Man has tried numerous ways of disguising sin sothat it will not look so bad. We read of this practice inthe days of Isaiah, "Woe unto them that call evil good ... that put darkness for light . . . that put bitter forsweet.. ." (Isaiah 5:20). The Jews apparently thoughtthat by calling sin good and darkness light, sin would no longer be sin. The American Everyday Dictionarydefines whitewashing thus, "Anything used to coverup defects, faults, etc. To cover up the defects, faults,errors, etc.," pg. 534. Whitewashing sin was not uncommon during the earthly ministry of our Lord. The Jews tried to rid themselves of the responsibility of honouring their parents. They taught that if theysaid their possessions were "corban" (set aside forspiritual use) they were free of any responsibility totheir parents and their negligence was justified. Theyused this argument (it is corban) in an effort to coverup their defects and faults or to whitewash their sin. Kind reader, as we view mankind and society todaywe find that whitewashing sin is just as common. Let's observe some cases and examples in which effortshave been made to whitewash sin:

CALLING SIN A SICKNESS

Your writer will readily concede that there are truecases of mental aberration or sickness. There are cases that are totally physiological in their origin andnature over which the victim has no control and other cases that are products of the absence of mental hygiene. But it has gotten to the point that there is no such thing as sin -it is all a sickness. For example, manhas tried to whitewash the sin of homosexuality bysaying it is ONLY a sickness (all emphasis throughoutmine, D.M.). I will agree that it is a disorder but the"victim" has control of it (or at least he can). The Biblecalls homosexuality sin (Gen. 19:4, 5, 7,11; Rom. 1:21, 24, 26-28). In fact, it is one of the most reprehensibleand disgusting sins found in the Bible! But man comesalong and in an effort to whitewash it says that it isONLY a sickness and not sin. Alcoholism is another

case in point. Again, we are told that alcoholism is onlya sickness over which the victim has no control. Beloved, these "sicknesses" are the products of intemperance and indulgence of the worst kind!

CALLING ADULTERY AND FORNICATION AN AFFAIR

In most instances, it is now accepted socially for twopeople to have an affair. By using the word "affair,"the world seems to think that an illicit relationship isjustified. We are told that two people living togetherout of wedlock is JUST an affair. This is, however,another evident effort to whitewash sin. When two people are engaging in an affair they are committingadultery! Practically all you hear on television thesedays is about somebody having an affair. By the timeHollywood gets through whitewashing an affair itappears to be something that is perfectly noble anddecent. It used to be when two people were said tohave lived together it was a disgrace, but now when itis said that they had an affair, nothing bad isassociated with it. Beloved, it matters not how strenuously man tries to whitewash fornication andadultery, an affair is still adultery and those whopractice such cannot enter the kingdom of God (Gal.5:19, 21; Rom. 1:29).

CALLING THIEVERY GOOD BUSINESS

Another way in which man tries to whitewash sin isby calling the salesman and businessman who employsdeceit, chicanery, and misrepresentation to sell hisproducts a good businessman. When a man goes outand robs a bank he is a robber and thief but when he cheats somebody out of his money in a business transaction he is a good businessman, according to theworld. But, beloved, a business transaction that involves deception and misrepresentation is nothingbut thievery!

BY USING EXCUSES

Many also labour to whitewash and disguise sin byemploying excuses. "I know I shouldn't have said anddone those things but I have a bad temper," we oftenhear people say in trying to excuse themselves. "I donot have time to study, pray regularly, and teachothers," and "I am just not able to give as the NewTestament teaches." The first excuse is often advanced in an attempt to whitewash the sin of saying unkind words and performing harsh acts by thinkingtheir speech and actions are justified because theyhave a bad temper. The second excuse is indicative ofdisinterest (it is an attempt to justify the sin of notstudying, praying with regularity and teaching others). The last commonly heard excuse has thedesign of covering up the sin of not giving scripturallyby using bad stewardship as the reason, which is a sinwithin itself. Let us not be guilty of trying to concealsin through the use of excuses. Remember, the excuseand that which we are excusing are never justified.

BY TEACHING THE DOCTRINE THAT THE ALIEN SINNER IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE TO GOD'S LAW

We are told by some that the alien sinner is notamenable to God's law and will not be judged by it.Therefore, when he steals, cheats, and wrongs othershe is not really sinning. This doctrine has manyramifications and they are all false and erroneous.While the New Testament does teach that the alien sinner (carnally minded) is not subject to God's law (inthe sense that he is not submissive to it, Rom. 8:7) italso teaches that ignorance is not winked at today andthat those who reject the gospel will still be judged byit (Acts 17:30; Jno. 12:48).

CALLING LIES LITTLE WHITE LIES AND STORIES

Many will freely admit that a falsehood is indeed alie but when they themselves are placed in a situationin which it is profitable for them to lie they will say itis just a little fib or story. This is nothing short of thefalse doctrine of situation ethics in practice. There areeven members of the church who practice Romanism that is, that in some circumstances a lie can be toldjustifiably. An example of this whitewash job wouldbe when a salesman comes to the door and the persondoes not want to see him, so he sends one of thechildren to the door to tell him that he is not home. "Oh, this is just a fib," we are told. Beloved, a lie is a lieit matters not what we call it. Moreover, all liars will have their part in the lake which burns with fire andbrimstone (Rev. 21:8).

CONCLUSION

Brethren, let's always call sin, sin and not try towhitewash it. Remember, we cannot change sin andwhen we seek to disguise it we only make it moredeceptive.

Pineland, Texas

PERSONAL EVANGELISM (2)

In a previous article we defined "personalevangelism", pointed out the subjects of such person to person teaching efforts, showed why it is neededand gave scriptural proof that the work is required ofus. Not only is the salvation of others dependent uponthese efforts, but our own as well.

We ought to learn something from the worthyexamples set for us by the Lord and his followers ofNew Testament times. Peter said of Jesus "leaving usan example, that ye should follow his steps" (1 Peter2:21). While the context concerns the manner in whichJesus endured suffering, it is a fact that we shouldlook to him as an example in other areas also. "Let thismind be in you which was in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 2:5).While Jesus addressed multitudes, taught in synagogues and the courts of the temple, he had timefor the individual. Some of his best remembered and most often cited lessons were directed initially to one person. He had time for Nicodemus, a ruler of theJewish high court and taught him about the new birth(Jno. 3:1-5). Most of us would have thought theSamaritan woman whom Jesus met at a well an unlikely prospect for conversion. She was a sinner.Yet, to her Jesus presented the unforgettable lessonon the nature of true worship (Jno. 4). In Jericho,Jesus singled out the publican Zaccheus, who musthave appeared somewhat ludicrous for climbing a treeto see over the crowd, went home with him to rebukehim for his sinful life, offer hope of forgiveness andthereby spark hope in all the rest of us by saying "Forthe Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost" (Lk. 19:10).

Many who recognized Jesus as the Christ were prompt to tell friends and relatives of their discovery,including the Samaritan woman. When Andrew realized that Jesus was the Messiah, he "first findethhis own brother Simon" to tell him the good news (Jno. 1:40-42). What a blessing that turned out to be for thekingdom of God. Verses 43-51 tell of Philip findingNathanael to tell him "We have found him, of whomMoses in the law, and the prophets, did write." Nathanael at first was not convinced, but Philip didwhat every good personal evangelist ought to be ableto do. He urged him to examine the evidence forhimself by saying "come and see." Philip the evangelist left a successful meeting in Samaria to meeta Bible reading man of importance riding along adeserted road, taught him of Jesus, convinced him, and stopped to baptize him before the man went on hisway rejoicing (Acts 8:26-40). Here was personalevangelism at its best. Such labors were not confinedto Philip. It was said of the apostles at Jerusalem "Anddaily in the temple, and in every house, they ceasednot to teach and preach Jesus Christ" (Acts 5:42). Thescattered saints from Jerusalem "went everywherepreaching the word" (Acts 8:4). A husband and wife,Acquila and Priscilla, took it upon themselves to takeaside the eloquent and knowledgeable preacher Apollos to set him straight, and with admirablesuccess (Acts 18:24-28). How many of us would havebeen intimidated by the ability of an Apollos andfeared that he was "too set in his ways" to change? Paul reminded the Ephesian elders that while he wasworking with them he taught them "publicly, and fromhouse to house" (Acts 20:20). These are all worthy examples for us to follow.

The spiritual motives which should compel us toreach out for the lost are set out for us in the scriptures. Every now and then there are some brethren who decide that they have become specialists in the field of personal evangelism to the degree that unless the brotherhood buys and reads their "how to" books, or their "how to" records or sales kits, they will surely be a failure in personalevangelism. The principles of salesmanship have somethings in common with soul winning, but not everything. One might indulge a whim or fancy inbuying, but obeying the Lord rests upon an understanding of his will, else one cannot come tothe Lord (Jno. 6:44-45). Whether one buys a Ford or Chevrolet does not affect his eternal destiny, butobedience to the gospel does so affect it. When toomuch stress is laid upon sales gimmicks from thecommercial world to try and lead lost souls to Christ,there is the very real danger of baptizing the untaughtthus getting a dry sinner all wet! And that is all he willbe! Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against tryingto convince a brother that he can teach someone the truth. I hope these articles will help with that. But I have a great deal against fast buck schemes in which brethren capitalize on a person's sense of shame for having to admit to himself that he is not interestedenough in soul winning to invest $50 or $60 of his hard-earned money in a set of records, or a tool kit!

The gospel contains all the motivation any faithfulChristian needs. In 2 Cor. 5:9-14 Paul sets forth at least four motivating forces which should impel everythoughtful child of God to get busy, overcome hisshyness, ignorance or whatever, and get on with thework of saving those in his acquaintance. Verse 9 speaks of "being accepted of him." Since the Lord taught in his word that Christians ought to teachothers, and then left us abundant examples of thatbeing done, it should be well understood by everybeliever that if he wants to be accepted by the Lord,he must do what the Lord requires. Verse 10 points tothe judgment to come. Not only will my neighbor,relative, friend or co-worker stand in judgment to giveanswer, but so shall we all. The fact that one whom wehave known and spent hours with through life might come to the judgment unprepared when personalevangelism might have made the difference, shouldtrouble us deeply. What are we to say to the Lord forour own failure in this regard? The judgment to comeshould move us to work harder to save the lost. Verse 11 says "Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, wepersuade men." If we really believe, as we say we do, that those who do not obey the gospel will be lost inhell eternally, what excuse can we offer for not tryingto avoid that fearful prospect? Have we no compassion? Jesus said "blessed are the merciful, forthey shall obtain mercy" (Mt. 5:7). When the gospelis taught to the lost, mercy is offered. Shall we be therecipients of mercy who have shown no mercy tothose "dead in trespasses and sins"?

Verse 14 says "For the love of Christ constrainethus." Paul was never able to forget how the grace ofGod reached down to turn him aside from a life of error and certain destruction and to save him through the gospel. He wrote "But God commendeth his lovetoward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christdied lor us" (Rom. 5:8). For that reason Paul said hewas "debtor" and "ready to preach the gospel" to thelimit of what power was in him (Rom. 1:14-17). Whenwe think of a crucified Lord and reflect on the fact that his suffering was for each of us, then we ought to bemoved to rescue the perishing. My brother, my sister,if these forces described in 2 Corinthians 5:9-14 are not sufficient to impel you to teach the gospel to the lost inyour circle of influence, then all the records, salescourses, TV reminder tags and mirror slogans whichenterprising brethren may sell you will not get the jobdone, even if you buy them by the train load!

Paul did not use the carnal weapons of hisdetractors in Corinth to answer them, nor should weresort to carnal gimmicks and gadgets in the greatwork of soul saving. God's weapons are "mighty" because they are his weapons and they are able tobring even our thoughts into captivity to Christ. Thedoctrine of the all-sufficiency of the gospel applies asmuch in personal evangelism motivation as it does inother areas of spiritual need.

A final article in this study will deal with the effectiveness of personal evangelism. Watch for it nextmonth.

ANCIENT HERESIES IN ONENESS DOCTRINE

In recent months I've had the pleasure ofmoderating for Gene Frost in two debates. The firstwas with Raymond Parnell in Greenwood, Ind. and thesecond with G. T. Sharp near Decatur, Alabama. Bothof these men are preachers in the United PentecostalChurch. Subjects discussed were: the baptism of theHoly Spirit; miracles; and the Godhead.

It's not my objective at this time to review thedebates except to say that both were well ordered discussions of the issues by representative men. Genepresented and defended the truth in what I wouldterm an extremely forceful, intelligent, and clear manner of presentation. In both discussions,Pentecostal attendance dwindled and the attendance of Christians grew as the weeks progressed. This was one obvious indication of the Pentecostal dissatisfaction with the way things were going.

From the research Gene and I did, both collectively and individually, in preparation for and in retrospectof these discussions, some facts have come to light thatmay be of benefit to others.

The most interesting thing that has emerged in ourstudy is the philosophical roots of "oneness" doctrine. Though the largest of the "oneness" denominations,the United Pentecostal Church, claims in the Foreword of their manual that "the revelation on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (and) the pivotaldoctrines of the absolute deity of Jesus Christ and thebaptism in His name . . ." came in the year 1914, the"oneness" concept is actually a combination of severalancient heresies.

Gnosticism, Sabellianism, Marcellianism, and Nestorianism, all heresies of the first five centuriesA.D., contained basic elements of "oneness" philosophy.

Brother Frost showed his audiences that their doctrine was neither in the Bible, nor was it revealedin 1914. It was taught by heretics throughout thecenturies. He further showed that the same problemsthey now experience in explaining their concept of onepersonality in the Godhead in view of such events asthe baptism of Jesus were experienced by those earlyheretics.

Modern "oneness" debaters jump from the Sabellianphilosophy of God (one person, Jesus) beingmanifested at different times in different forms to the Marcellian concept of God expanding Himself, like the old comic book character, Plastic Man, into anynumber of manifestations at the same time.

They seem to just now be formulating a philosophical basis for their doctrine. Kenneth Reeveshas written two booklets in which he has set forth such a system of thought. These are: "The Godhead", and"The Great Commission Re-Examined".

Brother Frost has summarized the United Pentecostal philosophy as follows: "The overall concept pictures God as a Being expandedthroughout the universe and beyond, without entity orform. He is so vast that he cannot know what He is about in every area except as He can communicatewithin Himself. God has an 'image' that emanated from Him as He spoke; His words in creation came outin a haze outline of a man. With this pattern, God madeangels and man. In redeeming man, He took this image, His speech-pattern, and with it formed the fleshof Jesus, who was then born of Mary. With the humanspirit of the man Jesus, God moved in and shared thebody. Thus the Sonship began at the birth of Jesusand ceased or will cease, just when Pentecostals havenot yet decided. (They are disagreed on this point.K.G.) God also moves into the bodies of Christians,and in this action is known as the Holy Spirit. TheHoly Spirit within each person is exclusively his HolySpirit. The Holy Spirit is omniscient only as he employs the communication system within Deity tocommunicate with Himself in every other place."

When this was presented before the Greenwood,Ind. audience, some Pentecostals shook their headsnegatively and some agreed. Mr. Parnell poked fun atthe charts but would not deny any part of the summary.

Another interesting and related line of study is theinfluence of cabalistic philosophy in "oneness" doctrine.

While reading the authoritative book of Freemasonry, Morals and Dogma, by Albert Pike, I ran across several references to the cabala (or kabala). Having done some reading in the field ofastrology about a year earlier, I recognized the importof cabalistic doctrine. I was surprised to find about two pages of references in my indexed copy of Morals andDogma. These references make it clear that cabalism is the basis of Freemasonry.

The cabala is said to be the "secret teaching of theAncient Mysteries (given to) the children of Seth,carried from Chaldea by Abraham, taught to the Egyptian priesthood by Joseph, recovered and purified by Moses, concealed under symbols in theBible, revealed by the Savior to Saint John, andcontained entire, under hieratic figures analogous tothose of antiquity, in the Apocalypse of that Apostle"(Morals and Dogma, p. 97).

Cabalistic teaching served as the basis for the numerological and allegorical schools of interpretationsuch as was founded by Philo in Egypt. The sameconcept is readily seen among those groups today whoclaim that the Bible cannot be read and understood in its literal or obvious sense but that the real meaning is BEHIND THE WORDS (This is what Kenneth Reeves says in his book "The Godhead", p. 38).

Not only is there a correlation of thought betweenthe cabalists and modern-day "oneness", but BrotherFrost has presented in his debates what may verypossibly be the origin of the "oneness" concepts ofBible interpretation and of the Godhead.

Morals and Dogma, in tracing cabalistic influence through the centuries, mentions Emmanuel Swedenborg as a proponent of that philosophy. Swedenborg said: "The spiritual sense of the Word isnot that sense which shines forth from the sense of the letter . . . The spiritual sense does not appear in thesense of the letter, being within it as the soul in the body . . ." (Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures, Four-Doctrines, P. 4.)

The truly amazing thing about this mystic genius, however, (as relates to the present subject) was notthat he was a cabalist, but that he was a "oneness".There is scarcely an argument that the United Pentecostals and Apostolics make that Swedenborg did not make. When one considers the abundance of Swedenborgian material on the shelves of used bookstores, he can understand how this man could well bethe Daddy of the "oneness" "revelation."

Reeves, in the afore mentioned booklet, "The Godhead", teaches that if we accept the literal importof the language of the Bible we will be led to theconclusion that there is a plurality of individuals in theGodhead, but that they who are enlightened realizethat the true hidden meaning is "behind the words."

The similarities between the Pentecostal philosophyas presented in Reeves' books, and the ramblings ofSwedenborg are too numerous to be coincidental.

All the scriptural arguments that one may presentwill not prove a thing to somebody who is convincedthat the Bible does not really mean what it says.Pentecostals believe that the real meaning is evidentto only a select few and they are that select few. Untilthis attitude is exposed and destroyed, plain statements from God's word will fall on deaf ears.

For those who would like to study these matters ingreater detail, Brother Frost has written two lengthy articles which will be appearing soon in THE PRECEPTOR.

CAN UNITY PRODUCE DIVISION?

For hundreds of years, all men of all denominationswho profess to believe the Bible have answered thecritics who question its inspiration. A major argumenthas been an appeal to the unity among the writers whowrote over a period of hundreds of years yet withoutdiscrepancy or contradiction. The critics have beentold that if the Bible contained clear and undeniable contradictions it could not be the inspired, inerrantand infallible word of God. That is true.

Many of the same men who contend that division inthe Bible would destroy its effectiveness and deny itsinspiration, also believe in and endeavor to defenddenominationalism — a system of division. No twodenominations are alike, nor do they teach the same things, yet they all claim to get their doctrine from theBible.

Are you following me? How could a book of perfectlyharmonious truth which contains no division or contradiction produce a system of division and doctrinal discrepancy? If division in the Bible would prove that it was not of God, why doesn't the division peculiar to denominationalism prove thatthe system is not of God?

The Bible says that God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33). The Bible speaks to all menalike. What it says to one it says to all. Anydivision, therefore, must be attributed to ignorance ordisbelief. I repeat: If division would prove that the Bible is not of God, it also proves the same for denominationalism. A book of unity cannot produce asystem of division. Such is impossible. So if sectarianswould use the same logic in trying to uphold denominationalism that they use in defense of the Bible, they might see the error of denominationalism.

"SPLITTING HAIRS"

In the GOSPEL ADVOCATE, Feb. 28, 1974, theeditor, with a note of editorial endorsement, reprinted an article entitled "Splitting Hairs."

The article emphasized the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, and then made application to many in thechurch who quibble over things of little value whileneglecting the "weightier matters of the law." There are many good thoughts in the article. No doubt wecan become too negative and inconsistent. We can alsofail to make proper distinction between matters offaith and matters of opinion.

But there are some things in the article which I view with concern. The writer gave a list of things which heconsidered to belong in the realm of "hair splitting"and included "whether we should call any one 'brother' except those of our 'own faith and order' " and "whether baptism is valid unless it be specifically 'for the remission of sins'."

That's news to me. I didn't know that it was "splitting hairs" to refuse to acknowledge a sectarianas a brother, and to contend that baptism is for theremission of sins.

Jesus said, "my brethren are these which hear theword of God, and do it" (Luke 8:21). If I am doing thewill of God, then I am in fellowship with all others whodo the will of God — but no more. Read First John 1:7 and Second John 9-11. If a man has not obeyed thegospel and is not doing the will of God he is not mybrother in Christ. I'm not interested in making my"own faith and order" a test of fellowship, but I amconcerned about the faith and order revealed by theLord, and I cannot fellowship those who refuse toaccept the faith and follow the order.

The Bible says that baptism is "for the remission ofsins" (Acts 2:38) and I deny that I am "splitting hairs"when I teach that and insist that people obey it!

The editor said that he reprinted the article byrequest. If he is taking requests, I have a file ofmaterial from past pages of the ADVOCATE which Iwould like to see reprinted, including some materialfrom the editor. In fact, I know some people whowould be willing to buy the space at the regularcommercial rate to get some ADVOCATE materialreprinted.

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES VS. THE BIBLE

An Associated Press article out of Houston is headed, "World won't end, 'Witness' says." The articlequotes Milton G. Henschel, one of the 11 members ofthe Watch Tower Society, as saying, "We don't believethe earth is going to be destroyed, as some otherreligions do. The Bible shows that the tent of God will be with mankind so we believe that paradise will be onthis earth. Most people will either gain everlasting lifeon earth — or die and go out of existence."

Now consider what Peter said about this: "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise,and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, theearth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up" (II Peter 3:10).

He talked about what is to happen to "most people."What about the others? "But there will be a limited number of associates with God in the heavenly kingdom." He also predicted that this is the last generation of man, and that the end will come in 1984.Proof? One generation of about 70 years from World War I in 1914. He forgot to give the scripture on that!

ROME'S INFALLIBILITY REAFFIRMED

An article from Vatican City, July 7, 1973, stated:"The Vatican's office for combating doctrinal errors,the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,

issued a 19-page document that said all dogmas 'must be believed with the same divine faith' that Roman Catholics have displayed in the past. The document,which reaffirmed the concept of the infallibility of the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope, came afterattacks by some theologians."

Even though millions of Catholics, including manyofficials, don't believe in papal infallibility, Rome mustcontinue to insist upon it for that is the foundation ofRomanism and the only way to maintain control overthe people. Of course they never inform the peoplethat infallibility was not accepted, even in the CatholicChurch, until nearly eighteen hundred years after thedeath of the apostles.

A GOOD STATEMENT

Jane Meadows, entertainer, and wife of Steve Allen,commented recently in FAMILY WEEKLY on therole of religion in their 18 years of successful marriage.

"People who say religion is a crutch are usuallysitting with a martini in one hand and a pill in theother. What they don't understand is that strong faithcan release them from all the insecurities that putthem in that position. Religion is not a crutch if it helpsyou lead a better, more fulfilling life. It's more like a good friend. Let's face it, we must have it."

The apostle Paul put it this way: "Be careful (anxious) for nothing; but in everything by prayer andsupplication with thanksgiving let your requests bemade known unto God. And the peace of God, whichpasseth all understanding, shall keep your hearts andminds through Jesus Christ" (Phil. 4:6,7.).

FAITH AND DOCTRINE

I raise the question: Is there a difference in the faithand in the doctrine? We are concerned about the faith revealed and the doctrine or teaching of Christ.

ROM. 1:16-17

Paul said in verse 15 that he was ready to preach thegospel. He affirms in verse 16 that the gospel is God's power to save, and that in the gospel is revealed the righteousness of God, verse 17. The just live by faith.Thus, Paul uses the terms faith and gospel synonymously in this passage.

TITUS

Paul instructed Titus that elders were to "hold fast the faithful word" (1:9). Holding that "faithful word"would enable them to exhort and convince gainsayers"by sound doctrine" (1:9). A sharp rebuke was to begiven that certain ones "may be sound in the faith"(1:13). Titus was charged to speak "sound doctrine"(2:1). In Titus there is no difference in sound doctrine,the faith, and the faithful word.

I TIM. 6:3

Paul told Timothy that "wholesome words" were the "words of our Lord Jesus Christ" which was "doctrine."

ROMANS 10

In writing to the Romans Paul said Israel was ignorant of "God's righteousness" (v. 3). God'srighteousness is called in verse 8 "the word" and "theword of faith." In verse 15 Paul said the gospel waspreached, and some in verse 16 had obeyed the gospel. Their faith came in verse 17 by hearing the "word of God." Paul uses the gospel, the word of God, the wordof faith and God's righteousness all to refer to the same message.

ACTS 6:7

Luke tells us that when "the word of God increased" there were a number of the priests who "were obedient to the faith." If "the faith" was not "the word of God" how could people obey the faith when theword of God was preached?

ACTS 13

The "word of the Lord" was preached in Jewishsynagogues, verse 5. One desired to hear "the word of God" in verse 7. Elymas sought to turn Sergius Paulusaway "from the Faith" (v. 8). Paul said, "the right

ways of the Lord" were perverted by Elymas (v. 10).When Sergius Paulus believed, it was "the doctrine ofthe Lord" (v. 12). What is the difference in the word ofthe Lord, the faith, the right ways of the Lord and thedoctrine of the Lord in Acts 13?

ACTS 14:21-22

Paul and Barnabas preached the gospel to the city ofDerbe and exhorted others to continue in the faith. Were they teaching different things? No, the faith isthe gospel.

PHIL. 1:27

Paul told the Philippians that their lives should "beas it becometh the gospel of Christ" and that theyshould strive "for the faith of the gospel." The faithand the gospel are the same.

I COR. 4:15

Paul "through the gospel" had begotten the Corinthians. In verse 17 he says Timothy is "mybeloved son." In I Tim. 1:2 Paul said that Timothy washis "own son in the faith." Of Titus, Paul said he was his "own son after the common faith" (Titus 1:4).People begotten by the gospel can be said to be in thefaith.

I TIM. 4

When Paul wrote Timothy he said some would "depart from the faith" (I Tim. 4:1). In doing so theywould give heed to doctrines of devils, which consisted of (1) "forbidding to marry" and (2) "commanding toabstain from meats." There were those who would not depart because they knew and believed the truth (v.3). Meat was sanctified by the word of God (v. 5). Paulsaid Timothy would be a good minister if he remindedbrethren of certain things that were in the words offaith and good doctrine (v. 6). Paul uses the terms, faith, doctrine, truth, words of God, words of faith and doctrine to mean the same thing.

BIBLE WORD STUDIES"SALVATION" WORDS: "SAVE" SOZO, "SAVE," IN THEGREEK WORLD

In the Greek New Testament, one of the most common words used to denote human redemption isthe verb sozo, "I save." This verb is found verycommonly in Greek literature, dating even to the writings of Homer. The term seems to be derived fromthe adjective saos, "safe." (See Theological Dictionaryof the New Testament, vol. 7, pp. 965ff.)

Though New Testament usage is more limited thanthat of Greek literature in general, it is interesting andprofitable to study the uses of sozo in classical literature prior to the time of the writing of the NewTestament.

"SAVING"

The first and basic use of sozo pertained to"snatching" of gods or men from some immediatedanger. This danger might be warfare, sickness, perilsof sea, etc. The agent of the salvation is not necessarily human: darkness, a horse, a shield, etc.might accomplish the "saving."

"KEEPING"

In some instances, sozo occurs in classical writingsin the sense of "keeping alive," "pardoning." Similarly,when the Nile did not rise, the king and queen mightlevy taxes to "save" men; that is, to keep them fromwant and perishing. In one place, Homer uses sozo todenote keeping a spark of fire from going out.

"BENEFITT1NG"

The preceding examples have all pertained tosaving or keeping from some danger or threat; butclassical literature uses sozo in the positive sense of"keeping in good health," etc. The water in Alexandriawas said to "save," that is, "benefit."

At the annual feast of Zeus, the priest would praylor the "salvation" of the people; that is, for their wellbeing, for their cattle, for their wealth.

There are many instances of praying for the "salvation" of the emperors.

"PRESERVING THE INNER BEING"

A different and interesting nuance of sozo occurswhen the term is used not to denote the physical well

being of the individual, but to denote his inner being ornature. One occurrence of the term tells how a tyrant can "remain" a tyrant. That is, he can "save" his nature. Another reference indicates that an actor can retire early and "save" his reputation. Similarly, whena man acts like an animal he "loses" his nature as a

man. (Continued)

"STRANGE DOCTRINES NO. 1"

I never cease to be amazed at the new doctrines which crop up every year. The amusing thing is thatall the advocates of these doctrines claim a firm foundation in the Bible. If the Bible supported one-third of all that men claim, I could understand why wehave so many atheists in the world. I shall in this, andsucceeding articles, discuss some strange doctrinesadvocated by Mr. Jack Langford of Ft. Worth, Texas.

In the early part of the year it was my privilege tomoderate for brother Bob LaCoste in a six nightdebate with Mr. Langford. I had met Free-Will Baptists on the polemic platform and felt that Mr.Langford's affirmative would be along the same line.Basically, his arguments for Holy Ghost baptism werethe same but he soon tapered off and left the Baptistposition. Mr. Langford has a pretty good following inthe Ft. Worth area. He fancies himself as "Nonsectarian" which isn't so bad if he would stand byhis guns. He will not allow a sign of any sort to beplaced over his meeting place. He will tell you orallythat he is a member of the body of Christ, which is finebut he feels that the expression "churches of Christ"(Rom. 16:16) is more of a description than justificationfor a name. He holds to the Baptist argument relativeto the name "Church of Christ" but unlike them he refuses to wear a name of any kind: The place where he meets is a rented building, and I am not sure, but Ibelieve he feels that it is unscriptural to own property. His people are friendly and zealous. Theystudy their Bible a great deal but always under theguidance of Mr. Langford. Mr. Langford is superficially a mild mannered man, but can be ruffledwhen things do not go his way. It was necessary for meto call him down once or twice during the discussionand this did not suit at all. He doesn't know too much about the rules of public debate. He told me during thediscussion he didn't like moderators and he felt that God could do the moderating. I told him that would be fine if he would let me tell him what the will of God was. He got the message. Mr. Langford felt that everyone at the

debate should step aside and let him tell what the will of the Lord was on certain questions. When I reminded him that this would not work, and I couldnot tolerate it, he softened his position somewhat.

This discussion was conducted jointly at Cooper,Texas and Ft. Worth, Texas. It was freely admitted byall preachers present that Mr. Langford is smooth inthe propagation of his theories. He has memorized hismaterial and can make some of it sound persuasive tothe unlearned.

I shall, in this article, take up only one of his affirmitive arguments. Mr. Langford took the positionthat water baptism was a "hangover" from the Old Testament. He admitted that John's baptism was inwater, and also reluctantly admitted that water baptism is mentioned in Acts 8 (the Eunuch) and alsothat the Samaritans were immersed in water. He also admitted that Cornelius was baptized in water as recorded in Acts 10. In passages such as Acts 2:38; 1Pet 3:21; Rom. 6:3, 4; Mk. 15:15, 16, etc. he firmlyadvocated that these verses refer to Holy Ghost baptism.

In order to justify the above claim, Mr. Langfordaffirmed that the Old Testament was phased out. Heasserted that about the time Hebrews was written it was ready to vanish away. He actually used the word"phased out" in his charts and affirmation. He used the word phased so much it was difficult to know at timeswhether he was talking about Nixon's economic planor the Bible. He readily granted that certain parts ofthe Law of Moses were nailed to the cross (Col. 2:14) but that other matters of the Law were phased out.One of his arguments in favor of this was Paul's keeping the Nazarite vow in Acts 21. He gave this asproof that Paul was keeping the Law of Moses. I shall discuss this later.

Mr. Langford went to Heb. 9:9-13 to sustain histheory. It reads, "Which was a figure for the time thenpresent, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did serviceperfect, as pertaining to the conscience; which stoodonly in meats and drinks, and divers washings, andcarnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time ofreformation". He then moved down to verse thirteen which says, "For if the blood of bulls and goats, andthe ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifiethto the purifying of the flesh" and keyed in on the word"washings" and the fact that some translations haveI baptism) following this word. He then skipped downto verse thirteen and asserted that these washings orbaptisms were for the purifying of the flesh. From thisassumption, he claimed that all water baptism in theNew Testament, including John's was only for thepurifying of the flesh and was sort of a hangover fromJudaism. He gave no proof of this but did make astrong assertion.

In refuting the claim that the washings of Heb. 9, wore the same as water baptism of the New Testament, I prepared a chart. On this chart it wasshown that not one item between the washings of theOld Testament and water baptism of the New were the same. They were listed as follows: (1) TheELEMENT is different. In the Old Testament the priest used hyssop, cedar wood, scarlet and the ashesof a heifer mixed in water for the water of purificationused in cleansing the people. In the New Testamentonly WATER was used as the element (Num. 19:1-15;Acts 10:47-48). (2) The DESIGN was different. In theOld Testament the design was to purify the flesh.People were considered unclean for touching a deadbody. This is not so under the New Testament law.The design of water baptism is for the remission ofsins (Num. 19:13; Acts 2:38; Mk. 16:15-16). (3) TheSUBJECTS were different. Under the Old Testament the priest had to wash their clothes to sanctify them.Even among the priests who washed themselves thereis no indication that they had to be penitent believers.But under the New Testament, all people baptized inwater had to be penitent believers (Acts 2:38; Mk.16:16). (4) The ACTION was different. Under the OldTestament the priests sprinkled the people with thewater of separation. Never does one read in the NewTestament of one being sprinkled but rather they were immersed (Rom. 6:3-4). (5) The ADMINISTRATOR was different. In the Old Testament the priests washed themselves. Never does one read in the New Testament about one baptizing himself. In the New Testament one was always baptized by another. See such passages asActs 8:38; Acts 9:18; Acts 10:47-48.

This chart proved fatal to Mr. Langford's theory. Hedidn't refer to this chart one time in the discussion. Never did he say it was unscriptural. We shall continue with other theories in succeeding articles.

CALVINISM EXPOSED # 7

In our last article we were examining the Calvinistic doctrine of the security of the believer.We continue with this thought in this article and some statements that were made by Baptist preachers. There are some Baptists who will acceptthe consequence of their doctrine — but not many.

In a tract by Sam Morris, who, at the time he wrotethe tract, was the pastor of the First Baptist Church inStamford, Texas, he wrote, "The way a man lives hasnothing whatever to do with the salvation of his soul. ... The way I live has nothing whatsoever to do withthe salvation of my soul." "He could commit every sinfrom murder to idolatry and that will not make his soulin any more danger." Another Baptist by the name of Bill Morris said in a telephone conversation with agospel preacher in that area, "If I killed my wife andmother and debauched a thousand women, I couldn'tgo to hell — in fact I couldn't go to hell if I wanted to.If I did, God would be a liar, for he said 'no man can pluck them out of my hand.' " You at least can admirethese fellows for one thing — they are willing toaccept the consequences of their doctrine.

On this subject of the security of the believer, Iwant to ask a few questions.

1. Can a child of God lie? 2. Yes, for the Bible warnshim not to lie (Col. 3:9). 3. ALL liars shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone(Rev. 21:8).

1. Can a child of God get drunk? 2. Yes, he is told not toget drunk (Eph. 5:18). 3. But no drunkard can enter into the kingdom of heaven.

1. Can a child of God commit fornication? 2. Yes,Christians are told to flee from it (1 Cor. 6:18). 3.Fornicators cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor.6:9).

Now, here is the clincher of all clinchers in opposition to the doctrine of Calvinism. They teachthat Christ died only for the elect. So, if Christ diedfor someone he must have been of the elect. Note this passage. "But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat,now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him withthy meat, for whom Christ died." Paul calls the manunder consideration a brother — thus he is saved. He is, Paul said, a brother for whom Christ died. What did Paul say about him? The grieved brother may bedestroyed. The Greek word here is apolluo and means,"By one's conduct to lose his eternal salvation — Rom. 14:15" (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, Page64). Thus, this should settle it once, and for all, and forever. Paul said that one FOR WHOM CHRIST DIED may lose his ETERNAL SALVATION.

One other passage and then we will conclude thisstudy. In Matthew 25:14-30 Jesus begins a parable bysaying, "The kingdom of heaven is like unto .. ." Thushe identifies what he has under consideration. Verse 14 says he called unto him his "OWN SERVANTS."He left and went into a far country. He gave to his"own servants" talents according to their abilities. Ifyou will read the entire story of Jesus regarding these servants, you will note that one was said to be a"wicked and slothful servant" (verse 26). He had notused his ability as he should. There is not a singledoubt about WHO this servant was. He was the master's OWN servant. When the master returned to check on the progress of his own servants, what did hefind? The five talent man had gained five others. Thetwo talent man had gained two others. The one talentman had done nothing with his talent. What did theLord say of this his OWN servant? "And cast ye theunprofitable man into outer darkness: there shall beweeping and gnashing of teeth" (verse 30). UnlessOuter Darkness is heaven, then one of the master's OWN SERVANTS went to hell.

We hope you have enjoyed this study of the doctrineof Calvinism. We hope it will be profitable to all.

THE NEWS LETTER REPORTS

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

GENE MABRY, P.O. Box 62, Changewater, N.J. 07831-The church meeting in Glen Gardner, N.J. has been in existence about seven years. It was started by Bob Bunting with John Pickens andLarry Bailey watering the seed he planted. The church began from one member and has grown to 28 members. Attendance on Sunday now averages almost 40. We meet on Sundays in the Community Room of the National State Bank. In August I will have been preaching here three years. During that time we have had 21 baptisms. Some of these have fallen away, but several have shown remarkable growth and have turned out to be exemplary Christians. I am' partially supported by the Eastside congregation in Athens, Alabama. When in this area, stop and worship with us. We are very happy to see new faces. My phone number is (201) 6896095.

JOHN NELSON, Jacksonville, Arkansas. In February a new congregation began meeting at 212 East Main St. in Jacksonville.The nucleus came from Arch St. in Little Rock and we were helped much by Eugene Britnell and others at Arch St. Attendance has been running from 39 to 53. We have rented a suitable place, at least for now. We have a 15 minute radio program each Saturdaymorning with Brother Britnell speaking. Since beginning, one has been baptized and two restored. We solicit the prayers of faithful brethren everywhere for the success of this work.

ATTENTION, PHILADELPHIA, PA. AREA. A family of faithful Christians from Manila in the Philippines now lives and works in Philadelphia. They have been disappointed in not finding a faithful congregation to attend. They have been worshipping in their home but would like to get in touch with other Christians in the area who might meet with them. The editor met the lady and her children in Manila in 1971. Her late father was a faithful and beloved elder in the Makati church in Manila. If you know of Christians in the Philadelphia area please have them contact Glorina Saez de Leon, 2918 Frankford, Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. 19134, phone (215) 634-5919. This family knows the difference in soundness and liberalism.

WARD HOGLAND, Box 166, Greenville, Texas 75401. Meetings for 1974 include: Cedale Dale, Lancaster, Texas; Weiner, Ark.; 84th St., Oklahoma City; Greensburg, Ky.; Myrtle Grove, Pensacola, Fla.; Charlotte, Tenn.; Glasgow, Ky.; Riverside Dr., Nashville, Tenn.; North Miami, Fla. Rufus R. Clifford will preach inour April meeting.

Robert LaCoste and Jack Langford met in a six night debate in February centering around water and Holy Ghost baptism. Brother LaCoste affirmed the essentiality of water baptism and Mr. Langford that of Holy Ghost baptism. The discussion was orderly and represented well by both groups. The first three nights were conducted in the meeting house in Cooper, Texas and the last three in the civic auditorium in Ft. Worth. Though this was onlyhis second debate, Brother LaCoste did an excellent job. Gospel preachers from this area attending were Leon Goff, Hayse Reneau, Jesse Jenkins, Pat Farish, Al Payne, Tom Roberts, Al Watkins,Foy Vinson, Noel Bailey, Jack Howard and Thomas Shropshire. It was a pleasure to assist Bob in this debate. There is a possibility that I will meet Mr. Langford at a future date.

GARY HARGIS, Box 715, Byron, Minnesota. Since moving toRochester, Minnesota last June, two have been baptized. There are now 6 members in Rochester and I am the only man. We have taught several couples thoroughly but with no evident success. For the past three months we have had articles in the newspaper. We have had several inquiries and 12 have started a correspondence course over a 100 mile radius. Not a word though from the many Lutheran ministers. We had a meeting in August with Dennis Reedof Tampa, Fla. James Denison will be here in May and Frank Smith in August or September for meetings. We need help from brethren (preferably mature men, but could use college aged boys) to helpknock on doors and stir interest. How about it brethren? My wife and I have knocked on many doors, shown the Harold Dowdy lessons several times as yet without much interest generated. Theweather this winter was beautiful, only got to 31 and had 30 inches of beautiful snow. Preachers, we need you in virgin territory. We have visitors from the south to encourage us but we need some good ones to come and stay and help this work which was started and sustained by two faithful sisters who would not give up. Would to God we had many throughout the land with their intestinal fortitude.

CONNIE W. ADAMS, P.O. Box 68, Brooks, Ky. 40109. In the meeting in March at Westside in Warner Robins, Georgia, 5 were baptized and 3 restored. My brother in the flesh, J. Wiley Adams is the preacher there. Things are looking up in middle Georgia. A manis badly needed to move to Macon, a city of 150,000 to work with some tried and true brethren in building up the cause. More about this in a later report. The Westside church appointed elders anddeacons last year and is in a position to wield an influence for good both there and throughout the world as families which may be taught and strengthened while stationed at the SAC base there later are sent to the ends of the earth. This year I will preach inmeetings at Newbern, Tenn.; Blue Ash, Ohio; Knollwood, Xenia, Ohio; Spring Creek, Tenn.; Leitchfield, Ky.; Mound and Starr in Nacogdoches, Texas; University Heights in Lexington, Ky.;Hodgenville, Ky. and Country Club Rd. in Tucson, Arizona. We would be glad to meet any of our readers in these places.

KEN WELIEVER, 4324 Maxlin Rd., Kettering, Ohio 45429. The Kettering church is growing both numerically as well as spiritually. The week of March 10th we saw 5 precious souls obey the gospel, making a total of 7 for this year. 6 have recently confessed sin.March 1st, one of our young men, James Grushon, who has been preaching "part-time", moved to West Bend, Wisconsin to preach in that area. The Kettering church is having fellowship with thatwork by assisting in his support. He is a fine young man and an able proclaimer of the Word and we are confident he will be an asset to the cause in West Bend. If you are visiting in the Dayton vicinity, we would appreciate your worshipping with us at 4600 Bigger Rd.in Kettering. Sunday services are at 9:30,10:30 and 6:00.

JOHN M. TROKEY, 5108 Sherrill Dr., Amarillo, Texas 79108. I have just ended an enjoyable two and one-half years with the church in Fontana, California. The church there continues to glorifyGod in their work and help in the support of six preachers outside their local work. Max Bradford now works with them. I am now working with the Pleasant Valley congregation in Amarillo, Texas.There are many capable Christians here and I anticipate a pleasant work.

LARRY R. DEVORE, Box 86, Roseville, Ohio 43777. Our work continues to go forward in a good way. Recently one confessed sin and a former Catholic obeyed the gospel. Paul Kelsey was with us in our meeting in April.

PREACHER NEEDED SALEM, OHIO. The Salem church is looking for a preacher. We are interested in someone experienced in personal contacts who canteach others to do the same. The congregation is small but the potential is good. If interested contact Larry E. Chaffin, 922 South Union Ave., Salem, Ohio 44460, phone (216) 332-5069 or 337-6113.

DEBATE. Dick Blackford of the Willow Glen congregation in Central City, Ky., met John T. Wallace in debate April 29, 30 and May 2 and 3 in the Willow Glen meeting house. The first two nights.Mr. Wallace affirmed that the seventh day of the week is bound as a Christian sabbath in this age. The last two nights Dick Blackford affirmed that the first day of the week is enjoined as a day ofworship in this age.

STEVE BOBBITT, 508 Pine Hill Circle, Lawrenceville, Georgia 30245. My family and I plan to move June 1 to Waverly, Tenn. to help begin a new work. This will be the only church in Humphreys County which will stand firmly against all the denominational trends in the church today. The Oak Ave. congregation in Dickson will furnish my complete support and buy time for a daily call-in radio program. Thus far five families have committed themselves to the new work.

This move ends three years work in Lawrenceville. Some growthhas been seen. Several have obeyed the gospel and some have fallen away. Lord's day attendance runs 50-60. They furnish complete support for the local preacher and also have a daily call-in'radio program which covers Metro Atlanta and much of northeast Georgia. Anyone interested in the work can address the church at

P.O. Box 533, Lawrenceville, Ga. 30245.

The church is prospering in the Atlanta area. Embry Hills recently appointed bishops and deacons. The Jonesboro congregation is nearing completion of their meeting house. The Rays Road church (formerly Glenwood Hills in Decatur) will beginconstruction soon between Tucker and Stone Mountain. The Sanpfinger Road church meets in Decatur. A faithful congregation meets on Powers Ferry Road in Marietta. Other congregations meet in the surrounding towns of Lawrenceville, Covington, Mabelton and Gainesville. In March a new work begins in Roswell with David Tant preaching there. A similar work is planned for Griffin. Preachers in the area include David Tant, Max Ray, LarryBilbo, H. S. Owen, Robert L. Schales, L. C. Buttrey and Harvey Buttrey. Of course, J. Ed Nowlin now of Perry, Florida must be remembered for his work of over twenty years in the area.

PREACHING ON THREE CONTINENTS BILL H. REEVES, Rt. 3, Fredericktown, Ohio 43019. I recently returned from a 25,000-mile trip, some preaching in English, most in Spanish, in three different continents, and at each place thethought crossed my mind; if only I had a lifetime to give to this country. How beautiful and quaint is England and so much to be done there. And, what a challenge to preach in Spain and not onlylead souls out of Catholicism, but also help the converted see the errors of institutionalism and liberalism. The Republic of South Africa is so much like the U.S. as a place to live; how easy it would be to adapt oneself to that country and preach among so lovely apeople.

In South America I preached in Argentina. It is so European. It is modern and green and friendly. There is one lone (but valiant) full-time preacher in that country. What a challenge! Also, I preached in Chile — cool, clear-skied, mountainous Chile (earthquakes and all!). There are five congregations there anda number of workers, and the prospects are good for progress in conversions. The people are receptive; this was especially noticeable. It is indeed a promising field.

I returned to the U.S.A. via Miami, Florida and preached to theSpanish-speaking congregation, which sorely needs the help of a full-time preacher. A persistent, tireless and conscientious man preaches for them, but he has to do secular work and cannot giveenough time to the needs.

Who will go? Who will say, Send me? There are young men (too few in number, though) who are preparing themselves to preach fora lifetime, and there are some men already prepared and experienced, all of whom would do well to consider leaving home and country to spend, if not a lifetime, a good number of years in giving a hand to those few who labor in remote places and standvirtually alone. Let us be as unselfish, brethren, as we can be with this one lifetime that God gives us to share it with those who have limited opportunities to know Christ through his gospel. If I can put you in touch with any of the above-mentioned places and preachers, or otherwise give you additional information, let me know. How I wish that all of my American brethren could see andexperience what I did on that 45-day trip. Of course, it is impossible. But I can show slide-pictures of these places and people and give a personal report to any congregation interested in having fellowship with them. Again I say, Let me know.