BAPTISM ---WHO, HOW, WHY

One of the most controversial subjects is baptism.Why there should be different views on a topic that isso plainly taught in the Bible has always been puzzling to me. There are three aspects of baptism that we willdiscuss in this article. (1) Who may be baptized, (2)How to be baptized, and (3) Why be baptized.

Who May Be Baptized?

1. The taught may be baptized. "Go yetherefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them inthe name of the Father, and of the Son, and of theHoly Ghost" (Matt. 28:19).
2. Believers may be baptized. Jesus said: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but hethat believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16).
3. Penitent believers may be baptized. The apostle Peter said: "Repent, and be baptized every oneof you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remissionof sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38).
4. Men and women may be baptized. "But when they believed Philip preaching the thingsconcerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women" (Acts 8:12).

CONCLUSION: Only those old enough to be taught, to believe and to repent are to be baptized. There is no place for infant baptism in God's plan.Babies cannot be taught, neither can they believe orrepent. Thus, they are not subjects of baptism. Baptism must be preceded by teaching, faith and repentance, or it is null and void. Baptism by itself will savenobody. Those who sprinkle (they call this baptism)babies have a gross misconception of Bible baptism, aswell as the spiritual state of the babies. Children arewithout sin (Matt. 18:3; 19:14). Baptism is for aliensinners (Acts 2:38). Therefore, babies are not to bebaptized.

Furthermore, alien sinners should be baptized andnot saved people. Notice in the above texts that salvation is AFTER baptism and not before it. Paulwrote that newness of life comes after baptism."Therefore we are buried with him by baptism intodeath: that like as Christ was raised up from the deadby the glory of the Father, even so we also should walkin newness of life" (Rom. 6:4). Those who advocate baptism for the saved circumvent what the Bible teaches.

How To Be Baptized

1. Baptism is a burial. "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death. . . ." (Rom. 6:4). "Buried with him in baptism " (Col. 2:12).
2. Baptism is a going down into the water. "And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and theywent down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him" (Acts 8:38).
3. Baptism requires much water. "And John was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there, and they came, and were baptized" (John 3:23).
4. Baptism is immersion. The reputableGreek scholar, W. E. Vine, said of baptism that it is"consisting of the processes of immersion, submersionand emergence" (Vol. 1, p. 96). Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon states, "immersion, submersion" (p. 94).

CONCLUSION: Sprinkling and pouring will not fitthe action of baptism. In fact, in the Bible sense,sprinkling and pouring are not baptism at all. They are human substitutes without one iota of divine authority.

James Gibbons, a Cardinal in the Catholic Church,wrote: "For several centuries after the establishment of Christianity, baptism was usually conferred byimmersion, but since the twelfth century the practiceof baptizing by infusion (pouring, wew) has prevailedin

the Catholic Church, as this manner is attended by lessinconvenience than baptism by immersion" (Faith of our Fathers, p. 266). Here we see why sprinkling andpouring became substitutes for baptism—simply amatter of convenience. Remember, Jesus said, "immersion."

Why Be Baptized

1. One should be baptized to be saved. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. . ."(Mark 16:16). "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...." (1 Pet. 3:21).
2. For remission of sins. "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins...." (Acts 2:38).
3. To wash away sins. Ananias told Saul of Tarsus: "And now why tarriest thou? Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of theLord" (Acts 22:16).
4. To get into Christ. "For as many of you ashave been baptized into Christ have put on Christ"(Gal. 3:27). "Know ye not, that so many of us as werebaptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death" (Rom. 6:3)?
5. To reach the blood of Christ. Read Rom. 6:3 again in the above paragraph and notice that Paulsaid we were "baptized into his (Christ, wew)death." Jesus shed His blood in His death. We are baptized into the benefits of His blood and thereby cleansed from our sins by His blood in the act of baptism.
6. To get into the one body. "For by one Spiritare we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jewsor Gentiles, whether we be bond or free..." (1 Cor.12:13). Regardless who we are, all of us come intothe one body, the church, by the same process— baptism.
7. To be born again. "Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (John 3:5). In the spiritual birth theSpirit begets us through the seed (Luke 8:11), the Word of God (1 Pet. 1:23) and the birth is consummated in baptism.
8. It is commanded. When Peter was at the house of Cornelius, the divine record states: "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:48).

CONCLUSION: The inevitable conclusion, in view of the foregoing Scriptures, is that baptism standsbetween the alien sinner and his salvation. Hence,baptism is most essential and necessary. We had just as well omit faith or repentance as to leave out baptism. The same Lord who said that we must believe, also said that we must be baptized in orderto be saved. Woe unto the man that changes it! Thosewho reject it have "rejected the counsel of God" (Luke7:30).

I trust you will honestly and sincerely consider these Scriptures and observations on baptism. May you have the courage and faith to do what the Lord demands. Let's forget what men teach and go back tothe Bible for the basis of our beliefs and actions.

Please Renew Promptly

THE CHANGING OF THE GUARD

Last month we carried an announcement of the selection of Bob F. Owen as the new President of Florida College upon the retirement of James R. Copein July, 1982. At this juncture in the history of FloridaCollege, I wish to make some observations which willbe of interest to many of our readers.

The Role of Florida College

The ideal on which the school was founded and has survived is a simple one. Those responsible for itsexistence believe that the parental duty to bring upchildren "in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph. 6:4) includes providing for the education of ouryoung. Much of what is offered on the college anduniversity level today is saturated with humanism.Faith destroying philosophies and attendant moralpermissiveness often confront young Christians intheir educational pursuits. It has been the goal of thosewho operate Florida College to provide qualityeducation in a moral setting where the leaven ofgodliness may spread unhindered from both teacher and student. The editor and his wife both benefited greatly from the opportunity provided by thisinstitution. Both of our sons received similar benefit. Through the years we have encouraged many youngpeople to take advantage of what the school has tooffer and we have seen many positive results.

Florida College is a human institution. It is not thechurch. It neither solicits nor accepts funds fromchurches. It is not perfect. It has freckles and sometimes warts appear. It has friends and it hasenemies. Some of its friends are naive as to its faults. Some of its enemies are overly critical. While the editoris an alumnus and has served for a number of years onthe school's National Council, he has tried to be afriend with enough objectivity to speak his mind to theadministration, board and staff. This has been done onmany occasions.

I do not believe that Florida College is the onlyalternative in educating young people. There are manysound, productive Christians today who received theircollege training elsewhere while retaining their convictions and character. Some have been able to attend school near excellent congregations which have provided wonderful services to such students inBible teaching. The 12th St. church in Bowling Green(and other area congregations) have been a great blessing to students at Western Kentucky State University.

Mound and Starr in Nacogdoches, Texas has done finework with students of Stephen F. Austin State University. The College View church in Florence,Alabama has rendered similar service to students at the University of North Alabama at Florence. Somestudents are situated so they can live at home andattend schools in their own city, as do a number inLouisville. As parents, my wife and I looked uponFlorida College as a bridge between leaving home andfurther education for our sons beyond what FloridaCollege offered. It gave them independence from homebut in a setting where similar standards prevailed.While we recognize weaknesses and flaws in a humanenterprise, it is our persuasion that the ideal is worthyof preservation,

James R. Cope

The editor was a student at Florida College the yearJames R. Cope came to serve as President. He broughtwith him some brilliant young teachers who were soonto leave the mark of their influence upon students. Brother Cope himself was a fearless, articulate teacher.In my judgment, the teaching of the school was weakened when administrative duties took him out of the classroom. He began his tenure with several old buildings in poor repair. A number of the teacherslived under similar (if not worse) conditions to thestudents. From a meager beginning, the school hasincreased in enrollment, new facilities have been addedand the financial condition of the school greatly improved.

In the late 50's storm clouds burst over the school and a determined effort was made to wrench it awayfrom the hands of men who stood in opposition to theliberal tendencies manifesting themselves throughoutthe nation. Loss of students and revenue threatened to close the doors. But men and women of conviction who could not be bought won the hearts of grateful patronswho tightened their belts and saw it through. It is thebelief of the editor that had it not been for the courage and reputation of James R. Cope, the school would have folded. His staff shared in the sacrifices of those lean years.

The stature and influence of James R. Cope has leftits mark on Florida College. For 33 years he has beenits most visible symbol of strength, courage, devotionto principle, and unwavering loyalty to the Lord inpersonal life and teaching. While some have jokedabout his tenderheartedness and quaint stories andexpressions, it has been these very qualities whichhave bridged the gap between academic aloofness andthe genuine warmth of real folks. The most unlearnedparent has felt comfortable with "Jim" Cope. He haspersonally gone to bat to help find ways for students topay their bills and remain in school. Through the years,in his role as a gospel preacher, brethren have not hadto wonder where he stood. He was the first editor of the PRECEPTOR and all who read that knew what he believed touching issues of great moment to Christians. He wrote tracts and booklets which cut across the grain of popular opinion. In the "open forums" of an earlier time, he stood his ground and

spoke his piece without any thought or fear of the consequences. For these, and numerous other reasons, many of us have felt that the school was in safe hands.

We are confident that we speak the sentiments of thousands in expressing to James R. Cope our sincerethanks for his countless contributions to the enrichment of the lives of so many of us. As his life and work takeon new dimensions, we wish for him and his beautiful wife, Georgia Dean, health, long life and fruitful service as we all move nearer the inevitable hour.

Bob F. Owen

Now comes the changing of the guard. Bob F. Owen came to Florida College as a student the same yearJames R. Cope came to be President. Though of a little younger generation, he has been a witness to the struggles through which the school has passed. And notonly a witness, but a participant. Soon after completing his own college work, he joined the staff ofthe school where he has remained an integral part ofthe day-in and day-out operation of the school for nearly three decades. He and his wife, Janelle, met while students at Florida College. My wife and I double-dated with Bob and Janelle on numerous occasions. We have been good friends through the years.

Brother Owen has asked the present staff to continue under his presidency. That he knows as muchabout the inner workings of the school as it is possiblefor one to know, is beyond question. There is a naturaltendency to take a "wait and see" attitude when such a change in leadership is affected. While rooted in the ideals on which the school began, well versed on itsdaily functions, yet every man has his own personality,his own style and deserves space to work within that context. No man should ever be expected to fit the same mold as those who have gone before. Bob F. Owen is not James R. Cope, nor should he be expectedto be. We are sure that we join other friends of the school in wishing for him a successful and fruitful tenure of service as President of Florida College.

Looking Ahead

We do not know what the future holds for this institution. That it presently fills a need we confidently believe. Some have complained that some things are changing at Florida College. Perhaps so. But we are convinced that many of the perceived changes are but reflections of changing times and standards among patrons of the school. The school is sometimes caught inthe crossfire of idealism on which it was founded and which is so strongly cherished by older patrons and the loosening attitudes and moderating influences of a younger clientele.Some students and parents seem to choke on rules and restraints which they have never applied at home. The moral permissiveness of the age has infiltrated the lives ofmore Christians than some wish to admit. This is reflected in the speech, dress and standards of acceptable conductwithin a student body.

The second generation is always crucial in any enterprise. Schools are no exception. Maintaining a balance between changes which are innocent and which improve, and holding the line where principles of rightare concerned are not always easy. No school is eversafer than the quality and character of those who makeup its board. When a board takes into its number men of uncertain sound and conviction, their attitudes will filter down through the personnel they employ. Wetake this public means of urging the Board of Directors of Florida College to continually exercise care as to the standards they set for those who shalloccupy that board, as well as those who administer and teach in the college. Should money and influencebe the dominant criteria? Is a prospective board memberknown to be sound in the faith? Or does he ventilate doctrinally loose attitudes? Is he a trouble-maker andsower of discord? Is he a business "hot dog" ratherthan a man of mature and stable judgment? Is he a"wheeler-dealer" who uses his money as a club to gethis way? These are considerations of great moment.The future of Florida College is ultimately bound up inthem. The school has suffered at times from lack of care in choosing board members. A number of the present board members are personal friends of the editor and I am convinced will appreciate what is saidhere. I speak as a friend who wants to see the schoolsucceed and persevere to serve another generation ofparents and youth.

Thanks to James R. Cope for a job well done. Our prayers and good wishes are with Bob F. Owen as he assumes his new responsibilities. "I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, evenas thy soul prospereth" (3 John 2).

In March of 1981, the Arkansas Legislature passed abill and Governor White signed it into law (known asAct 590) authorizing the teaching of what they called"creation science" whenever the theories of materialistic evolution are taught in the public schools. Almost immediately, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the legislation. In December,1981, a trial was conducted in Little Rock beforeFederal District Judge William R. Overton. In January of 1982, the judge ruled in behalf of the plaintiffs and declared the law unconstitutional.

Due to the widespread publicity and interest in thetrial and the subject discussed, and since I was in thecourtroom when the trial began and heard much of it,the editor of this paper has requested that I presentthis account of the trial as I saw it. We hope that thiswill be of interest to our readers, who, in most cases,received distorted reports by the news media. Due tothe local interest and promises we made to radiolisteners, we are presenting much of this material inour church paper. Brother Adams understands thatthis is a unique situation, and that it is both difficultand useless to try to write different accounts of thesame event.

The Judge

Let it be understood that I have deep respect for ourlaws and judicial system, and I have no desire to speak disrespectfully of Judge Overton, but I must makesome observations about his role in the trial. Mr. Overton is a Methodist. One of the first witnesses called by the ACLU was the Methodist Bishop ofArkansas. I thought then and still think that the judge would have been more than a normal person not tohave been unduly influenced by such testimony. Thejudge questioned and argued with some of the state's witnesses. This and other factors caused us to feel that the judge was not completely unbiased during thetrial. It wasn't too difficult to predict the outcome.

The Attorney General

Although I have some problems with some of theattitudes and actions of State Attorney General SteveClark, perhaps he did as well as one could expect. Ithink that he should have used some experiencedcounsel which was available to him, and pressed some

points more than he did and challenged more of thearguments of the opposition.

As I see it, his major problem was being in theawkward position of trying to defend creation withoutacknowledging a creator. This is not only inconsistent,but impossible. His effort was to avoid any referenceto God. The ACLU recognized this problem, and madeevery effort to make it a religious issue. Someone suggested that they gave Mr. Clark an anvil and toldhim to swim with it. And that's not easy to do!

The American Civil Liberties Union

The ACLU was founded in 1920 by Elizabeth Flynn,William Foster, Louis Budenz and Roger N. Baldwin—all loyal members of the Communist Party. When Baldwin died not long ago, he was hailed as "a life-long champion of individual freedom." He said many times that he was for socialism, disarmament, social ownership of property,and that "Communism is the goal."

The ACLU expends much of its time and money indefending murderers, homosexuals, drug peddlers,flag-burners, draft-dodgers, Nazism, pornography, andcriminals of all kinds. They are against anybody andanything that is for God, Christianity, pure morality and true Americanism. The ACLU is the legal arm ofthe humanist movement in America. It is apparentthat they are more interested in promoting atheism,humanism and communism in this country than theyare in what children are taught about creation in theschools. They seek every opportunity to take advantage of social problems and emotional issues.

When you see the ACLU defending some person ormovement, you may reasonably conclude that theperson or movement is unscriptural, unethical or un-American. Righteous people should oppose the ACLUwhenever and wherever possible! During the Little,Rock trial, someone suggested that A-C-L-U should stand for Anti-Christian Lunacy Union.

The challenge of Act 590 in Arkansas is a perfectexample of the arrogant hypocrisy of an organizationthat claims to fight for civil liberties while at the same time actively repressing views contrary to its ownpreconceived notions. While piously proclaiming thatit is the guardian of religious liberty, the ACLU seeksto force all the people of the United States to acceptatheistic, evolutionary humanism as their court-decreed state religion!

The ACLU Witnesses

The attorneys, witnesses and supporters for theplaintiffs enjoyed the publicity and rejoiced in theirfeeling of victory. They used about 20 lawyers,including some highly adept volunteers from a NewYork law firm.

Among their witnesses were several members of the "clergy" and they were happy about that. There werepriests, rabbis, and Bishop Kenneth Hicks of theMethodist Church. As I listened to his testimony andrealized that he was standing with the atheists,agnostics and humanists, it was hard for me to realize that he even claimed to believe the Bible. The truth is, he does not believe all of it. He doesn't even understand the meaning of "buried" in the Bible (see Rom. 6:3; Col. 2:12). And where in the Bible would he find authority for a state bishop over manychurches? He was followed by a witness who said shewas an atheist, and frankly, I appreciated her honestymore than I did the bishop's hypocrisy.

The State's Witnesses

We agree with a statement in Discover magazine of February, 1982, which said: "The defenders of creationism were their own worst enemies." The state senator who introduced Act 590 stated on the witness stand that God called him to do so. I didn't believe it, and doubt if anyone in the courtroom believed it,including the judge. I wondered then why God didn'talso speak to the judge and tell him how to rule on the case.

Then there was the witness (a preacher) who wasmade to testify that he believed in UFOs and that theywere the work of Satan. How he knew that I don't know. And what did UFOs have to do with the issue under consideration? Nothing! But the ACLU peopleintroduced and dwelt on such to make the creationists look ridiculous—and they succeeded.

All of this reminded me of what I have known for years, and that is: if truth is defended and errorrefuted on any subject it will be left to true Christians—members of the body of Christ who believeall of the Bible, know what it teaches and how to applyit—to do so! The church was the only organization tochallenge the evolutionists (mentioning Dr. Carl Saganand Dr. Stephen Jay Gould by name) to debate thesubject.

First Amendment Dualism

As a writer for the Los Angeles Times observed in asyndicated article, there are two major points in theFirst Amendment, the Establishment clause and theFree Exercise clause. He quoted a California lawprofessor as saying, "There is an inherent tension ofconflict between these two provisions. The court's pattern has been to perceive the cases as falling eitherunder one clause or the other and then either totallyignoring the other clause or disposing of it in a verysummary and often dissatisfying way."

The First Amendment reads: "Congress shall makeno law respecting an establishment of religion, orprohibiting the free exercise thereof. . ." If creation istaught in a public school, does that mean that Congress has established a religion? No, of course not!The Amendment was so worded as to prohibit theCongress from establishing a state religion or respecting one denomination over and above all others.We are for that.

Have we reached the point that God cannot bementioned in the classroom (unless one is cursing), and there can be no reference to the Bible? If so, thenchildren cannot be taught the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, or the Gettysburg Address. In those famous works, God is mentioned,and even as Creator. Why is it legal to teach childrenabout God from such sources and illegal to teach themthe same thing from Genesis?

Our Congress opens with prayer to God. So does theSupreme Court. Our coins and currency bear the inscription "In God We Trust." When the Federal Court opened in Little Rock on Dec. 7, 1981 to trythe creation bill, a Federal Marshall declared: "Godsave the United States and this honorable court." In many ways, this nation has acknowledged God.

Which Way Are We Headed?

Are we going to turn this great nation into anatheistic society? Are we going to allow a radical andunbelieving minority to rule and declare what ourchildren are taught?

An Associated Press/NBC News Poll in November,1981, revealed that 76% of the people believed thatcreation should be taught when evolution is taught inthe public schools.

An editorial in the Wall Street Journal in January ofthis year made some interesting observations. Havingexpressed disapproval of the Arkansas legislation,they said:

"But having said that, we cannot find much sympathy either for those forces who run to the lawcourts at every slightest hint that a teacher might wantto use the words God or church. We suspect thatefforts to break down societal mores and standards of conduct that have a religious base are more than alittle bit responsible for the fundamentalist backlash.We would be doing the Arkansas legislators a disservice if we did not acknowledge that if caughtbetween the relativists and the fundamentalists, weourselves might often be tempted to side with thefundamentalists, at least those who are concerned, aswe are, about a decline in the moral order. While the principle of church-state separation is useful in preserving a liberal and pluralistic society, we arenot sure the courts have considered what it might belike if they insist on divorcing government entirelyfrom spiritual thought. . . we hope the forces who havewon this narrow battle in court won't labor too long with' the notion that they have scored some majorvictory against religious belief."

Amen! It is certainly true that there is some connection between philosophy and conduct. Many ofus can remember when children could read the Bible and pray in the public schools. Did that result in aunion of church and state? Was it a violation of the Constitution? Of course not! In those days there wasvery little violence, rebellion and immorality in theschools, and we didn't know what dope was. Now thatprayer, the Bible, and the teaching of creation havebeen removed from our schools, look at conditions.Look at the crime, vandalism, violence (even murder), illegitimacy, drug addition, etc. Were conditions better then, or are they better now? We allknow the answer.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7

How Must We Interpret the Bible?

During the trial, we heard much from the ACLU

lawyers and witnesses about the Bible "as literally

interpreted." Certainly there is figurative language in

the Bible, but that is not true of the creation account.

If the Bible doesn't mean what it says, does it say

what it means? If not, how are we to know what it

means or whether it means anything? We understand

that the evolutionist—atheistic or theistic—cannot

allow the Bible to mean what it says, but we believe

that it does. And remember also that the Lord and the

inspired apostles endorsed the creation account as

recorded in Genesis (see Matthew 19:4-6). Were they

ignorant or deceived about the creation? Certainly not!

Kelly Seagraves of Creation-Science Research Center, who thinks the Arkansas trial was a victory forcreation, made the following statement: "If Creationcannot be taught because it is held by religious peopleand is based on a literal view of the Bible, thenEvolution will also be banned, because all those whotestified in the trial for the ACLU stated evolution was consistent with their faith, thus making evolution anessential element of their personal religious faithwhich is based on a non-literal interpretation of theBible."

Both creation and evolution are systems of faith, and neither can be established scientifically. One is thereligion of Christianity and the other the religion of humanism. Why should one religion be taught in thepublic schools and the other denied?

Why Are We So Concerned?

Why are Christians so concerned about childrenbeing taught the inspired account of divine creation?Simply because it is impossible to separate our concepts of our origin from our concepts of our nature, duty and destiny. The scriptures, common sense and human behavior throughout recorded history all confirm this to be true. The apostle Paulknew this, and as he addressed the philosophers andscientists from Mars' hill in Athens, he emphasized these facts.

1. Origin. He said, "God that made the world and allthings therein. . ." (Acts 17:24). That confirms ourorigin.
2. Nature. "And hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on the face of the earth. . ." "For as much then as we are the offspring of God. . ." (verses26, 29). God has made all men (not men and animals) ofone blood, and people are the off-spring of God. Did Heever say that to or about a monkey?
3. Duty. "That they should seek the Lord. . ." "weought not to think that the Godhead is like..." (verses27, 29). To say that I "ought" is to say that I owe. Ifthere are things which I "should" and "ought" to do,then I have a duty to perform.
4. Destiny. "Because he hath appointed a day, in thewhich he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained. . ." (verse 31). Man, notanimals, has an appointment with God at the judgment, and an eternal destiny awaiting him.

THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT

Alistair Cooke, urbane host of "MasterpieceTheater" recently dropped a quotation that is worthy of some thought. He said, "Somebody once said toHugh Weldon, who was the managing director of allBBC television then, 'But how can you do it that way?Don't you risk failure?' And Weldon said, 'of course,the whole point of television is not to avoid failure atall costs, but to give triumph a chance.'"

That line is too noble to be applied to television. It's true of all life. If we don't risk failure, triumph will never have a chance.

Many folks never become Christians because theyfear failure. "But I don't believe I can live it," we're often told. Here's someone who understands what God's conditions are and what wonderful blessings thefaithful are heirs of, but he cops out because of thepossibility of failing to continue faithful. One thing forsure, To never begin is to guarantee failure. One doesnot refuse to start a trip until he is guaranteed ofarriving safely at his destination. If he did, he would never arrive at all. Let us encourage people to givetriumph a chance.

Then consider the use of our talents. The "one-talent man" of our Lord's parable (Matt. 25) was determinedto avoid failure at all costs. As a result, he never gavetriumph a chance. If we fear failure to the point that werefuse to try our hand at teaching a class, or preachinga sermon, or leading a song, or a prayer, we are boundto fail. Triumph doesn't have a chance.

The same is true of striving to win souls. Oft timesmembers of Christ's body do not share the good newsbecause they fear rejection. Triumph doesn't get achance. The gospel goes unmentioned to neighbors,friends, relatives, and co-workers because of the possibility of failure. Our attitude should be like Paul's ".. .or do I seek to please men] for if I yet pleasedmen, I should not be the servant of Christ" (Gal. 1:10).

The whole point of life is not to avoid failure at allcosts, but to give triumph a chance.

AN INTERESTING DEDUCTION

It's been probably ten years since W.L. Whartonmentioned something to me about enjoying Mark Twain's "The Innocents Abroad." I purchased a paperback edition shortly thereafter. The 75 cents price-mark confirms that it was bought some yearsago. I only recently read it. The "innocents" were Twain

and his fellow passengers who embarked on a trip toEurope and the "Holy Land" on June 1, 1867, only twoyears after the end of the Civil War.

As anyone familiar with Mark Twain might suspect,he had no sympathy for the sacred cows of tourism inthese antique lands. Still, we do not sense the utterskepticism and out and out blasphemy in this workthat we find in much of his later writings.

I found some of his remarks concerning Rome andthe Vatican of special interest:

"No prayer is offered to the Saviour, who seems tobe of little importance anywhere in Rome; but aninscription says, 'Blessed Peter, give life to PopeLeo and victory to King Charles.' It does not say, 'Intercede for us, through the Saviour, with the Father, for this boon', but, 'Blessed Peter give it us.'

"In all seriousness, without meaning to be frivolous,without meaning to be irreverent and more than all,without meaning to be blasphemous, I state as mysimple deduction from the things I have seen and thethings I have heard that the Holy Personages rank thus in Rome:

"First: 'The Mother of God', otherwise the Virgin Mary.

"Second: The Deity.

"Third: Peter.

"Fourth: Some twelve or fifteen canonized popesand martyrs."Fifth: Jesus Christ the Saviour (but always as aninfant in arms).

"I may be wrong in this—my judgment errs often,just as is the case with other men's—but it is myjudgment, be it good or bad."

NEHEMIAH: LET US RISE UP ANDRESTORE THE PLACE OF HISTORY INSPIRITUAL REVIVAL

In our last article we looked at the need for SpiritualRevival. We are living in a day when the church isplagued by five great ills. First of several, as we notedlast month, was the zero growth rate. In far too manycongregations, we are not baptizing enough people toreplace the ones that are dying and those who fall bythe wayside. Second, the church faces the problem offragmentation into sectarian parties that insist hat theyare the only ones with the key to truth. Third, is the monster of materialism that tells us that the prestigeof our jobs, or the money from our jobs, is moreimportant than the Lord's work. Materialism tells us that football, camping and hunting are more important than the Lord's work, or more importantthan being present to teach a Bible class, which wecannot do when we are regularly out of town. Materialism is not what we possess, but simply ourattitude toward what is important. Fourth, a greatneed of the church is for stability in the homes ofChristians. How many preachers are now divorcing; how many Bible class teachers are lost to the Lord because they have become guilty of adultery and havedestroyed their marriages? The Devil does not have tomake atheists out of us; he can simply destroy our marriages and render us ineffective in the Master's cause. The fifth great ill of the Church today is the lackof an inner fellowship with the Lord. We worship theinstitution of the church, instead of the Savior of the church, Jesus Christ. We spend no time with Himin prayer and meditation and our concept of "faithfulness" is how many times a week one comes to the building.

Now with such great needs before us, we can easilysee that our need for spiritual revival is not justimagined but very real, so real that we stand at thecrossroads of our place in the kingdom of God. Just asthe Lord took the kingdom away from the Jews andgave it to the Gentiles, He may ever so easily take it from us and give it to a more dedicated people. Thequestion before us in this article is: what does Nehemiah teach us about this process of implementing spiritual revival? The thrust of Nehemiah 9 is to demonstrate the place of history in spiritual revival.

The Place of History in Revival

We have seen that the leaders of Israel were serious about teaching the people. In Chapter 8 the peoplegathered together and read and studied the word ofGod for hours on end. When the law was read, itproduced conviction in the hearts of the people of Godand the people forsook their sin by repentance. Theinstitution of the day of atonement and the Feast ofTabernacles sought to bring the people back to theirGod on their knees in agony for their sins and ingratitude for His goodness. But yet, as wonderful asthis was, it still was not enough. The people needed tofeel the obligation of a covenant between them andtheir God. We all know what it means when a start is made toward renewal but if it falls short, the heart iscalloused and may never be touched again. So Ezraand the Levites did not want to see this spiritual feverslip away into the failures of the past. Therefore, it wastime to invoke history as an object in spiritualrenewal. Nehemiah 9 is a recounting of history of theIsraelites and will provide a fitting prelude to thesigning of the covenant in Chapter 10. Chapter 9 can be divided into three sections: Verses 1-4 PREPARATION OF THE PEOPLE: Verses 5-31 PRAYER FOR THE PEOPLE; and Verses 32-38 PROMISE FOR THE PEOPLE. The main section is the middle section of Verses 5-31, which is a prayer forthe people and which recounts the history of Goddealing with Israel. It covers the redemptive scheme ofGod for His people from Adam to the Babyloniancaptivity.

This history is divided into four sub-divisions: (1)Adam to Abraham, 5-8. (2) Egyptian captivity to theRed Sea deliverance, 9-15. (3) The wilderness wanderings to the occupation of the Promised Land, 16

25. (4) Finally, from the Judges to the BabylonianCaptivity, 26-31.

As the Israelites came together for this solemnassembly they did so with fasting, a symbol of theirdevotion, and with sackcloth as a symbol of their inner humility. Then for one-fourth of the day, that is forthree hours, they stood as the word was expounded.Then for another fourth of the day, three hours, theyspent in worship and confession. What group of God's people do you know that would be willing to spend sixhours on any given Sunday to worship God andconfess their sins to Him? We are all well aware of the "clock-eyed" brethren that cannot sit for three minutes past what they consider "overtime", without a smoke or with jockeying in line with the Denominational crowds at the cafeteria for lunch. All of this six-hour activity was simply PREPARATIONfor the prayer which the Levites were to lead.

This prayer was to point toward God's faithfulnessin each of the divisions: Adam to Abraham; Captivityto the Red Sea; Wanderings to the Occupation of TheLand; and the Judges to Babylonian Captivity. In eachcase God was faithful and delivered what He promisedto man when man was humble, submissive and obedient. Yet, in each case when Israel rebelled in thelust of her heart she was abused by her enemies. Over and over the point is made in the prayer that if you will obey, God will bless; and to make this abstract principle concrete, the Levites pointed to historicalexamples that all the people knew were true. RejectGod and He will reject you from His favor. Turn toGod and He will turn to you with His favor. All of thiswas in preparation for the signing of the Covenantwhich would be placed before them. This prayer is totake the religious zeal and turn it into firm commitment to the one whose favor they seek.

Our Use of History in Revival

Barber quotes Patrick Henry as saying, "I have no light to illumine the pathway of the future save that which falls over my shoulder from the past." So, thereare several great lessons that can be learned fromhistory that will aid us in our push for spiritualrevival.

First, the church has never been persecuted to death.Please take the time to read this lengthy quotationfrom Alexander Campbell in his opening address withRobert Owen, the infidel, concerning the ability of the Christians to withstand persecution. This is the greatest, most moving speech that I have ever read,and it ought to speak volumes to us today.

"You must not think, my friends, thatChristianity has come down to our timeswithout a struggle; nay, indeed, it took thenation at first by the irresistible force of itsevidence. It was opposed by consolidatedranks of well-disciplined foes. Learned, cunning, bold, and powerful were its enemies. But experience taught them it wasnot only foolish, but hurtful to kick againstthe goads.

Never was there such a moral phenomenon exhibited upon this earth asthe first establishment and progress of Christianity. The instruments by which itwas established, the opposition with which it was met, and the success which attendedits career, were all of the most extraordinarycharacter. The era of Christianity itselfpresents a very sublime spectacle: the wholeworld reposing in security under the protecting wings of the most august of allthe Caesars; peace, universal peace, with herhealthful arms encircling all the nationscomposing the great empire which was itselfthe consummation of all the empires of theancient world. Polytheism, with her myriadsof temples and her myriads and myriads ofpriests, triumphantly seated in the affections of a superstitious people, andswaying a magic scepter from the Tiber tothe ends of the earth. Legislators, magistrates, philosophers, orators, and poets, all combined to plead her cause, andto protect her from insult and injury. Riversof sacrificial blood, crimsoned all the rites ofpagan worship; and clouds of incense arose from every city, town, and hamlet, in honorof the gods of Roman superstition. Just inthis singular and unrivaled crisis, when theJew's religion, though corrupted bytradition and distracted by faction, wasvenerated for its antiquity, and admired forits divinity; when idolatry was at its zenithin the pagan world, the Star of Bethlehemappears. The marvelous scene opens in astable. What a fearful odds! What a strangecontrast! Idolatry on the throne, and thefounder of a new religion and a new empirelying in a manger!

After thirty years of obscurity we findhim surrounded with what the wise, thewealthy, and the proud would call a contemptible group; telling them that one of them, an uncouth and untutored fisherman, too, had discovered a truth which would new-modify the whole world.In the midst of them he uttered the most incredible oracle ever heard. I am about,says he, to found a new empire on theacknowledgment of a single truth, a truth,too, which one of you has discovered, andall the powers and malice of worlds seenand unseen shall never prevail against it.This is our helmet, breastplate, and shield,in this controversy. What a scene presentsitself here? A pusillanimous, wavering,ignorant, and timid dozen of individuals,without a penny apiece, assured that to them it pleased the Ruler of the Universe togive the empire of the world; that to each ofthem would be given a throne from which would be promulgated laws never to be repealed while the sun and moon endure.

Such were the army of the faith. Theybegin their career. Under the jealous andinvidious eyes of a haughty Sanhedrin athome, and under the strict cognizance of a Roman emperor abroad, with a watchfulprocurator stationed over them. They commenced their operations. One while charged with idolatry; at another with treason. Reviled and persecuted until their chief is rewarded with a cross, and themselves with threats and imprisonment.A throne in a future world animated them,and a crown of glory after martyrdomstimulated them. On they march from conquest to conquest, till not only a multitude of the Jewish priests and people,but Caesar's household in imperial Rome,became obedient to the faith. Such was the commencement." As you can see, the church never has been put out of

business by persecution. Not history alone, but also

the Book of Acts gives us that truth. But, on the other

hand, the church often faces extermination during time of plenty and prosperity. Rev, 3:17: "You say 'I amrich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,'". It was in the era of prosperity thatLaodicea was about to be cast out of the Lord's mouth. Israel, in its day of plenty, forsook the Lord, and neverseemed to have time to remember. It was not until adversity came that they could turn back to the Lord.So our greatest enemy is not famine, but the feast ofprosperity and plenty. As Campbell said, the blood ofthe martyrs became the seed of the church.

Secondly, we can learn from history that God isactively in the affairs of man for the benefit of Hispeople. The Revelation of Jesus Christ to John was toinform him that those who sought to destroyChristians would themselves be destroyed. We clearlyunderstand that Christ is the head of the church because many scriptures tell us that He has all powerand authority. We are told that He is the head of thebody and that forcefully indicates that He is the Headof the church. But, for a moment, look at Ephesians1:22, "head over all things TO the church" is the reading in most versions. But checking in the NIV, wefind, "appointed him to be head over everything FOR the church. . ." Notice the difference between "TO the church" and "FOR the church." We know that both statements are true no matter how the verse is translated. Yet, the NIV rendering gives the impression that the world is ruled by Him as theHead of the church FOR the benefit of its existence. History tells us that God ruled in the Old Testament inbehalf of His saints and He now rules in Christ for or in behalf of His saints. No matter our faithfulness or unfaithfulness God's Plan will be worked because He is ruling and active in the affairs of man for His cause.

Learning and appreciating His action in the worldfor His cause, we ought to be diligent in prayer andcommunion with Him concerning the growth and development of His kingdom. God is not like the deistwho winds up the clock never to touch it again! Heacts, works, and participates in the world of His saintsfor the redemption of mankind. This is why we mustdevelop a living, communing relationship with our Godon a daily basis if we are to be effective in His world. Itis by prayer and His will that the kingdom grows, not by my cleverness in answering argument. Not byoratory, not by my tireless door knocking, and not bythe sweat of my brow. When we do the work we are toomuch like Nebuchadnezzar of Daniel's day,—"is thisnot Babylon which I have built?" Brethren, we standin His strength and His power. He rules the world forthe benefit of the salvation by the gospel plan. There isno other purpose to man's existence in His mind. He is long-suffering and willing that none should be lost butall should come to repentance.

In conclusion, spiritual renewal is built on a sense ofHISTORY OF WHAT GOD HAS DONE, and we cangauge WHAT HE WILL DO IN THE FUTURE bythat Divine record. In the near future we will studymore about our need for spiritual renewal.

THE STANDARD OF SOUNDNESS

What is the standard by which one is determined tobe sound and what is the basis upon which a churchmay be said to be sound? Upon what basis can we say that one is faithful or that a church is a faithful church?

Soundness, either in a person or in a church, isnot determined by what the majority of people aredoing. The masses of people are traveling down thebroad way that leads unto eternal destruction. Jesussaid so in Mt. 7:13-14. A church or a person may bein the limelight of the world and having the worldpraising them for their religious activity, but such doesnot constitute soundness and faithfulness.

Soundness, either in a person or in a church, isnot determined by what the "brotherhood" thinks. By the term "brotherhood" I mean what thebrethren in general think. The brethren may give some congregation or preacher the name of being sound, and at the same time the preacher or the congregation may be weak and sickly as it is possible to get and still remain alive.

Soundness, either in a person or in a church, isnot determined by what project we support. Brethren and churches today have all kinds of projects that they have invented to take up their timein service to God. The one I may support or the churchsupports does not determine soundness. We need tolearn not to support projects and get back to supporting the work of the Lord.

Soundness, either in a person or in a church, isnot determined by the preacher the church has orby the preacher one likes to hear. A church can have a preacher who will preach the truth, but thechurch will not subscribe to the truth he preaches. Aperson may have a favorite preacher he likes to listento, and that preacher may preach the truth, but theperson will not accept the truth when it is preached. Aperson can pat the preacher on the back after theservices, but that doesn't mean he is sound.

Soundness, either in a person or in a church, isnot determined by either their approval or disapproval of any particular radio program. One could approve a certain radio program or TV programand not be sound in the faith. The approval or disapproval of any TV or radio program is not thebasis upon which soundness is

had. A church could disapprove of some radio programand still be sound in the faith. Or a church could approve of a radio program and be unsound in thefaith.

Soundness, either in a person or in a church, isnot determined by either their subscribing or notsubscribing to any religious journal. Too often, andone time is one time too often, brethren will attemptto determine faithfulness or soundness of a preacher orof a church by whether they subscribe to a particularpaper or not. If you do not subscribe you can befaithful to the Lord, and if you do subscribe you canstill be unfaithful to the Lord. When subscribing to any religious journal is the basis upon which todetermine soundness and faithfulness, a standard hasbeen set that the Lord does not recognize.

When the standard of faithfulness is determined bysubscribing to a religious journal, a pressure campaignis being used to force people into going along with aparticular program or else being labeled by officialpronouncement as being unfaithful and unsound.

There is one good reason why all of the "standards"I have mentioned do not determine faithfulness to the Lord—none of them is found in the New Testament. If these do not constitute the standard, then what doesconstitute the standard for faithfulness and soundness to the Lord?

The Apostle Paul said, the standard of faithfulnesswas that which was according "to sound doctrine;According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God,which was committed to my trust" (1 Tim. 1:10-11).Paul left Timothy at Ephesus that he might "chargesome that they teach no other doctrine" (1 Tim. 1:3). Further Paul told Timothy in 2 Tim. 1:13 to "Hold fastthe form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus." Again, Paultold him in 2 Tim. 4:2-4, to "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke,exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine. For thetime will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap tothemselves teachers, having itching ears; And theyshall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

Paul wrote Titus to "... speak thou the things which become sound doctrine" (Titus 2:1). And of certain ones Titus was told to ". . . rebuke them sharply, thatthey may be sound in the faith" (Titus 1:13). Paul toldTitus that one of the qualifications of elders was to be"that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhortand to convince the gainsayers" (Titus 1:9). Titus wasto teach young men to use "sound speech, that cannotbe condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you" (Titus2:8).

Paul, in writing to the Corinthians said, in 2 Cor. 13:5, "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith;..." How shall we make an examination of our lives as to whether we are in the faith? Or, if you want to apply the question to a congregation, by what standard will acongregation measure itself to see if it is faithful untothe Lord? Will the standard be whether we subscribe to some religious journal, or whether we endorse aparticular radio program, or whether we have the right preacher, or by the projects or institutions wesupport, or by what the brotherhood thinks of us, orby what the majority of people are doing?

I want to say something that needs to be said verybadly and we need to learn it: no man has any SCRIPTURAL right to set up a standard bywhich either individuals or congregations will bejudged as to their faithfulness and unfaithfulness!Sometimes men get puffed up with their own selfesteem and think that whatever standard they setup, the Lord just automatically will recognize and ifmen do not bow to the man-made standard that the Lord will reject all who do not subscribe to man's standard.

The standard for truth and error, right and wrong,faithfulness and unfaithfulness, sin and righteousnesshas been determined a long time ago and the standardis permanent. David said in Psalms 119:89, "Forever,O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven," We do not determine the standard here, it already has been settled by Jehovah God in heaven.

Sometimes when a person does not go along withwhat someone thinks, an official pronouncement isgiven that a certain person is unsound. If everyone elsedoes not accept the official pronouncement, thenwhoever does not is immediately marked as beingunsound. The same thing is true concerning congregations. If a congregation does not bow down tosome official degree, then it will be declared to beunsound, and with no more authority than the willof man.

The standard of soundness is set forth in the SCRIPTURES. The inspired writer said it was "sounddoctrine", "sound words", "sound speech", "truth", and the "gospel" that was the standard for determining if either a person or a congregation issound in the faith. When one makes a condition of soundness more than the inspired writer, he has added to the word of God. This no man can do without bringing down the curse of Almighty God (Gal. 1:8-9).

The 5th Avenue church of Christ with which I labor publishes a bulletin which we mail to people who arewilling to receive it. If, after they read it, they want topass it along to a friend, that is fine with us. Its purpose is teaching. Therefore, there are those thatreceive our church bulletin that we know do not agreewith what we say in it. But that is all right. Afterstudying and considering the evidence we have to present over a period of time in the light of NewTestament teaching, they may come to us and say that they see what we have been saying is the truth. If so,we are glad. If they do not see the things we present asbeing taught in the Scriptures, then we do not wantthem to accept them. We have had those that did notagree with what we were teaching in the bulletinwhen they first began to receive it, but as they studied and read it in the light of what the Bible taught, wehave had many from far and near to express their appreciation for the paper either orally or in letters to us.

Now what would you think if I were to declare that all the faithful Christians were receiving this bulletin?You would think that I was determining who is faithfulto the Lord and who is unfaithful to the Lord. You would probably ask yourself the question, "Does hethink that he is the one that determines who is sound and faithful and who is unsound and unfaithful just bysaying so?" Would the fact that I said so, make it so?

People should not be deceived by the standards ofmen and think that because they measure up to thehuman standards that the Lord recognizes such. I remember that the Lord wrote a letter to some who said they were "rich, and increased with goods, andhave need of nothing". This was their estimate of themselves, but the Lord said, "knowest not that thouart wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, andnaked": (Rev. 3:17). This was unto the church inLaodicea. The church of the Lord at Sardis had "a name that thou livest" (Rev. 3:1). If anyone had questioned the church in Sardis, she could and wouldhave said we have the name of living. The name menhad given this church was not the name the Lord hadgiven her. The Lord's estimate of her was, you are"dead" (Rev. 3:1).

May we always learn and know that the standard forsoundness is determined by the Lord Jesus Christ aswe measure up to the divine standard—the gospel ofChrist or sound doctrine and not the standards set bymen themselves. When men set their own standards of soundness, it is an admission that they do not want tomeasure up to the high standard set by the Lord JesusChrist. Thus, they will lower the standard of soundness to one that meets their approval andmeasurement.

UNCTION FROM THE HOLY ONE

QUESTION: What is the "unction from the Holy

One" in 1 John 2:20? Is this "unction" the same as

"the anointing" in verse 27? Is this "unction" and/or

"anointing" received by Christians today? If so, do we

not have guidance from within in addition to the word?

John said concerning "the anointing" (and because of

it), "ye need not that any man teach you" (v. 27).—L.S.

ANSWER: The words "unction" and "anointing"(KJV) are from the same Greek word "Chrisma," and,therefore, are the same in meaning. It is consistentlytranslated "anointing" in the ASV. The word is usedmetaphorically in these verses. The allusion is to theanointing of kings and priests in the O.T. when oil andaromatic herbs were used in such appointments (Cf.Ex. 28:41; 29:7; 40:15; 1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13). W. E. Vinesays that it is used "by metonymy, of the Holy Spirit, 1 John 2:20, 27 twice" (W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary Of New Testament Words, p. 59).

There are two possible views concerning the versesin question both of which harmonize with truth.

Number One: Those under consideration in verses 20 and 27 had received an anointing from the Holy One(Christ), and, as a result, John says, "ye know allthings" (v. 20); "ye need not that any man teach you:but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things,and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taughtyou, ye shall abide in him" (v. 27). These had receivedthe Holy Spirit (by metonymy) from Christ under whose guidance they were able to discern truth anderror—even false teachers, called the antichrist (v. 22).These false teachers, formerly of them (v. 19), weretrying to seduce the faithful and thereby occasion their apostasy. No wonder John said, "Beloved, believe notevery spirit, but try the spirits whether they are ofGod: because many false prophets are gone out intothe world" (1 John 4:1).

In the absence of the New Testament, there werethose among the early saints possessing spiritual gifts by which they were able to discern spirits, know truth,and reveal it. These gifts varied and were bestowedthrough the laying on of the apostles hands, but werenot always given to all Christians (1 Cor. 12:1-11; Acts6:5-8; 8:14-20; 1:5,6; Rom. 1:11).

From this view point some difficulty exists in thischapter (1 John 2) in determining just when John addresses saints in general and those possessing spiritual

gifts in particular. Such must be determined in the light of all else revealed and the immediate context.From such source we do know that while not all saints possessed such gifts some did and were in the midst ofnearly, if not all, congregations. The early Christianswere dependent upon such for divine guidance. Theinspired word resided in them and they spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Number Two: The phrase "in you" (v. 27) is plural(Gr., en humin), and is often translated "among you."Thayer says, "esp. with dat. plur. of persons, as enhemin, en humin, among us, among you, en allelois, among yourselves, one with another" (p. 210). Consider the following examples:

Lk. 1:1, "which are most surely believed among us"(en hemin).John 1:14, "The word was made flesh, and dweltamong us" (en hemin).1 Cor. 3:18, "If any man among you" (en humin) "seemeth to be wise in this world." 1 Cor. 5:1, ".. .that there is fornication among you"(en humin).

According to this view, John says that the "unction" or "anointing" received from the Holy Oneis among you. John wanted his "Little children" to know that they had an "unction" or an "anointing"which abided in their midst in the persons who wererecipients of spiritual gifts. From them they were tolearn the truth on all issues. John said that this "anointing teacheth you of all things." They needed nofurther instruction from any other source. Such instruction involved the curse of heaven (Gal. 1:8,9).

Both of these views harmonize with truth which in this instance is:

1. The words "unction" and "anointing"are used figuratively, meaning power withinthose endowed with spiritual gifts.
2. This "anointing" was present among theearly saints.
3. The early saints were to rely on such fordivine guidance.

Since miracles have ceased and the gifts of the Spiritno longer exist (Cf. 1 Cor. 13:8-13), we have noneamong us who have been "anointed." We do have,however, the results of that "anointing," namely, theinspired word—"the perfect law of liberty" (Jas. 1:25).We have no need for further teaching from any othersource, either from within or without. This word isinspired, perfect, complete, all-sufficient, and final!(Jas. 1:25; 2 Tim. 3:16,17; Jude 3).

HOW ELUSIVE IS TRUTH?

Pontius Pilate will not be the first or last to try toevade the impact of truth. When our Lord said, "Hehad come to bear witness of truth," Pilate evaded theaffirmation by saying, "What is truth?" This impliesat least two things: first, truth is so elusive one cannotfind it and second, if he finds it, he cannot understandit. This seems to be the easy way out for many in the world.

Back in the early fifties, the late and beloved W.Curtis Porter engaged a Mr. Billy Sunday Meyers ina debate on the scripturalness of the Church. Onpage 26, Porter pressed Myers for an answer tothis question, "Is it possible for any man to take theBible as his only creed?" Reluctantly, Myers answered, "No, not in a concrete sense, because aman's creed is his personal interpretation of the Bibleand not the Bible itself." Brother Porter replied on page 41 with these words: "There, you have it. Myfriend does not even claim to take the Bible for his creed. He says it is impossible for him to do it. Thatwill explain, I suppose, some of the things he teaches.To Moses, God said, 'Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it.' Deut. 4:2. But Myers says it could notbe done—Moses would have to add his personal interpretations. Isaiah said: 'To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, itis because there is no light in them.' Isa. 8:20. But my friend says it can't be done—they would have tospeak 'according to their personal interpretations' of the word. Paul said, 'preach the word.' 2 Tim. 4:2.But my opponent says that such is impossible—that aman must preach his 'personal interpretations' of the word instead of the word itself. And Peter declared: 'If any speak let him speak as the oracles of God.' 1Pet. 4:11. But Mr. Myers declares it is utterly impossible to do so—that no man can speak anything but his 'personal interpretation' of God's oracles."

After Porter had all but annihilated Mr. Myers onthis question, he comes back on page 53, with thisquestion, "Will God accept one's personal interpretation in preference to another's?" Meyershad to come up with some kind of an answer and hereit is, "Yes, because some interpretations allow sin inthe life, a thing which God cannot tolerate." Porterthen pointed out that Myers was meeting himselfcoming

back because if he couldn't understand the Bible he couldn't know what SIN was in the first place.

I print this brief exchange to prove that manypreachers do not really believe the Bible. About theonly thing they believe is "their own interpretations ofthe Bible." They are of the school of thought, that theTRUTH is so evasive and relative that no one can really master it.

The Lord said, "Ye shall know the truth and thetruth shall make you free" (Jno. 8:32). But I am toldthat I cannot know the truth because it is relative. I am told that I cannot know the truth because it is illusive. I am told that I cannot know the truth, only my personal interpretation of the truth. So what shall Ido? I cannot be free from sin and servitude until I know what I cannot know! What a shame.

The truth about the matter is that one can know the truth and be made free. Notice the Lord did not say onehad to know ALL the truth to be saved, but he mustknow the truth. In Heb. 5:12, Paul says, "For when forthe time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that oneteach you again which be the first principles of theoracles of God; and are become such as have need ofmilk, and not of strong meat." The writer tells us thatbabes drink milk and others eat meat. But both milk and meat are truth. One isn't required to drink milkand consume all the meat at the same time. Since milk deals with first principles, it means one must knowALL the truth on the PLAN OF SALVATION or he cannot be saved. However, this is a far cry from saying he must know ALL truth. Since our salvation from sin is predicated on faith, repentance, confession and baptism, it is axiomatic that we must know ALL thetruth on the plan or we cannot be saved. One cannotleave off anything God has commanded and be saved.One doesn't have to have the acumen of Solomon to see the difference in knowing ALL the truth on a specific subject and knowing ALL the truth on everything!

When Paul said, "For we know in part, and weprophesy in part" (1 Cor. 13:9). Just what did he mean?Obviously the pronoun "we" has as its antecedent theapostles and inspired writers. This means that no ONE apostle had a complete revelation. Therefore, theapostles most of whom will make it to heaven did not know ALL truth. This proves that one can make it toheaven without knowing ALL truth but it does notauthorize error. Although Paul said he "knew in part"he blasted the Judaizing teachers for bringing in falsedoctrine (see Gal. 5). When one takes the writings ofPeter, Paul, James, John and others, he has a completerevelation of God's will. However, no ONE writer gaveus a complete revelation. When Paul told the Galatianbrethren that some had fallen from grace (Gal. 5:4) howdid he know this? The answer is that he knew the TRUTH on this subject and when they deviated fromthat truth, they had fallen from grace.

I do not fall out with the Calvinist when he says, "Noman knows it all." Neither do I become disturbed when he tells me that I am ignorant on many things in theBible. This, I humbly confess. But when he tells methat God will overlook my ignorance on "right and wrong", "black and white" or "sin and salvation," I come out fighting! Some things in which I may beignorant have absolutely nothing to do with mysalvation. For example, I may be ignorant of "thelocation and size of heaven," but what difference doesit make? I may be ignorant of "Paul's thorn in the flesh," but what difference does it make? I may beignorant of "the details of judgment day," but whatdifference does it make? On the other hand, the Biblesays if I am ignorant of the plan of salvation, I cannotbe saved (Rom. 1:16). If I am ignorant of how Godwants to be worshipped, I cannot be saved (see Matt.15:9). If I am ignorant of the laws concerning adultery, lying, stealing the Bible says I cannot go to heaven(see Gal. 5). If my attitude toward my brother is notright and I call him a fool, the Bible says I am indanger of hell fire (Matt. 5:22).

So kind friend, don't be deceived by Calvinistdoctrine. I plead guilty to ignorance and I admit I do not know it all but ONE thing I do know and that isI MUST know the difference in RIGHT and WRONG,BLACK and WHITE, SIN AND SALVATION ORheaven cannot be my home. When a man tells me thatGod will overlook matters of RIGHT and WRONG, heis whistling in the graveyard.

In summary kind friend, remember this, when Godwrote the Bible, he made some things simple. He wroteit so you may know the difference in "RIGHT and WRONG". Other things do not really matter. The entire Christian system is predicated on one's knowledge of the truth. For example, if one cannotknow the truth, how could one know and rebuke thefalse teachers? Yet, Paul warned the elders at Ephesus about grievous wolves who would enter inamong them (Acts 20:29). If one cannot know the truth,he could not differentiate between a wolf and a sheep.Actually, the wolf could ostentatiously say he was asheep. Then with a great deal of audacity, he couldclaim that it was all a matter of interpretation. Friend, when Paul told Timothy to "preach the word" and that some would "turn their ears from the truth" if one can't know the truth, how could he preach it and how would he know when one turns his ears from it?

"ACCEPT	JESUS	CHRIST	AS
YOUR		PERSONAL
SAVIOUR"

I want to discuss with you the expression that isstated in the title of this article, for I hear it everywhere almost every day. "Accept Jesus Christ asyour personal Saviour, and let him come into yourheart, and you will be saved." I have also read many,many articles and tracts which conclude with the samesort of statement. "Jesus will save you if you will lethim by accepting him as your personal Saviour."However, when you turn to the book of The Acts of theApostles in the New Testament, as we have done insome of our recent articles, and read what is said aboutthe different cases of conversion, it seems incredible, inview of the above statement, what one finds in theScriptures. Notice the list as we observe how Godactually saved these people.

1. The Pentecostians—Acts 2:14-41. . .heard, believed, repented and were baptized.
2. The Samaritans—Acts 8:5-13. . .heard, believed,confessed, and were baptized.
3. The Eunuch—Acts 8:35-39. . .heard, believed, confessed, and was baptized.
4. Cornelius—Acts 10:34-38. . .heard, believed, andwas baptized.
5. Lydia—Acts 16:13-15. . .heard, believed, and wasbaptized.
6. The Jailor—Acts 16:30-34. . .heard, believed, repented, and was baptized.
7. Saul (who later became the apostle Paul)—Acts9:17-18; 22:16. . .heard, believed, confessed, and wasbaptized.

There they are, multitudes of Bible examples whohave been saved. And yet, not one single example of those who were saved being told to "accept Jesus Christ as their own personal saviour. On the contrary,, .in every example of conversion we have inthe New Testament after the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, people saved the Bible way were told to hear, believe, repent, confess and be baptized!

Not In Scriptures At All

Another interesting thing is that though manypeople (many preachers included) in the world today quote the title of this article to people telling themwhat to do to be saved, the statement is nowhere found in the Scriptures. If so, WHERE?

Send all News Items to; Wilson Adams, 6334 Auburn Ave., Riverdale, MD 20737

NEWS EDITOR HAS NEW ADDRESS WILSON ADAMS, 6334 Auburn Ave., Riverdale, MD 20737. After three and a half years with the Georgia Avenue church in Roanoke,VA, my family and I have accepted the invitation to move and beginwork with the Wildercroft church of Christ in Riverdale, MD, a suburb of our nation's capitol. Our work will begin there on April the 18th. The Wildercroft congregation has three fine elders, a goodprogram of work, and a bright outlook for the future. We invite anyof the readers of STS to stop and worship with us when visitingWashington or passing through the area. For times of services, please see the ad in the back of the paper. The building is locatednear the Beltway Exit of Hwy. 450 (Annapolis Road).NOTE: FROMNOW ON ALL NEWS ITEMS FOR THIS PAPER SHOULD BE SENT TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. Also, all those who put outchurch bulletins please make a note of the change.

FIELD REPORTS JAMES A. BRUCE, 430 St. Marys Place, O’Fallon, MO 63366.After three years with the good church in St. Peters, MO, we plan torelocate as of July 15th of this year. I have preached twelve yearsfull time and twelve years part time. We enjoy personal work andhave realized good growth in all areas while working with thebrethren here. The church is at peace and is willing to providereferences to those who may be interested. Please contact me at theabove address or phone (314) 272-8002 nights, or 278-2666 during the day.

ROBERT DOZIER, P.O. Box 4127, Grand Junction, CO 81502. I would like the readers of STS to know that the Valley church of Christ is now meeting at 136 N. 5th St. in Grand Junction. The church formerly met at 760 Winters Street. The church then merged with the Mesa Ave. church of Christ after joint study between the two groups brought unity upon the belief thatthe New Testament does authorize Bible classes (Mesa Ave. formerly opposed such). However, the members of the Valley church were not able to remain at Mesa Ave. due to an unwillingness to study in an effort to resolve other serious differences that existed among them, primarily concerning marriage, divorce, and remarriage.

I have been working with the Valley church since August 14,1981. We met in a home of one of the members from August until January and have been meeting in the local I00F Hall since January. Phil Thompson is now working with the Mesa Ave.church. Phil and I have spent several weeks studying together onthe marriage question but have not come to an agreement. Phil believes that the teaching of Jesus (Mt. 5:32; 19:9; Mk. 10:11-12;Lk. 16:18) applies only to Christians. He agrees with the basic position of James Bales as set forth in his book, Not Under Bondage. Others at Mesa Ave. hold various unscriptural positions regarding marriage,divorce and remarriage. I believe that the teaching of Jesus appliesto all and that fornication is the only scriptural grounds for divorce.The Valley church of Christ is united upon the New Testamentteaching on marriage, divorce and remarriage.

This is not written with a spirit of animosity or with ill intent, butwith a desire to inform those concerned with the cause of Christ in this area as to the present situation and to let brethren who maytravel in this area know where we ar3 meeting to worship. Anyonewishing to contact us may write the church at the above address orcall me at (303) 245-5079.

KEN GREEN, 2212 Jordan Lane S.W., Huntsville, AL 35805. The Jordan Park church in Huntsville, AL lost its building to an arsonist's fire last July. Fortunately, for me, the annex on the rearof the building which housed the church office and most of mybooks and materials, was saved from the fire. An attaché case with all my preaching outlines and records of past meetings was stolen. (Someone said, "It must have been somebody who'd heardyou preach.") Our address plates were destroyed. For this reason we have not mailed a bulletin since the fire. With the steep increasein postal rates, it's doubtful that we will resume a church bulletin. The Jordan Park church is now meeting in the Security Federal Savings and Loan building at 300 Clinton Ave. West in downtown Huntsville. We have classroom facilities at this location and have been having near capacity crowds of 200 andover. We hope to be in our new building sometime this summer. OnFeb. 16, we began a call-in telecast on CA-TV 9.The "What is Written" program airs from 8 to 9 p.m. on Tuesdays.This cable company has over 30,000 home subscribers, about two-thirds of the homes of Huntsville. Response has been overwhelming with calls on the line constantly. We believe that much fruit will result through this medium.

JOHN F. HUGHBANKS, 2932 Carter Ave., Ashland, KY 41101. Since moving here in the middle of October, the church has progressed spiritually and numerically. We baptized one precioussoul so far this year. Two people have been restored to God, and twofamilies have placed membership with us. The church is self-supporting in all ways. Our attendance averages 30 to 35 on theLord's Day. The church is at peace and we look forward to muchsuccess in the vineyard of the Lord in the coming years. If any ofthe readers of STS know of any contacts in this area, please send ustheir names. Ashland has a population of 27,000 people. I would estimate that within a fifteen mile radius of Ashland (includingHuntington, WV) the population would be in excess of 150,000. So there is much work to be done. If you are in this area, stop andworship with us. We assemble at 2950 Carter Ave. with services on Sunday at 10 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Our mid-week service on Wednesday is at 7:30 p.m. My phone number is (606) 325-3565.

WORK IN GERMANY

DANIEL HUBER, Box 253, 602nd ASOC, APO NY 09107. InSeptember 1981, the churches in Phorzheim and Heilbronn, W. Germany, decided it would be best to unite and form a single, butlarger, congregation. We are meeting in Heilbronn, and at the present time, have twelve members and several children. The work of preaching and teaching is divided among the five men. We arefortunate to have so many willing to put forth the effort necessaryso that no one or two persons are burdened with all the work. Wealso have two Bible classes for the children taught by several of the women. We have very few expenses at this time, so we do have alimited amount of financial support available to any preacher of thepure gospel of Christ that is in need. If you have such a need, orknow of someone that needs financial support, please let us know.Please send references and any information regarding your work.For more information about us contact: Heilbronn Area—Tom Foster, HHC 101st Ord. Bn.,

APO NY 09176. Karlsruhe Area—Ron Miller, 69th PSC, APO NY 09164. Stuttgart Area—Dan Huber, Box 253, 602nd ASOC, APONY 09107.

INFORMATION ON CHURCHES NEARTHE WORLD'S FAIRALEX OGDEN, Rt. 4, Box 249, Rockwood, TN 37854. May 1 through October 31 of this year is the World's Fair in Knoxville,TN. It is estimated that 11 million people will attend the Fair during this period of time. Many of you that are members of the Lord'schurch will be among that number. However, some may not be aware of the different congregations within the Knoxville area.Thus, I would like to take this opportunity to inform you of thosefaithful congregations within a feasible driving distance of the Fair

site.

West Knoxville church of Christ 9048 Middlebrook Pike Knoxville, TN 37923 Services: Sun. 9:00,10:00, 6:00 Wed. 7:30 Phones: 690-8410 or 693-8939 Approximately 25 minutes.

Chapman Hwy. church of Christ CornerChapman Hwy. and John Sevier Knoxville, TN 37920 Services: Sun. 10:00,10:55; 7:30; Wed. 7:30 Phones: 577-8781 or 546-6523 Approximately25 minutes.

Smokey Mountain church of Christ717Cates Street Maryville, TN 37801Services: Sun. 9:30,10:30,6:30, Wed. 7:30 Phones: 984-1730 or 984-1523 Approximately 30 minutes.

Loudon church of Christ 707 Ward Ave. Loudon, TN 37774 Services: Sun. 10:00,11:00, 6:00, Wed. 7:00 Phone: 458-5043 Approximately 45 minutes.

Oak Ridge church of Christ225 N. Purdue Ave.

(P.O. Box 331)Oak Ridge, TN 37830

Services: Sun. 9:00,10:00, 7:00; Wed. 7:00Approximately 30 minutes.

Post Oak church of Christ

Post Oak Road

(Rt. 2, Box 525)

Rockwood, TN 37854

Services: Sun. 10:00, 11:00, 7:00; Wed. 7:30

Phones: 354-4435 or 354-4099

Approximately 1 hour.

We will be looking forward to meeting several of you during thesummer months.

NEW CONGREGATION CLARKSBURG, WV—There is now a faithful church meeting in Clarksburg, WV. We are currently 14 people strong including children. We met in our homes for several weeks but are now meeting in the conference room at the Town House West MotorLodge, located one mile west of Clarksburg on Rt. 50. Due to scheduling problems where we are renting, we can only meet thereonce a week on Lord's Day morning at 10:00. The nearest scriptural congregation to Clarksburg is either Morgantown or Middlebourne,both several miles away. We ask the prayers of our many brethren inour efforts here in this area. For more information about our work, contact: David Cochran at (304) 782-2132 or Ronald Logan at 8426134. Or write us at 13 Meadowcrest Lane, Bridgeport, WV 26330.

DEBATES HOGLAND-JACKSON DEBATE: The elders of the Van Dorn St. church in Grenada, MS have asked Ward Hogland to meet Bill Jacksonin a two night debate on June 25th and 26th of this year. Brethrenfrom the Elliott church challenged the Van Dorn brethren with reference to the proposition below. The Elliot brethren selected BillJackson of Austin, TX to represent them in the discussion. On the firstnight Ward Hogland will affirm, "The Scriptures teach that a congregation, from its treasury, may not provide benevolent aid tosinners and to those who are safe." Bill Jackson will deny. The second night Bill Jackson will affirm, "The scriptures teach that acongregation, from its treasury, may provide benevolent aid to sinnersand to those who are safe." Ward Hogland will deny. The debate willbe held in the City Auditorium in Grenada, MS each evening at 7:00.Grenada is about 100 miles south of Memphis, TN and 100 milesnorth of Jackson, MS on I-55. For more information contact Bill James at 175 Van Dorn St., Grenada, MS 38901.

SMITH-BALLARD DEBATE—J. T. Smith has been contacted bythe brethren in Grants Pass, OR to meet Bro. Voyd N. Ballard onthe subject of how many drinking vessels may be used in the distribution of the fruit of the vine in the Lord's Supper, and whether or not the church may have an arrangement of BibleClasses in which both men and women may do the teaching. The debate will be conducted in Grants Pass, OR on May 17,18,19, 20.For more information write or call: George Garrison at 2602 Hamilton Lane, Grants Pass, OR 97526. Or phone (503) 479-8077.

PREACHERS NEEDED BELFAST, VA—The Belfast church of Christ, located in the southwestern part of Virginia, is in need of a full time preacher. Thecongregation has an average attendance of 30 to 35. We are able toprovide $400 a month support. Other support would need to beraised from outside sources. If interested contact Dover Stacey, Jr., atRt. 2, Box 358-C, Cedar Bluff, VA 24609. Or call (703) 963-9431,964-5139, or 964-2744.

SHEBOYGAN FALLS, WI—The church here needs a mature, full time preacher for a challenging work. Middle-aged preferred.Contact Mabrey Tayse at Rt. 1, Brigewood Rd.. Sheboygan Falls,WI 53085.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMS RESTORATIONS (Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)

273.

139