacher for the Beraey Points church in Birmingham. Brother Smith spent many years preaching in that area and was widely known and respected. He was faithful to the Lord. The editor of this paper will never forget the hospitality of his home a few years ago when making preparations to go and preach in Norway. The cause we love sustains a loss but our mourning is tempered with hope. Our sympathy is extended to his family.

GARY HARGIS, Box 715, Byron, Minnesota. In the last year six have been baptized in the work at Rochester, four of these the last six weeks. Attendance now runs 25-28. Through the obedience of one Lutheran lady a new congregation has now started in Spring Valley, Minnesota. Visitors are coming regularly there and a gospelmeeting is planned soon with Don Taafe of Dundee, Florida. Onecouple with three children have been driving 60 miles from Red Wing to worship with us. They are as regular as clockwork and he shares inthe preaching both here and in Spring Valley. He is interested in beginning full-time work shortly. Things are looking up. We nowhave many prospects. But there is this bleak note. January 1, 1975 I will lose $300 a month of my support. If anyone knows whererelief might be available, please let us know. EARL HARTSELL, Rt. 1, Box 38, Ruston, LA 71270. After two years of pleasant and rewarding work in Magnolia, Arkansas, I have moved to Ruston to help start a new congregation here. We met thefirst time September 1 with 14 present. We have since had as many as 22. We meet in the V.F.W. Hall on Route 80. If you know of any in this area we should contact, please inform us.

NEW SERVICE CONTEMPLATED BOB WEST, 6121 Hudson St., Orlando, FL 32808. Would you beinterested in a Clip Art Service produced especially for churches ofChrist? Most likely it would be published quarterly on a subscription basis and would include reproduction quality art and type for ads, illustrations for articles, instructional cartoons, charts, column headings, etc. If you would be interested and would state what materials would be most helpful to you, please let me know. (Editor's note: Bob West is an elder of the Pine Hills church in Orlando, author of the popular THEOPHILUS cartoon series, and a graphic designer/illustrator/art director for more than 25 years. This proposed service could be of great help in bulletin preparation.) HAROLD V. COMER, 521 Cumberland St., Florence, AL 35630. Franklin T. Puckett will teach a special series of lessons on "Calvinism and Modern Adaptations" for two weeks this spring from February 25 through March 7 in Florence, Alabama. He will deal withthe traditional doctrines of Calvinism, misconceptions about what Calvinism teaches, the danger of it in various denominational writings and the place of Calvinistic thinking in certain current problems and discussions such as imputed righteousness, grace,indwelling of the Holy Spirit, etc. This should be of great value, especially to younger preachers. Some brethren in the Florence area are willing to open their homes to house those who wish to comebut cannot afford to pay for lodging. Some homes will provide some of the meals. If you plan to come and wish such arrangements made, write to Franklin T. Puckett, P.O. Box 1166, Florence, Alabama 35630 or phone (205) 766-6179.

REPORT FROM THE PHILIPPINES LESLIE DIESTELKAMP, c/o Max Burgin, Lot 43, Seaview Ave., Ferny Creek, Vic. 3786, Australia. The first part of September it was my privilege to spend two weeks in the Philippine Islands. Thiswas a side-trip enroute to Australia where I now labor with support by the 77th Street church in Birmingham. Since they also support a native Filipino preacher whom they do not know, they asked me to go there and work with him briefly. Consequently, in two weeks I preachedin 13 congregations in two provinces and spoke 32 times (in one seven day period I preached 23 times). Everywhere I was received with much gratitude and hospitality.

Page 12

The usual custom for American preachers who go there is to go in pairs and to spend most of their time in lectureships and training sessions for preachers. This is a real good work, altogether worthy of support and of effort. However, because of my previous experiences, my personality and abilities, I believe I am more useful if I go directly to the people. Consequently, this Idid in the Philippines. I ate at their tables, slept in their rooms and preached to their hearts. They were very grateful and receptive. Sometimes I was asked why I had come there alone. Ireplied that I was not alone, but in the midst of more than forty million friendly Filipinos. Never have I been treated better, and throughout my travels, even into remote mountain areas, I had not even one moment of fear or anxiety.

Many native preachers are doing an excellent work with American support there, and they demonstrate abilities quite comparable to those of preachers in America and Nigeria. I regretthat I only scheduled two weeks there, and I hope that while I am in this quarter of the globe I may return to the Philippines for a longer time. In the meantime I am thankful for the opportunitythat was afforded me of reaching into the Asian field and now for this additional privilege of laboring for souls in my fifth continent, Australia.

PREACHERS NEEDED SHEPHERDSVILLE, KENTUCKY. The church here needs a preacher in November. We are self-supporting, own the building and a preacher's house. We are located just off 1-65, 15 miles south of Louisville on Route 44 east. Contact Tony Lacefield, Rt. 4, Shepherdsville, KY 40165 or phone (502) 957-4633.

LOVELOCK, NEVADA. The small church in Lovelock needs a preacher on retirement income to work part time with this church.We can provide $50 a week salary. For further information contact Damon Itza, 450 14th St., Lovelock, Nevada 89419.

PLYMOUTH, NORTH CAROLINA. The church which meets at Longridge Road and West Haven Drive in Plymouth needs a preacher in November. Joe Hickman, present preacher is movingto Sanford, N.C. in November. Interested brethren should write to the church at P.O. Box 711, Plymouth, N.C. 27962, or call FrankHollowell at (919) 927-3172.

GRIER'S CREEK, KENTUCKY. The church in Woodford County, Kentucky, meeting at Grier's Creek, is in need of a preacher. This is a new work of three and a half years with greatpotential. For information write Morton Million, Rt. 2, Troy Pike,Versailles, KY 40383 or phone (606) 873-4385.