Our cars are made to move forward with speed andcomfort, but they all come with a gear that we callreverse. We do not use this gear as much, but it isvery, very important on a car. We sometimes get intosituations where the only way out is to back out ofsuch places. Preachers and other church membersmay be deceived and blown about by some wind ofdoctrine so that they are found in digression. Reverseaction is the only way out of that type of error.Repentance is a good word. It describes a process of correction we all need to use on different occasions. It is bad to make such a mistake. It is especially bad tomake it and never find the courage and wisdom to usethat gear called reverse.
In the middle of the last century some very capablemen who had been very effective in the back to theBible movement had an urge to improve on the Lord's simple plan of government for His church. Theirfeeling was that if they could have a national or centralagency (Missionary Society) they could do big thingsfor the Lord. The society brought division, turned tensof thousands of people back toward denominationalism, led to less evangelistic workinstead of more, and the society became a center ofclassic modernism. The founders of this society wereable men who did not dream of creating such amonster, but they did. Man's wisdom is foolishnessbefore God. The society was established so we could be like the (denomi-)nations about us. The society became as modernistic as a Methodist Conference or a Presbyterian Synod. There was no more scripture for the one than for the other, and the pedestals createdpositions of pride in human wisdom.
The Christian Standard was a paper started topromote the American Christian Missionary Society.Decades passed and the society finally got wealth andpower. It then went modernistic. The Christian Standard then put forth special effort to control andrestrain the monster it had promoted. It failed in thiseffort. It would have been wonderful if they could havestopped the society while all used the reverse gear.
The Herald of Truth moved from a northern state to Abilene, Texas more than two decades ago. It wasthen very successful in getting money (millions of dollars) and power over churches. It brought division to more churches than anything since the apostasyassociated with the Missionary Society. Some of themen who promoted it and defended it in its early yearsare disillusioned and broken hearted.
The Herald of Truth has been "sponsored" by Fifthand Highland church at Abilene, Texas. This churchnow has confusion, heresy, division, and modernism onthe inside. It evidently is one of the most digressive ofthe churches in the present apostasy. Many churchesthat supported Herald of Truth so enthusiastically — and may we say arrogantly — will no longer support it with their money. Many dropped the program a fewyears ago. The exodus from among the fold of itssupporters continues.
Will the Herald of Truth cease to exist? Will it die? I say not. The number of wild, digressive churchesincreases, and, in many cases, these are groups withwealth. The H.O.T. can be their mouth piece. A fewmillionaires can pay much of the cost, while these wealthy apostate churches pay the rest. The Missionary Society did not die when it went modernistic, did it? It would be wonderful if churcheswould back out of this whole institutional framework but they will not.
The Herald of Truth is a separate entity. It can andmay move from Abilene, or Fifth and Highland mayexpel its more conservative members and continue itssupport for the more modernistic organization. Wemay be confident that H.O.T. will not reform itself. Ithas full steam ahead in its down hill drive. It has no reverse gear. It does not even have good brakes.
One of the sad facts is that human beings areslow to learn. The debaters who have defended Fifth and Highland church and Herald of Truth are now heart broken over finding that their idol was made ofclay, but they say they are still willing to defend theprinciple on which it was founded. They seem to wishfor Herald of Truth Number Two. Would it not go the same route? The American Christian MissionarySociety did, did it not? The Lord rejected any and allsystems of centralization in favor of local autonomy forHis church. He authorized the church to move in its local capacity alone. Such is the clear record of the New Testament.
We should not have tried the establishment of central agencies in our generation because we havethe example of centralization in the last century. Nowthat we have gone through the same rut again it is sad to hear the disappointed promoters saying they wouldstill support the principle under which it was started.Will they never learn? The answer to this question is"No!" If one hundred similar efforts to activate the church universal are made in the next thousand years,they will all go in the direction of human wisdom,pride, and complete apostasy. World Radio of this generation, mission compounds, and powerful sponsoring churches in general will furnish other examples of the damning effect of power, money, andhuman wisdom in religious affairs. How long will it beuntil another generation arises that will see sound churches again divided by efforts on the part of someto help the Lord by coming up with some plan ofcentralization?
LOVE NOT THE WORLD
"Love not the world, neither the things that are inthe world. If any man love the world, the love of theFather is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the prideof life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And theworld passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he thatdoeth the will of God abideth for ever" (1 John 2:1517).
The word "world" here does not mean the physicalglobe on which we live, but stands for the forces of evilin the world which are arrayed against the Lord andhis will. Satan is referred to as "the prince of thisworld" (John 16:11). As he desired to "sift" Simon Peter as wheat (Luke 22:31), even so, he desires to"sift" us all by exposing us to the three avenues oftemptation by which all have entered into sin. Johnsaid that to abide for ever we must do the will of God. This is placed in contrast to the world and its seductive voice. We cannot do the will of God and the will of the devil at the same time.
Worldliness is an improper attitude toward the world. It sets higher store by the praises and standards of those under Satan's power than it doesthe approval of God. Paul said those who are "risen with Christ" should set their affections "on thingsabove, not on things on the earth" (Col. 3:1-2). "Butthe wisdom which is from above is first pure, thenpeaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full ofmercy and good fruits, without partiality, and withouthypocrisy" (James 3:17). This is placed in contrast tothat wisdom which is "earthly, sensual, devilish" andwhich ends in envying, strife, confusion and every evilwork (verses 15-16).
It does not take a Solomon to see that among theprofessed children of God there seems to be a growing affection for the world and its will and a diminishingrespect for the will of God to govern the conduct of hispeople. Every preacher who travels about among various congregations of our day knows what I amtalking about. Not only have congregational activitiesbeen patterned after the "nations round about" in sofar as the more liberal churches are concerned, but inthose same congregations and among those who claimto be conservative respecting Bible authority, there isobservable a growing infatuation with the world.
Many of our men, young and old, have become soconcerned with pleasing those about them in the worldthat they have adapted the grotesque dress, hair styles and speech of the rebels of society who seembent upon depriving humanity of every vestige of dignity and self-respect. The language of our young iscontaminated with the bizarre expressions of thehippie musicians to whom they listen by the hour.
Our women, young and old, have adorned themselves, not with modesty, shamefastness and sobriety, but with the alluring attire of the mini-skirt and tights (misnamed "slacks"). Nobody asks or expects our women to dress in the style of the eighteenth or nineteenth centuries. But it is shamefulwhen so much flesh is exposed to the public eye as istrue in places of worship and elsewhere. What are mothers using for sense when they allow their daughters to go to school, to say nothing of a place ofworship, looking like a sex symbol? Why are fathersnot exercising their headship in their families to put a stop to it? And, by the way, where are the preachers?Where are the elders? Are they all blind? Certainlysuch problems must be resolved with wisdom, butthey MUST be resolved if the will of God is done.
Worldly attitudes toward error have devastatingeffects. The world peace movement in politics and the ecumenical movement in religion have had their effectupon some among us who want to back away from thefight with sin and error, find a convenient spot on theplains of Ono to negotiate with the devil, and raise aterrible outcry against anyone with the effrontery toask them to clarify their ambiguity, if not outrightcompromise.
What, other than the spirit of the world, is behindthe woeful lack of corrective discipline throughout theland? Have numbers become such an important barometer that we have overlooked the fact that pruning is necessary to growth? What did Paul meanwhen he said "mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine and avoid them" (Romans 16:17-18)? What did he mean when he said to"deliver such an one to Satan", "purge out the oldleaven" and "put away from among yourselves that wicked person" in 1 Corinthians 5? What does "withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly" mean in 2 Thessalonians 3:6? The spirit of the world calls for blindly covering these aberrations with what it mistakenly calls "love" whileGod and his will are dishonored all the while.
The church is in the world to radiate the light ofdivine truth. Its members must be salt, light and leaven to permeate every corner of the globe. But when the world gets in the church the salt loses itssavor, the light is hidden under a bushel and theleaven spreads evil and not good. Moses regarded thepleasures of sin as only "for a season" (Heb. 11:25). Somust we consider them. Paul said "godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the lifethat now is, and of that which is to come" (1 Tim. 4:8). Hearing and doing the will of God builds our house upon the rock and endures through eternity. Hearingthe siren call of the world and submitting to its temptations builds upon the sand and eventuates ineverlasting destruction from the presence of the Lordand from the glory of his power. Make up your mind.
I appreciate this opportunity to respond to theeditorial written by Brother Adams' in SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES, VOL. 14, NUMBER 11. While Ihave never felt the obligation to defend everything mybrethren have said on the subject of the churchtreasury I think that it is necessary to make somecandid observations about the subject.
It is quite easy for these brethren to fill these pageswith material in opposition to good works and causetheir readers to believe that they have a good case.Fighting "straw men" is no challenge. Presentingarguments among themselves without an opposing view gets to be rather one sided.
I Cor. 16:1-4 does give some information about achurch treasury but far beyond that it gives the onlyinstruction for the FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK collection. The only thing that passage specifies for its use is "poor saints". In all probability the onlycollection the church where Brother Adams preachestakes up is the first day of the week collection. That means that if our "anti" brethren are to remain consistent in their insistence upon a pattern in the useof the treasury they must cease to take their salariesout of the first day of the week treasury and get it outof some other. Friend, not one passage in the NewTestament ever once says anything about a preachergetting a dime out of the first day of the week contribution, not one! If you do get your salary out ofthat collection, brother Adams, that means the firstday of the week treasury, contributed for benevolenceand specified for benevolence, can be used in the fieldof evangelism. A. C. Grider said in his debate with Alan Highers that under no circumstances could a passage on benevolence be used in the field of evangelism. You fellows seem to be at odds with eachother. Now I believe you can get your salary out ofthat collection but your doctrine as it stands won'tallow you to for you have no specific example. Sinceby your actions and practice you obviously believe apassage on benevolence can be used in the field ofevangelism lets make some observations on Acts 11:27-30. Here one church sent to another in benevolence. Since you are constrained to believe apassage on benevolence can be used in the field ofevangelism it is obvious that the Antioch brethren could have sent to the Jerusalem brethren if the need had been evangelistic hence authority for onechurch sending to another in evangelism.
Brother Adams uses the case of Judas' being thetreasurer of the Apostles as authority for churcheshaving treasuries today. Then by the same token ifJesus taught his disciples to use that treasury forpersons considered to be unbelievers, why won't youfollow your lesson on through and admit that thetreasury it typified can be used for unbelievers? (Matt.
5:43-48). When you used that example you arguedyourself right out of the "saints only" doctrine. Wemay assume that the same "bag" was present whenthe Apostles became the first members of the church.What took place in the nature of that "bag" so thateven though it had been used for unbelievers now itcould not be?
Yes, Acts 2:44, 45 and 4:34, 35 as well as otherpassages mention a church treasury and I believe all ofthem. But only I Cor. 16:1-4 mentions the first day of the week collection. That's the only one you brethrenhave and my question is for what can you use that one?
The gathering of the funds mentioned in Phil. 4:15,16 does to my knowledge constitute a treasury. II Cor.
11:8 in like manner constitutes a treasury. What Iwant to know is, did they collect these funds on theauthority of I Cor. 16:1-4? If they did, and a passage onbenevolence (I Cor. 16:1-4) can never be applied toevangelism, what do you call it?
Brother Adams is very close to the truth. The fact isthat I Cor. 16:1-4 is a record of the first century churchmeeting a need in benevolence. Because of other passages, the only thing restricted is the day upon which the collection may be taken. Brother Adamsadmits that the same collection was used by the church to send wages to Paul. The treasury then canbe used for either benevolence or evangelism. Sincethat is true and the first century church contributedout of their treasuries to each other in the field of benevolence, it stands to reason that they might havedone it in the field of evangelism if they wished.
If the above is not true, then the following is aresult: (1) The Antioch and Jerusalem churches werein error in sending to each other in Acts 15. Verse 23says Apostles, elders, and brethren sent the writing,hence the church. (2) One church could not send the other a New Testament. (3) One church could not loanchairs to another to relieve an over crowded condition in a gospel meeting. (4) Two congregations could notcooperate in a tent meeting. (5) One congregationcould not aid another in a building program.
We must not make the church the treasury and thetreasury the church. The local congregation acts inother ways than through its treasury. If it is wrong fortwo congregations to cooperate in the field of evangelism through sending and receiving money,why, in the name of reason, isn't it wrong to cooperatein sending and receiving anything, such as messengers, writings, chairs, etc.? In Col. 4:16 NewTestament congregations cooperated in the field ofevangelism by passing around an inspired writing.Looking retrospectively then, if it is right to cooperatein sending and receiving such valuable things as aninspired writing, which is cooperation in the field ofevangelism, why isn't it right to cooperate in sending and receiving what Jesus called, "That which is least"i.e., money? (Lk. 16:10). What is it that makes sending inspired writings all right but wrong to send money?What is it that makes dollars more holy than scripture? Why is it that our anti brethren allow oneand reject the other? Maybe they don't allow either;I'll let them say.
I am sorry Brother Adams and I disagree but aslong as he and his writers of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES persist in the course of this paper andallow me space to reply, I will do so. I have no desire tomerely be difficult or an instigator of strife. I have aposition that has been tried in times past and I don'tmind anyone trying it again. I enjoy good discussionson a high plane as I believe Brother Adams does. Myaddress is below and I hope you will not hesitate towrite as a Christian since I am not interested in anycorrespondence of a different nature.
Rt.2
Brundidge, Alabama 36010 (EDITOR'S NOTE: We are glad to give this space toBrother Jackson to express his disagreement with myeditorial. When his article is closely examined you willfind that he is in agreement on the point that the onlyTIME mentioned in connection with a collection of a treasury is 1 Corinthians 16:1-4. He also agrees thatpassages such as Phil. 4:15-16 and 2 Cor. 11:8-9 alsoinvolve a treasury, though they do not specify a timeto gather it. Then my main point still stands. Other passages show that a common treasury was used inevangelism and in benevolence. While the occasion ofthe collection in 1 Cor. 16 was benevolent, the time ofit is still significant. Does our brother believe it wouldbe scriptural to take a collection on Wednesday night?I know some who say it makes no difference.
I did not mention the "bag" carried by Judas amongthe disciples as "authority" for a church treasury. I simply gave a brief survey of the idea of a treasury orcommon fund and said that "even" among the apostlesthey had such a bag. Brother Jackson overlooks oneimportant point in trying to expose "limited benevolence" from this reference. The whole mission of the apostles was directed to the "lost sheep of thehouse of Israel." They were not to go into any way ofthe Gentiles. They were to work among those who bydivine covenant were the people of God, even thoughthey had fallen away from him.
The reason it is scriptural for one church to send toanother in benevolence and not in evangelism is verysimple. One is in the New Testament and the other isnot. That makes a lot of difference with me. We are not talking about a problem over sending divinerevelation as was the case in Acts 15. All divine revelation to be sent has already been sent. We aretalking about one church sending funds to anotherchurch for a work which is the mutual responsibility of every church to the limit of its ability. When all the "maybes", "ifs", "perhapses" and related ideas areremoved, the fact remains that in the New Testament,one church sent to another to help it meet a needwhich was peculiarly its own in benevolence, but inevangelism, to which every congregation sustains thesame relationship, there was no interchange of fundsto be found. Churches sent forth preachers and sentwages to preachers, but not funds to other churches inevangelism. Brother Jackson has not found an exception to this.
Brethren, it sounds like Brother Jackson is asking for a debate, does it not? I have already offered tomeet him in discussion on an exchange basis in Louisville and in Brundidge where he preaches. Hedeclined. But he insists that he is ready and willing todefend his practice. You have his address, brethren,see what you can do with him.)
KETCHERSIDE'S NEW DRESS
Several years ago W. Carl Ketcherside of St. Louis,Mo., editor of Mission Messenger, spent a lot of effortopposing gospel preachers locating with and preachingfor a congregation fully organized. Some of his effortsincluded writing in his paper and a few religiousdebates. His fellowship seems to have been limited tothose who agreed with him then.
OLD KETCHERSIDEISM
The basis upon which he opposed a located preacherwas that he believed there was a difference between preaching and teaching, and in the gospel of Christ andthe doctrine of Christ. In the Wallace — Ketcherside Debate at Paragould, Ark., in 1952, he said, "Now, theidea of preaching the gospel to the church, is one thatis not held forth in the New Testament scriptures"(page 21). He declared, "My friends, there is a great difference between preaching and teaching. Our brother has repeatedly spoken about preaching to thechurch. I want you to know that you cannot preach thegospel to the church and here is a good place for us tocenter this discussion" (page 22). We are told, "Thereis a difference between teaching and preaching" (page 53). He quotes Leroy Garrett as saying, "One preacheswhen he tells sinners about Christ and he teaches when he edifies the church" (page 23). To summarizeKetcherside's old position, note chart 1.
Ketcherside made a radical change in the application of the above position. He decided to finda way that those who were divided over the use ofuninspired literature, Bible classes, women teachers,instrumental music, church supported missionary, benevolent and educational institutions, individualcommunion cups, the "sponsoring church" type ofcongregational cooperation, Premillennialism, and a number of other questions could all be united. Thisincluded both those of churches of Christ and those of the Christian Church.
NEW KETCHERSIDE DOCTRINE
Really there is nothing of a basic difference in whathe taught several years ago and what he is teachingnow, that I am able to determine. The difference is inthe application he now makes.
Consider some statements all found in the February, 1973, copy of Mission Messenger. On page19 he says, "Preaching in the church, or to the church,is not mentioned in the Christian scriptures." Again, "We preach the gospel to unbelievers, to aliens, butnever to Christians, or those who have received it"(page 19). Again, a third quote from page 19, "Thegospel is the seed, the sperm, by which we are begotten. The doctrine is the bread upon which thechildren feed, and by which they grow." On page 20 hesaid, "Not one apostolic letter is a part of the gospel ofChrist. . . . The Roman letter was not a part of thegospel.... The letter to the Galatians was not part ofthe gospel." "The gospel is designed to enlist soldiersin a single army in which those who were formerlyenemies became a unit in Christ" (page 22). With chart 2 we summarize the New Ketcherside Doctrine.
IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THE OLD AND NEW?
If one will compare closely charts 1 and 2, it will beseen that there is not any basic difference in the two.He has just changed into a new dress, but it is still thesame old woman of error. (1) Both make a differencebetween teaching and preaching. (2) Both make a difference in the gospel of Christ and the doctrine ofChrist. (3) Both say preaching is to aliens, never to thechurch. (4) Both says teaching is to the church, and notto aliens. (5) BOTH ARE WRONG AND UNSCRIPTURAL.
In Ketcherside's old position these differences weremade in order to oppose a gospel preacher workingwith and / or for a church in gospel preaching. In hisnew position these differences are made in order tounite all he claims are in the Restoration Movement,and at last will also include the denominations.
ARE GOSPEL AND DOCTRINE DIFFERENT?
In order to see there is no distinction between the gospel of Christ and the doctrine of Christ as
were to have "obedience to the faith" (Rom. 1:5). He Ketcherside seeks to make, consider chart 3.
said the scriptures were revealed "for the obedience offaith" (Rom. 16:26). Those who "do not obey theTruth" will be punished (Rom. 2:8). The Romans had"obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered" (Rom. 6:17). Some had "obeyed thegospel" (Rom. 10:16). They had obeyed the faith, thetruth, the gospel and the form of doctrine which suggested they obeyed the same thing. In the Romanepistle four terms (faith, truth, doctrine and gospel)are used synonymously with that which was obeyed.The gospel is doctrine. Ketcherside says the gospeland doctrine are different. Consider chart 4.
From chart 5 one learns that the Romans were established according to the gospel (Rom. 16:25). They were established because the gospel had been preached unto them (Rom. 10:15), and they hadobeyed the gospel (Rom. 10:16). At the judgment bythe "gospel" the Romans would be judged (Rom. 2:16).
(1) Romans. Paul wrote to "saints" (Rom. 1:7). Tothese saints, he said, "I am ready to preach the gospel"(Rom. 1:15). He wrote these saints to conform theirlives unto "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus"(Rom. 8:2). To these Romans and other Gentiles, Paulsaid he was "ministering the gospel of God" (Rom.15:15-16). (2) 2 Cor. 9:12-13. Paul said saints thanked God forthe subjection of saints at Corinth "unto the gospel ofChrist." These saints were subject to the gospel. (3) Gal. 2:14. Paul said Peter, Barnabas and certainJews did not walk "according to the truth of the gospel." (4) Matt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:15-16. Jesus said thegospel was to be preached to every creature (Mk.16:15). He said the apostles were to "teach all nations"and when they were baptized the commands of Christwere to be taught to them (Mt. 28:19-20). The commonly called "Great Commission" shows there is no difference between preaching and teaching; and between the gospel of Christ and the commands ofChrist.
(5) I Tim. 1:10-11. Paul said that which was "contrary to sound doctrine" was that which was not"according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God,which was committed to my trust." (More to come.)
IS KISSINGER THE ANTI-CHRIST?
A local Baptist preacher announced recently that hewas going to preach on the subject, "Is Kissinger theAntichrist?" I don't know what proof he used nor whatconclusion he reached, but knowing him, I wouldn't be surprised at anything.
Believe it or not, some sectarians have come up withthe following "proof that Mr. Kissinger is the fulfillment of Revelation 13:18. Here is the way theygo about it: Place the letters of the alphabet across apiece of paper. Place the number 6 under the A. Add 6each time and place the total under the letters all theway to Z which will have 156 under it. Now take theletters K-I-S-S-I-N-G-E-R and place them vertically.Go back to the letters and numbers, and place the proper number by the letters in the name. For example, 66 by K and 84 by N. Now add your ninefigures and the total will be 666.
Now you understand why some people think thatyou can prove anything by the Bible!
WE PAINT ON DIFFERENT DAYS
A few days ago I was doing some painting on myhouse when I noticed my neighbor and his wife comehome from worship. It was Saturday. The next day, asmy wife and I left for worship, he was painting on hishouse. You see, we paint on different days because weworship on different days. He follows the law of Mosesand I follow the law of Christ.
Since I am not a Jew and have never been in bondage in Egypt, the sabbath has no meaning to me. "And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God broughtthee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day " (Deut. 5:15). Notice the reason for giving the sabbath. Inverse 3 he said, "The Lord made not this covenantwith our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day."
The law of Moses, including the sabbath, has beenabolished (Col. 2:14-17). I worship on the Lord's day — the first day of the week — the day upon which Christ was raised, the church was established, and thedisciples came together to break bread (Acts 20:7).
CREEDS AND SCRIPTURES
I read an article recently concerning the controversy in the Presbyterian Church over the writing of a new creed. Mr. F. W. Hobbie, a localpreacher, was quoted as saying, "Many are not willingto accept any change in the language of the Westminster Confession, which dates back to 1647,and which has come to be revered by many on thesame basis as the Scriptures."
The article said, "One of the things proposed by thecommittee — something not acceptable to the convictions of many in the church — is to make the point that confessionals are not in the same categoryof inspiration as the Scriptures; that they are the workof men and as such often include error."
There is no need to say that they "often includeerror" for the truth is, they always include error.There is no other way to write a human creed. If it hasmore than the Bible or less than the Bible it is sinful (Gal. 1:6-9; Rev. 22:18,19). If it contains exactly whatthe Bible does it is not a human creed but rather a reproduction of the Bible. The man who truly believessuch scriptures as Second Timothy 3:16,17 would notgive a dime for a thousand human creeds. All human creeds are born out of dissatisfaction with the word of God and the blasphemous idea that men can improveupon the Bible.
"O GOD! NO!"
Back in June of '73 there was a destructive fire in a cocktail lounge in New Orleans known as "The UpStairs Lounge." Twenty-nine people were killed. One survivor said, "Bill Larsen, a pastor at the Metropolitan Community Church, got caught in the window, and I just watched him burn. He had one armout, and I heard him scream: '0 God! No!'." That's what he should have said as he was about to enter the door of that wicked place. I doubt if the cause of righteousness suffered a loss, and there will be moreburning ahead for such ungodly hypocrites.
LET THE ENEMY LOSE ONE
The Bible condemns divisions, factions and the spiritof denominationalism. It also describes the fruit thereof. I read of an example of the bitterness andjealousy which can exist between denominationswhich surely takes the prize.
A small Southern town was split down the middle between Baptists and Methodists. The two denominations competed in every aspect of town life.
One of the leaders of the Baptist forces who was upin years became ill and was told by his good Baptistdoctor that he was soon to die. One of his last acts was to become a Methodist.
The Methodist minister was overjoyed. He askedthe dying man if God had shown him the right roadjust in the nick of time. The dying man, pale andcoughing, raised his head from the pillow and with a shaking voice said, "Oh, no! I just decided that if someone's got to die, I'd rather it be a Methodist."
"For where envying and strife is, there is confusionand every evil work" (James 3:16).
CALVINISM EXAMINED #4 That Christ died for the elect and for them only is the doctrine set forth by the Calvinists. The non-elect were EXCLUDED from the benefits of Christ's atonement. However, the Calvinists overlook a number of passages that set forth the fact thatsalvation is the gift of God.In Eph. 2:8-9, for example, we see that Paul saysthat "salvation" is the "gift of God." On page 522 ofWord Pictures in the New Testament, Mr. A. T. Robertson says of this passage, "Paul shows thatsalvation does not have its source in men, but fromGod. Besides, it is God's gift and not the result of our works." So, salvation is the gift of God. However, wewould note just here that Paul does not exclude every work here. For, if he did that would exclude FAITH.Yet Jesus said "faith" is a work of God (John 5:28-29).If Christ died for all, we may ask, why will ALL notbe saved? The problem here is that both the Universalists (who believe that every person will besaved) and the electionists both fail to recognize thepart that man has in salvation. In John 1:29 (as wenoted in our last article) Christ paid the "sin debt" andmade provisions for all who will take advantage of the debt being paid. Let me illustrate it like this. If someone owned a piece of property that my son-in-lawwanted to purchase but did not have the money topurchase it, if I had the money I could purchase it andgive it to him, either conditionally or unconditionally.But that is exactly what Christ did. He paid the sindebt (something that man could not do) and offers it tous as A CONDITIONAL GIFT. There are a number of passages that refute the doctrine of limited atonement. In John 3:16 we read,"God so loved the world, that he gave his onlybegotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shouldnot perish, but have everlasting life." There are twowords in the above passage that I want to note inparticular. They are "world" and "whosoever." If God so loved the "world" (and he did), then the "world"
Page 9
should not perish. You will note that he did not saythat the world CANNOT perish or WILL NOT perish,but that we SHOULD NOT perish, but haveeverlasting life. But, of course, this does not in anyway indicate that the atonement is limited to anygroup or tribe of people.
There are a number of passages in the New Testament that refute the doctrine of limited atonement. In John 6:51, Jesus said, "The bread that Iwill give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of theworld." Also, in Heb. 2:9 we read, "But we see Jesus . .that he by the grace of God should taste death forevery man. And John said, "For therefore we bothlabour and suffer reproach, because we trust in theliving God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially ofthose that believe." All these passages mean nothingIF the doctrine of limited atonement is true.
The fact of the matter is this; although God mayhave the power to give an UNCONDITIONAL GIFTto anyone he desires, sometimes in order to provethose to whom he is giving the gift, he places conditions on it.
In Numbers 14:8 we read, "If the Lord delight inus, then he will bring us into this land, and GIVE it us; ..." Thus there is no doubt about the fact that it was a GIFT. God said it was. However, there were a numberof conditions that had to be met in order to receive the gift. God had them line up with the armed men infront, followed by the priests with ram's horns;followed by the Ark of God. Then the people were tofollow this procession with the people being veryquiet. They were to line up in this order and marcharound the walls of Jericho once a day for six days. Then on the seventh day they were to march aroundthe wall seven times, making a total of thirteen times.The priests were then instructed to blow on the ram's horns and the people were to shout with a great shoutand the walls would fall down. This was by the grace ofGod, it was a gift; and yet they did something to get it. It was a CONDITIONAL GIFT.
There are two verses of scripture that set forth thefact that everyone COULD be saved; and that salvation is a conditional gift. "Go ye into all the world,and preach the gospel to every creature. He thatbelieveth and is baptized shall be saved; but he thatbelieveth not shall be damned." Thus Christ is willingto save all, yet this salvation is conditioned on believing and being baptized. All will be saved thatobey the words of Christ.
ABILENE AFTERMATH
Reams of paper have been used lately to review thetrouble within the confines of the Highland Church inAbilene as related to Herald of Truth. As far as I can see not one person has changed his view about unscriptural cooperation. The fight seems to be over "control". It is the same old story of Jeroboam and Rehoboam about who would be head man.
The other day I received a 24 page brochure fromthe elders telling their side of the story. If the matterwere not so serious, it would be amusing. On page four,they tell how they "fired" Brother Harper. I haveknown Brother Harper ever since he preached for theold Fourth and State Street Church in Little Rock. At one time, I had high respect for his ability and work. Isuppose these elders like many others felt they couldfire Brother Harper and then like Pilot wash theirhands of the matter. Well, like the cat who returned,this matter was not over at all. The Abilene elders found out the hard way that Brother Harper had asmuch or more influence in the brotherhood than they. He began (as they admit) by telling his side of thestory to the attentive ear of a confused brotherhood.Evidently churches began to cancel their financialsupport to the Herald of Truth like leaves falling manautumn wind. The elders immediately felt the "heat"and contacted Brother Harper with the intention ofmaking peace. They put him on what they called"liberal retirement" for the rest of his life! They evenmade it retroactive to when they had fired him. Notonly this, they apologized and asked his forgiveness. Ineed to talk with Brother Harper and find out how heachieved such a feat. I would be willing to take the liberal retirement and forget the apology!
Actually, I know how he brought this pressure onthe elders. They evidently did not plan to be so nervous at the beginning, but when a Church has a"baby" being supported by a brotherhood the story isdifferent. On page five the elders said, "We were sosickened and frustrated by what was going on that wewere blinded. Now, we know we were wrong. There isjust nothing else to say except, we made a mistake".They went on to say, "We temporarily lost sight of thefact that Brother Harper had labored with us for 28long years, that he had worked long hours, stayedaway from his family, married our youngsters, prayedwith our sick, and buried our dead".
When I read this humble confession from the pen ofthe Abilene elders about a preacher they had fired, I thought wouldn't it be wonderful if all elders felt thisway about faithful gospel preachers without being pressured into such an affirmation.
Brethren, we all have a tendency to forget too soon.In this 24 page brochure, they go on to tell of internalproblems in the Highland Church. They tell of theresignation of three other elders. Evidently the "heat"put on these elders caused them to dissolve the Television Committee. They affirm, on page 15, thatthey are "running" the Herald of Truth and that it isnot operated by a committee. They admitted at onetime, they had a Radio and Television Committee.
They close with a humble plea for all churches tocontinue to support the Herald of Truth. The Herald ofTruth is that spiritual monstrosity started by myformer school mate, James Walter Nichols. This organization does not have one vestige of scripture forits existence or operation. Wouldn't it have been wonderful in all of this confusion if Brother Harper and the elders would have come back to the truth instead of fighting over "control"!
In the doing of any task which involves difficulties,and which must be performed despite obstacles and opposition, and which requires longsuffering and patience, there is always the danger of weariness.
Our work to serve God in the up-building of Hiscause is no exception.
We give to the point of sacrifice to provide funds tocarry the gospel to the lost, who, for the most part, areoblivious to our concern for them. We study to equipourselves to teach a generation that cares nothing for what we have to say. We baptize people who often areunwilling to shed their goatskins of worldly lust andselfishness, and who refuse to take their cross and bear it for the cause of Christ. Even brothers and sisters who could be expected to be mature and productive in the Lord are too willing to spend theirtime and energy selfishly serving themselves insteadof Christ.
Is it any wonder that sometimes those who labor tobuild up the church are tempted with weariness asthey labor to carry, not only their own load, but alsothe load dumped on them by slothful members who refuse to help in the work?
But let such feelings be shut out of our minds. Let usnot indulge ourselves in feelings of self-pity for the endless task we perform with seemingly small results.Neither let us harbor feelings of bitterness againstbrethren who are unwilling to carry their share of the burden. Such feelings too easily become excuses forgiving up and becoming unfaithful ourselves.
Let us instead listen to the faithful word of God which exhorts, and promises, "And let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we shall reap if wedo not grow weary" (Galatians 6:9).
Let us also look to the examples of godly men whotoiled endlessly, enduring great temptation to becomeweary, but who in their faithfulness to God were richlyblessed. Noah labored to build the ark while at the same time preaching to sinful men in an effort to savethem; men who no doubt laughed him to scorn (II Peter 2:5). Abraham was called by God to go into astrange place, and was promised a seed through whomall nations would be blessed. For twenty-five years hewaited for a son, and,for all his life he wandered as astranger in a land in which he had no inheritance, andamong people who were not his own. Yet, in his faithfulness, Abraham became "the father of all who believe" through Jesus who came of the lineageof Isaac (Romans 4:11, 9:6-8). And think of Moses whospent forty years in the house of Pharaoh acquiringwisdom and knowledge and the bearing of a leader,but who was still not ready to lead God's people out ofEgypt. Instead he spent another forty years in thewilderness of Midian in preparation for the exodus, adeliverance in which even the people he deliveredmurmured and rebelled time after time making Moses' work hard to bear. Even though Moses himselffaltered along the way, his work nonetheless succeeded in the establishment of that nation of Israel through which God would bring His Son, the Christ.
And let us never fail to remember Jesus who gaveup the form of deity to take upon Himself the form ofman in order to die for us. Jesus went about doinggood, yet he walked upon this earth poor, homeless,despised, and rejected. Even His own disciples fledfrom Him, and left Him to face the ordeal of a mocktrial alone and friendless. But Jesus faithfully did whatthe Father sent Him to do, dying in agony to savethose who through sin had made themselves the bondmen of wickedness, and the enemies of God.
Yes, let us remember Jesus, and ". . . consider Himwho has endured such hostility by sinners againstHimself, so that you may not grow weary and loseheart" (Hebrews 12:3).
P.O. Box 928 Bend, Ore. 97701
The greatest evil that plagues the religious world ofour day is that of compromise. There was a time whenevery religious organization held to certain doctrinalstandards, never willing to give up their beliefs unlessproven wrong from the word of God. Many millions ofpeople have gone down religious roads which arepaved with the opinions of men rather than, a "thussaith the Lord." But they, at one time were willing tostand up and defend the doctrine dear to their hearts.Even though all could not be right, they could beadmired for the courage to stand for their convictions.
What has happened to the grit and firm convictionof those gone on before? Have we lost the backbone tostand up in the face of the world and teach the thingswe honestly believe? Preachers of old were once facedwith disproving false doctrine, and they did it. Now, toa large extent people believe it makes no differencewhat a person believes or practices, regardless of whatthe Bible teaches; and so we find that most religiouspeople have no conviction at all. We read reports ofmembers of the church of Christ involved in "UnityMovements", and brethren taking up with the "Neo-Pentecostal Movement", "Divine Healing", "Speakingin Tongues", and we wonder why! Well, I will tell youwhy. It is because people no longer believe the Bible isthe inspired word of God.
Can we not realize, that only through study of theNew Testament, and through its strict teachings, cantrue Christianity thrive and be counted in the lives of humanity. Compromise is a "jelly-fish" "no-backbone"attitude toward the teaching of the New Testament,and has no place in the religion of Christ. If we areinterested in the growth of New Testament Christianity we would have the back-bone to teach and practice that which is revealed in the Bible by the HolySpirit. A compromise is favorable in the eyes of the world, but it will mean destruction for the church that Jesus died for.
If you profess to be a Christian, then live in a way that will be pleasing to Him. If you know the truth,and fail to live as you should, then do not profess to bea Christian, for you are hindering the progress of thechurch, and the cause of Christ. Above all else, anygroup or individual, the cause of Christ must be preserved! It is by the word of God this old earthstands, if we leave the Word it will fall, as it did underthe Old Testament. Peter said: "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are keptin store, reserved unto fire against the day ofjudgment and perdition of ungodly men" (2 Peter 3:7).
Are you helping or hindering?
18112 Regina Ave.,
Torrance, California 90504
GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI. The congregation on theMississippi Gulf Coast which formerly met at 393Cowan Road, Gulfport, MS, has purchased some property a few miles north of Gulfport. We are nowmeeting at Morris Road. Our building is about 15minutes from the old building. Follow Cowan Roadfrom Highway 90, turn left at the flashing cautionlight, then right at the first traffic light. The buildingwill be visible from this point. Our service schedule remains the same.
BOB HERNDON, 342 Mt. View Ct., SE, Concord, N.C.28025. Rex Hadley, preacher for the Charlotte, N.C.church, will be with us in a meeting this spring. Weplan to start using the Hurt Bible CorrespondenceCourse soon. Let us know of friends or relatives who live in our area, including the northern side of Charlotte. Jack Byars (Rt. 1, Box 147) is the capablepreacher here.
L. EARL FLY, P.O. Box 3295, Jackson, Tennessee 38301. I am now preaching for the Southside congregation, which was established a few months agoin the south Jackson area on Hwy. 18 at Malesus. Thisis the second conservative church in the Jackson area. The other one is Hollywood Drive, where I preachedfor four years. A house was purchased and convertedinto a temporary meeting place until a building can bebuilt. We have about 35 in attendance and $60 weeklycontribution. I do not yet have full support.
RICHARD BERG, 109 Commonwealth Circle,Charlottesville, Va. 22901. Since you carried a newsitem in your paper about the work here, a family inLynchburg, Va., about 60 miles away, contacted usand has been worshipping with us here. Occasionallywe have visitors now from elsewhere in Virginia. Weneed other families who are sound in the faith to move here. We also sorely need a mature man who has donesome preaching and is well versed on the issues tosettle here. The Charlottesville — Waynesboro areais an absolutely beautiful portion of the country tolive
in, has a good school system, medium industry(Dupont, Morton Foods, Sperry-Marine, etc.), lowcrime rate and is just a very nice place to raise afamily. If you are passing through please stop andworship with us.
HOYT H. HOUCHEN, 12528 E. Alaska Place, Aurora,Colorado 80012. Three of our families at Boston Street in Aurora have moved recently to Grand Junction,Colorado and we are happy to report that they mettogether for worship for the first time on December 2.This marks the beginning of a conservative congregation in Grand Junction. We rejoice to see a new work begin on the western slope. For more information about the new work, or if anyone knowsof those living in or near Grand Junction who shouldbe contacted, please communicate with Louis Page,757 Hill, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501. When inColorado, visit us at 1297 Boston Street in Aurora.
ARTHUR W. ADAMS, P.O. Box 181, Oglethorpe,Georgia. For two years we have worked with the GlenPark congregation in Gary, Indiana. During that timewe are pleased to report there were 35 restorationsand baptisms. The church there publishes a bi-monthlybulletin, has a Sunday morning radio program and offers a correspondence course. While there we assisted in appointing three men as elders: JohnGaddis, Evan Overturf, and Willie Williams, and twodeacons: Bobby Cleek and James Conn. The newelders are re-evaluating the work program of thechurch. Parven DeBerry will soon move to work withGlen Park.
On November 1, we moved to Oglethorpe, Georgiato assist the work which had been torn apart over theinstitutional problems and resulting bitterness. Uponarrival we found the Sunday morning attendance was
16. After one month, 5 have been restored, severalwho left are now attending and outsiders are showinginterest in the work. The local newspaper is giving us a weekly column which is bringing some results already. The brethren passed out over 600 tracts lastmonth. Attendance and contribution have recentlydoubled. We hope soon to start a radio program and alocal bulletin. We are fully convinced that the churchhere will grow rapidly. Please pray for us, and whenyou are in the area stop and worship with us. We are20 miles west of 1-75 on Route 241.
LARRY R. DeVORE, Box 86, Roseville, Ohio 43777. Two were restored at Roseville on October 28. Bob Dickey of West Lafayette, Ohio was with us in a meeting Nov. 26-Dec. 2 with fairly good attendancebut no additions.
WELDON E. WARNOCK, 1021 Welford Dr., Xenia,Ohio 45385. The Knollwood congregation has signed aone year contract with radio station WAVI, Dayton, toconduct a talk program for one hour each Sundaymorning. We will be on from 9:00 to 10:00 o'clock. Ibelieve this type program wherein the listeners maycall in their questions or comments during the broadcast is the most appealing to the radio audience.The attendance at Knollwood is up slightly and thecontribution remains about $900 per week. Werecently had a gospel meeting with James Cooperpreaching and we just concluded a ladies Bible Classand a men's training class. When in the Dayton area,worship with us. The building is located at Highway 35and Fairfield between Dayton and Xenia.
JAMES R. COPE, Temple Terrace, Florida 33617.When 1973 ends, I shall have delivered my series,Solving Family Problems, 129 times in barely three years. I put over 100,000 miles behind me last year andam close to the same for this year. Many brethrenhave warned that I cannot indefinitely keep mypresent pace. I have reluctantly agreed that they areright. I am going to try to cut my week-end schedule toabout one-half during 1974. Brethren who would liketo schedule the Family Series or week-end meetingson other themes should contact me as soon as possibleif they desire my services during 1974. I have tried toaccept every call and have turned down no churchregardless of size or location. I get to each one as timeand circumstances permit.
OVERSEAS PREACHING REPORT
WALLACE H. LITTLE, P.O. Box 1306, Marshall,Texas 75670. Many places in the world today are whiteunto harvest. Unfortunately most US saints are justdimly aware of this. Only occasionally do we learn ofconversions in Europe, Africa, the Philippines, Asia, Mexico and other places. It is not for the absence ofsuch knowledge. A number of men have been to theseplaces and can speak personally and authoritativelyconcerning both the work and the men doing it. Butthere is a lack of ready availability of this informationbecause it is not packaged in convenient and accessibleform.
In conjunction with others who also have a highdegree of concern, I am trying to start a paper dealing with this work and those engaged in it. Tentatively, itwill be named OVERSEAS PREACHING REPORT. Originally, we intend it as an eight page quarterly,with plans to convert it to a monthly later. It will be8 1/2 by 14 inches, folded. The writing will be done bythose who have been to these places and have intimateknowledge of the cause of Christ there. We will deal inall aspects of the good fight of faith against the forcesof evil. We hope to include writing from native preachers.
Attempting to compile a mailing list, I find many ofthe addresses in the 1971 DIRECTORY OF CHURCHES put out by Bill Wallace as well as thoselisted in brotherhood papers do not conform to PostOffice regulations, thus material sent out with suchaddresses is undeliverable. So, we are asking all whowant to receive our paper to send me their correctmailing list, INCLUDING ZIP CODE. We are especially anxious to send our publication to churchesand preachers. We will send it without charge. Pleaselet us hear from you on this.