CROSSROADS: ORGANIZATION OF HUMAN POWER

Every successful operation must be organized to pro-duce exactly what the organizer desires. There is a closerelationship between the creator, the organization and the work done. A major difference between religious systems is the difference between their organizations. These organizations differ because thenature and scope of their works differ. And the nature and scope of the works differ because the philosophy and goals of the founderS of these religious bodies differ. I suppose, therefore, weshould expect to find unscriptural organizations inchurches where the doctrine has been corrupted tosuit the fancies of religious zealots whose appetitesfor greater emotional thrills are never quenched.

Any church that undertakes a work for which it findsno New Testament authority will find it necessary toemploy some additional organizational arrangement bywhich to do that work. Additional or perverted organi-zations signify corrupt doctrines; and, of course, doc-trines of men mean practices that lead away from Godrather than glorify Him.

Those who have been in the Crossroads church of Christ have made the charge both orally and in print that the real power in the organization of Crossroads isin the preacher, Charles "Chuck" Lucas, and his assist-ants, both locally and across the nation. It is furthercharged that the elders at Crossroads are puppets toexpedite the programs of Lucas. Of course, Chuck

Lucas and the elders, Rogers Bartley and Richard

Whitehead all vehemently deny this. About the only

way we can be certain of anything of this matter is to

read what Crossroads has been saying and doing for the

past twelve to fifteen years and see who receives the

credit for the good they claim to have done, and who is

blamed for the evils committed. When we read the re

ports and records of both friend and foe, whoever is in

power will receive the most praise or blame. He will be

the chairman of the board, the chief of the system, the

founder of this "strange" evangelistic system!

Thirty-five years ago churches of Christ across thisnation began to create benevolent organizations, suchas orphan homes, homes for the aged and other institu-tions through which to do benevolent work of all kinds.The fact that the Lord did not make provisions in theorganization of the church to do such benevolenceshould be proof enough that it was not authorized in theword of God. But such evidence is not proof of anythingto those bent on doing their own will. They require a "Thou shall not" before they restrain themselves fromdoing whatever they want to do. They argue that Bibleauthority allows them to do anything that is not specifi-cally forbidden in the word of God. It does not registerwith many that God AUTHORIZES what He wants usto do; His silence does not authorize anyone to do any-thing.

I am not using the word "organization" in this articlein the ordinary sense. We usually think of the term assignifying the process of arranging of the parts in order for function. It is the act of getting the body ready foraction: putting the members in proper relation to eachother. As it relates to the church, there will only bebishops, deacons and saints (Phil. 1:1; Acts 14:23; Titus1:5). There is absolutely no organic tie of any kind thatbinds members of one congregation to members of an-other. Preachers have no more authority to direct alocal work than any other member.

In this study I use the word "organization" to meanthe work being done and the system of operation. Whatare in the unscriptural organizations at Crossroads?What is involved?

The Fascination and Disgust ofthe Crossroads Operation

Crossroads church of Christ is doing most of the

things that other liberal institutional churches are do

ing. In addition it has launched into new areas of en

deavor not before undertaken by churches of Christ.

This is not just another case of institutional digres

sion; it is a well planned and zealously executed scheme

to attract and excite college students and sensitive peo

ple who are emotionally disturbed by world affairs to

day. They are motivated by some promises and threats

that drive them deep into the system.

One of the deceptive features of Crossroads church isthat it appears to many not to be "liberal" or "institu-tional." Yater Tant seems blinded to everything atCrossroads but the number of baptisms per year andthe "WORK! WORK!" of each member in their various Bible classes. His editorials in Vanguard glow with re-ports of the great work Crossroads is doing, and whatan example she is for others of us, both the "institu-tional" and the "anti" churches.

Now if the number of baptisms is what we are after,why not mimic the Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses? I wish brother Tant would tell me if he would applaud theVine Street Christian Church in Nashville, Tennessee (we both know this church) if they baptized 300 soulsper year, and would he encourage all of us to imitate their pattern of evangelism to attain such results? Doyou believe the members of the Christian Church will besaved if they stay in that denomination? I do not! Theyare not doing the will of the Father (Matt. 7:21-23). Doyou believe those who are baptized there and continuewith the Christian Church are any better then thosewho have never obeyed the gospel? (2 Peter 2:20-22).

I will assume that brother Yater Tant would not take the position that those who stay in the ChristianChurch will be saved. There is no difference in principlebetween the digression of the Christian Church and theCrossroads church of Christ. Both have abandoned the authority of Christ regulating the nature and work ofthe church. Both have proceeded to promote their ownwills. I could not pray for the success of Crossroadsanymore than I could pray for the success of Vine StreetChristian Church in Nashville, Tennessee. The wholeissue is the authority of Jesus Christ.

Now seriously, brother Tant believes that Crossroadschurch is wrong about some things. He has said so insome of his editorials in Vanguard. I wonder, however,if he thinks these sins are significant enough to causethe loss of souls? I believe all sins separate us from God;That is the nature of sin (Isa. 59:1,1; Rom. 3:23; 5:12;James 1:14, 15). If brother Tant believes Crossroads isin sin with their works, school, orphan care and recrea-tion centers, missionary programs, school of ministry,campus ministry and religious days observance, etc.,how can he encourage them in baptizing all those whowill go right into the system and become worse thanthey were before? How can he encourage all "faithful"churches and brethren to imitate what Crossroads is doing?

(Continued on Page 4)

WHO IS GREATEST IN THE KINGDOM?

The "me first" concept is not new. Throughout thehistory of man the pursuit of preeminence has surfacedrepeatedly. It festered among the apostles. They dis-puted as they walked by the way as to who should begreatest (Mk. 9:33-37). Even the mother of James and John requested that her sons should sit, one on the righthand, and the other on the left in the kingdom (Mt.20:20-22). She did not want much!

On one occasion they came right out and asked "Whois the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? Jesus set a child in the midst of them "And said, Verily I say unto,except ye be converted, and become as little children, yeshall not enter into the kingdom. Whosoever thereforeshall humble himself as this little child, the same isgreatest in the kingdom of heaven" (Mt. 18:1-6). Theconcept of a spiritual kingdom seemed hard to grasp.Their minds ran to the external trappings of powerstructures such as developed in the reigns of Saul,David and Solomon. The Roman Empire had its chainof authority with certain posts being regarded asgreater than others.

The humility of a little child, innocent as to power andprivilege, served as the appropriate rebuke to such am-bition. The child was dependent on his parents for sus-tenance and protection. He was open, trusting and for-giving. Unless they could develop the spirit of humility manifested by the little child they could not even enterthe kingdom, much less hope to be an "official" in it.

Greatness Measured By Service

"But Jesus called them unto him and said, Ye knowthat the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion overthem, and they that are great exercise authority uponthem. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant" (Mt. 20:25-27). Nothing more vividly im-pressed this lesson upon their hearts than the timewhen he girded himself with a towel and got down andwashed their feet. Then he said "For I have given you anexample, that ye should do as I have done to you (Jno. 13:15). Jesus did not ask of them what he was unwillingto do.

The apostles had a ministry to perform. Paul saidthat Christ "hath given to us the ministry of reconcilia-tion" (2 Cor. 5:18). They delivered the "word of reconcili-ation" and in so doing fulfilled their role as "ambassa-dors for Christ" (2 Cor. 5:19-20).

Elders in the church have a ministry, a service orwork. Paul told the Thessalonians "to esteem them veryhighly in love for their work's sake" (1 Thes. 5:13). ToTimothy he said "If a man desire the office of a bishop,he desireth a good work" (1 Tim. 3:1). And what a workit is! They watch for souls, guard the flock, stop themouth of the gainsayer, and tend the flock of God asthey that shall give account unto the chief Shepherd.

Deacons in congregations have a ministry to perform.The word "deacon" itself denotes a minister, a servant.These attend to special responsibilities on behalf of the church and in such way as to be identified before saintand sinner as servants of the church. They are to "usethe office well" (1 Tim. 3:13).

Preachers of the gospel have a ministry as well. "Ifthou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ..." (1 Tim.4:6). Timothy was told to "do the work of an evangelist,make full proof of thy ministry" (2 Tim. 4:5).

All Christians have a ministry. We do not all havethe same office (function) though we are all membersone of another. Peter said "if any man minister, let himdo it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ" (1 Pet.4:11). In the verse before that Peter said "As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to an-other, as good stewards of the manifold graceof God." Paul said there must be an "effectual working in the measure of every part" to make increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love(Eph. 4:16). The minis-try of every part is of vital importance to the health and growth of the whole body.

Plenty of Work For All

In light of the foregoing passages, not to mentionmany others which want of space prohibits, it should beevident that there is enough service to keep us all busyfor a lifetime. It is a common fallacy that all spiritual work must be assigned in a congregational structure.Certainly there are areas where we pool our time, talentand money to function as a unit. Yet, the success of thatdepends on personal response to opportunity. Butbrother, don't wait for the elders to give you a class toteach, or honor you by having you to fill the pulpit. Findsomeone to teach and teach him. Occasions arise almost daily for all of us to "wait on our ministry." In paintingthe judgment scene, Jesus said he will say to those onthe left hand "Depart" for they had not ministered untohim (Mt. 25:41-46). In feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, providing for the stranger, clothing thenaked, attending to the sick, visiting those in prison, weare attending to our ministry. Do we have to call abusiness meeting of the congregation or wait for eldersto call upon us before we can attend to these things? Arethey not the daily opportunities of life?

The fulfillment of such ministry must be done be-cause it is right and not to gain attention and qualify forawards. That was the gist of the Lord's rebuke of those who pray standing in the street or give alms to be seen

of men (Mt. 6:1-6). To serve in order to gain attentionand recognition and make curtain calls before an ap-plauding world is to pervert our ministry. God sees, knows and cares. He not only recognizes our action; hesees the motivation behind it.

No Matter Who Gets the Credit

Someone once said it is amazing how much good can be done when we don't care who gets the credit. Rivalrypromoted by jealousy is an ugly thing. That is the meaning of "emulations", listed by Paul as a work of theflesh in Gal. 5:19-21. Has another brother accomplishedsomething we either could not or did not? Then let us all rejoice in it. We need to stop looking at certain kinds ofservice as higher rungs on the ladder of success whileother service is more menial and therefore less desir-able. David expressed what should the sentiment ofevery child of God now when he said "For a day in thycourts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in thetents of wickedness" (Psa. 84:10). Can you preach? Then attend to your ministry. Can you serve as anelder? Wait on your ministry. Are you a deacon? Thenserve with diligence. Have you a box of ointment? Thenbreak it and perfume your area. Can you sew garmentsfor the poor? Then be a Dorcas. Can you speak words ofencouragement? Then be a Barnabas. Can you tell someone you have found the truth? Then be a Phillipand find your Nathanael. Can you write teaching artic-les in a journal, the newspaper, a bulletin or a book?Then do it. Can you defend the truth in debate? Then dothat. Can you open the door at the place of worship andgreet all who enter with a cheerful countenance? Thenremember what David said. It is a far greater rank to bea doorkeeper in the house of the Lord then to dwell among the wicked.

Let us all find our place of service and perform it. Letus forget about becoming generals, presidents, board directors and supervisors. The Lord sent out to hire "laborers" in his vineyard. Who is greatest in the king-dom? Greatness will be determined by Him who sits onthe throne. But it will be measured by service. "To thework, to the work, there is labor for all."

(Continued from Page 1)

But if he does not believe that Crossroads church is involved in anything that jeopardizes the souls of men in Hell, why does he not fully endorse Crossroads andurge that we all unite on their terms and be brethren?Just forget our differences and accept each other as weare. I think I have heard that record somewhere before. I conclude that in the light of all evidence we have,brother Yater Tant is so enamored with the Crossroads system that he is willing to compromise all else. I do notknow any other conclusion to which we can come in theface of all the evidence from both Crossroads and brother Tant's pen.

If that conclusion is right, I can understand why hetwice addressed the Crossroads assembly when both Chuck Lucas and the elders were present and he did notwithstand them to the face (Gal. 2:11,14). If he believesthey are walking uprightly according to the truth, he, ofcourse, would not oppose them.

Ira Y. Rice, Jr. has appointed himself the chief um-pire, head referee, field judge and commissioner of brotherhood activities. All churches and brethren who do not accept him as such are not worthy of the term"faithful" in the Lord. He says as much in his paper.

He is a professional, experienced man on "anti-ism"from its beginning, he claims. Ira Y. Rice, Jr. has a dream! He dreams that he is the shining knight in ar-mour who is in charge of all forces against "ANTI-ORPHAN CARE," "ANTI-MISSIONARY WORK" and "ANTI-CO-OPERATION" of churches. Since he will not listen to anything spoken or written on thesubject except that which agrees with his views, let himsleep and dream. He does not know that there is NO"anti orphan care" for him to fight. The issue was and isNO CHURCH SUPPORT of ORPHAN HOMES for this care. There is NO "anti missionary work" problem,but the issue was and is CHURCHES CONTRIBUT-ING TO CHURCHES AND SOCIETIES TO DO EVANGELISM. There is NO "anti cooperation of churches" issue to battle, but the issue was and is NO CENTRALIZED CO-OPERATION IN WHICH SEV-ERAL CHURCHES DO THEIR WORK THROUGH ONE.

If Ira Rice does not understand that "anti" refers to

the human institutions through which they try to in

volve the church, and not the work for which the church

is responsible, he is still sleeping and dreaming. When

he awakes he will find that by every definition of the

word he is about the strongest "ANTI" one could find.

He is strongly opposed to the "Liberals" among

churches of Christ. I believe he is right about them, but

inconsistent with his own practice. He is very much

against Chuck Lucas and the Crossroads philosophy!

His paper tells that over a long period of time. I agree

with many of his conclusions, but again I have a prob

lem with his practice. Ira Y. Rice, Jr. is definitely

ANTI! He is ANTI ANTI! That is a fact! He does not,

however, define what he means by "anti" most of the

time, and when he uses the word it results in a false

charge.

Crossroads church is an organization developed from

human power to promote the philosophy of the Cross

roads system. (To Be Continued)

PARENTAL DUTIES AND NEEDS

There are two areas of parental duties — the physicaland the moral-spiritual.

Food, clothing, shelter and medical care are generallythought of as essentials of physical life. That the parents are to provide for the physical needs of theirchildren is unmistakably clear from two New Testa-ment passages written by the apostle Paul. In 2 Corin-thians 12:14 he says that "the children ought not to layup for the parents, but the parents for the children." In ITimothy 5 he declares, "If any provideth not for hisown, and specially his own household, he hath deniedthe faith and is worse than an unbeliever," That a hus-band who is a father able to do so has a responsibility tocare for his children and his wife is implied in James

1:27 where exhortation is made to the Christian "to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction." There would be no need for such exhortation were the breadwinner alive and meeting these moral obligations.In the I Tim. 5:8 text obviously "the faith" demands itsadherents care for their own families. Further, it is clearthat even a self-respecting infidel recognizes that gen-eral society owes him nothing as concerns providing for his own.

Moral and spiritual functions are bound upon everyChristian and some of these obligations relate particu-larly to a Christian toward his own children. ApostlePaul makes this point unmistakably clear when he de-clares, "Fathers, provoke not your children to wrath:but nurture them in the chastening and admonition ofthe Lord" (Eph. 6:4) and "Fathers, provoke not yourchildren, that they be not discouraged" (Col. 3:21). He-brews 12:9-11 reflects the good which comes to the childwhose father did not withhold chastening: "We had thefathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave themreverence: shall we not much rather be in subjectionunto the Father of spirits and live? For they indeed for afew days chastened us as seemed good to them. . . Allchastening seemeth for the present to be not joyous butgrievous; yet afterward it yieldeth peaceable fruit untothem that have been exercised thereby, even the fruit ofrighteousness."

Parental Needs are Two-fold

There are two general areas of parental needs — knowledge and wisdom.Parental knowledge looks three ways: (1) towardGod's will for the parents because they are parents, (2)

toward the parents' responsibility to understand each child's physical and mental abilities and emotional tem-perament and (3) toward each child's moral strength and weaknesses.

The second area of parental need is wisdom to dealwith the various stages of the physical, mental, socialand spiritual development of the child. Wisdom is anecessity for the parent who would have the child to bephysically healthy and grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ.

Proverbs 22:6 admonishes parents to "train up a childin the way he should go" and promises that "when he isold, he will not depart from it." We need to be carefullest we jump to an unwarranted conclusion regardingthe promise of this passage being peculiarly spiritual inits implication, i.e., that proper childhood training guar-antees the eternal security of the child's soul. If one is not careful he may thoughtlessly be affirming that achild of God cannot sin so as to be lost in hell. I do not subscribe to this popular Calvinistic meaning which Ihave heard brethren place on this text. One needs toremember that while Proverbs is an inspired book ofwise sayings that many of its expressions are not exclu-sively related to spiritual matters but often deal withprinciples which will aid one in the pursuit of everydaysecular life activities apart from any religious implica-tion. In my judgment Proverbs 22:6 is such a text andconveys the thought of training a child "according tohis way," (Hebrew text), i.e., according to the natural gift or aptitude God has placed within him, if I correctlyunderstand the literal meaning of the Hebrew text. De-litzsch, according to the "Critical Notes" of the Preacher's Homiletic Commentary on Proverbs, Vol. 13, p. 633, renders the passage "give to a child instruction according to his way, i.e., conformably tothe nature of youth." To illustrate, I understand thedivinely inspired writer to be saying that if a child hasa natural aptitude or bent for music that this inborn trait should be exploited by the parent. If one has anatural aptitude to work effectively with his hands histraining should capitalize on this quality. It will set him in a favorable position all his life. My mother often said, "Don't try to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.' " I think her proverb applies in the interpretation and application of Proverbs 22:6.

Parents cannot be overly knowledgeable about theirchildren's nature or their acquirements. Their physicalstrengths and weakness, mental abilities, peculiarities,emotional reactions and general stability or lack thereof, will manifest themselves early in life. Parents,of all people, should be the first to discover and, there-fore, have knowledge of their children's innate qualities and potentials.

Another important realm of parental knowledge isthe environment in which their children live and move inside and outside the regular domicile. Though thechild may not realize the impact of its environment anythinker knows that every person and every condition isplaying a part in the molding of the child's understand-ing, attitudes and actions. It behooves concerned

parents, therefore, to be alert to every person and situa-tion to which the child is or will be exposed becausephysically, mentally, emotionally and morally the childwill be affected. Well did Tennyson say, "I am a part ofall that I have met."

Think about some of those influences which affect for weal or woe. At home are to be found parents, siblings,possibly grandparents, other kinsmen and playmates.Constantly TV and/or radio blare forth their mentalmenus to eye and ear. Newspapers and magazines con-tribute their part. Outside the child's home are the parents of his playmates when he may be visiting andlistening to their profane speech and observing theiralcoholic consumption. Whatever happens in or aboutthe school-house is a major impression factor. Parentsshould never forget that five days each week for 36weeks each year the child spends more awake time inthe presence of school teachers and other influencesthan he spends with either father or mother. It is herethat peer pressure probably exerts its greatest power in terms of personal loyalties, thought development,speech, moral concepts, dress habits and sports. Unfor-tunately the impossibility of close supervision byschool administrators and faculty helps the negativeinfluences. If the child attends church services (he prob-ably follows the parents' practice) he may well learnmost of what he will ever know about the Bible and religious duty. If his parents are negative and critical ofelders, teachers, preachers and what usually happens inthe church services the child will grow up with the sameattitude. The family influence for righteousness in a seaof secularism and immorality must indeed be a strongone if the child is to be spiritually able to cope with theenvironment in which he daily lives.

More is needed by successful parenthood than mereknowledge of the child itself and of its environment.Proper parental guidance calls for wisdom to implementparental knowledge. Everybody knows that none be-comes wise simply by the accumulation of knowledge.Wisdom is the art of reaching a righteous means. Agreat Greek scholar defined wisdom as "that endow-ment of heart and mind which is needed for the rightconduct of life." Every parent should heed the exhorta-tion: "If any of you lacketh wisdom, let him ask of God,who giveth to all liberally and upbraideth not" (Jas. 1:5). Parents should analyze carefully the treatise ofJames 3:13-17 on earthly and heavenly wisdom and study diligently all that the books of Proverbs and Ec-clesiastes say on this subject.

NEHEMIAH. LET US RISE UP AND BUILDThe Place of Growth In Spiritual RevivalPart 5—Reaching The Lost

In the 1lth chapter of the book of Nehemiah, we havebeen studying the problem of re-populating the city ofJerusalem. We have said that it is much like the prob-lem we face today of re-populating spiritual Zion which is the Lord's church. We are living in a day of declining baptisms, declining attendance, and declining interest.If we are going to be successful in a future generation,we, too, need to re-populate Jerusalem. We have saidthat there were four basic principles that we need to adhere to if we are going to re-populate Jerusalem. Num-ber 1 is that we must know God; Number 2 is that wemust become a people of joy; Number 3 is that we mustbecome a people of love. We subdivided becoming apeople of love into Part I, Loving One Another and Part' II, Accepting One Another. Now we come to the fourthprinciple of re-population for the city of Zion. That is reaching out in evangelism to touch other people. It is so difficult to know how to do personal work today.That's why many are failing to re-populate Jerusalem.

Most means of personal evangelism today involve aperson going and reaching for a person X whom he hasnever met, whom he does not know, and with whom he has very little, if any, influence or prior contact. Suchmeans of evangelism reaches very few individuals and they do not bring the results that we would like for themto bring. If they did, we would not face the problem thatwe face in Jerusalem today. Let us share together somestatistics of church growth that we find that should bevery informative. We find that in a questionnaire givento basically fundamental religious people the questionwas asked, "How did you come to Jesus Christ?" Theseare the answers that were given. 4-6% just walked into a church building. 4-7% came as a result of the preacheror the minister. 2-4% came because they heard and likeda particular church program of activity. 1-2% came because of visitation. 3-6% came because of Bible school activity. .001% came because of television orevangelistic meetings or crusades. This represents aVERY SMALL MINORITY of people. The bottom lineof this survey was that between 70-90% of the peoplethat filled the different churches today came because ofa FRIEND OR RELATIVE whom they knew, whomthey trusted, and WHOM THEY RESPECTED SHARED THEIR FAITH WITH THEM. You see,

most of the means that we are using today are methods

that seek to put in contact an unknown person and we

wonder why we do not have any impact or any influence

in the life of the person without the gospel. God's plan

for salvation certainly involves preaching the gospel to

people that we do not know personally. There are many

examples of this in the New Testament. But yet there is

also another concept of evangelism in the New Testa

ment that we have almost altogether or completely ig

nored. That is the concept of a friend reaching another

friend. If you will, THE ANDREW PRINCIPLE.

When Andrew found the Lord, he reached for his

brother, Peter, and brought him to Jesus Christ. As we

begin to look at the method of reaching people today, we

want to talk about the most effective plan and that is

the plan that puts an individual in contact with some

one whom he already knows and already respects.

God's plan for evangelism today is a plan of beauty.What God does is that He desires to build into us the beauty of His own character. That's why we studiedthese three prior concepts before we studied the conceptof personal evangelism. We, ourselves, must know Godand His character before we can share Him with anyoneelse. We, ourselves, must become a people of love beforewe can share the will of God with anyone else. We mustbecome a people of joy before we can share that withanyone else. You see, first of all God wants to build intous the beauty of His character and then He wants to putus on display before a lost world. The idea found inMatthew 5:13-16 of being a light set on a hill is the exactprinciple which we are seeking to establish in these lessons. We are the light of the world. We are to reflectnot our own light, but the beauty and the character ofGod in our lives. Then, God's means of communicating truth to an individual is always through a fleshlypreacher or individual. We see this is true. He couldhave sent the angels to proclaim His gospel, but ratherHe sent his own Son. His own Son as an individual would come and live among men and proclaim it to Hisfellow man. Thus, as a result, we see that God alwayscommunicates to man through man, through life on life.

It is so unfortunate that the average Christian has nonon-Christian friends and the tragedy is that the non-Christian has no Christian friends. The world outside today is seeing no alternate (Christian) life style. Wehear a great deal today about the terminology "alter-nate life style". But, we are finding today that the world sees no alternate life style of Jesus Christ in any oneelse's life. The non-Christian has the right to see aChristian, a child of God, become a thing of beautyamidst his own imperfections and see the Spirit of Godform in him the fruit of the Spirit so that they canobserve the peace and the hope and the joy and the self-control in the life of him who is a child of God. Israel of old was to be this kind of nation. The command to love one another was given to Israel of old in the beginningof the nation. That is not just simply a new commandgiven by Jesus Christ to His disciples.

We find that Israel of old was to love, accept, and care for one another. In all of their institutions and in all of their relationships, they were to be a thing of beautyand the pagan nations round about them were to seethis in their lives. Thus, leading the pagan nations to seethat Jehovah, could produce something different thanwhat their pagan gods could produce. The terrible trag-edy with Israel of old was that they did not let thebeauty of God become manifest in their lives.

Today, as a corporate body of believers, unless weknow God, unless we have the joy of Jesus Christ in ourhearts, unless we really become a people of love, we haveno corporate beauty to share with the world at all. Andso, as a result, we have concentrated on METHODS touse rather than what we are to be. Personal evangelismis much less what we do; rather it is much more what weare. The method of personal evangelism is very unim-portant. As we have said before, it is unimportant be-cause it is God that gives the increase. It is also unim-portant because what we need to do is to establish arelationship with our friends and with our neighbors sothat they can see Jesus Christ in us personally and thenmake a decision that they want to copy that life style.The key word in personal evangelism is the word "RE-LATIONSHIP". Many today do not want to recognizethis fact. It is much easier to talk about how we are going to reach person X—by direct mail, by the radio,by the television, by a knock on the door—because wedo not put anything on the line with person X. But,when we begin to build close relationships and invitepeople to come, not only into our homes, but into ourhearts and to see exactly what we are, then we areputting our credibility on the line. It is much like aperson that is always going on a diet, but never tellsanybody. When you do that, you are not accountable toany one. We want to reach a person for Jesus Christthat we have never met, that we do not know. In doingthat, we put absolutely nothing on the line. But, whenwe begin to build a relationship with someone in ouroffice, with someone on our street, with someone in our

P.T.A. group, we are inviting them to see how we copewith worry, how we cope with reversal, how we copewith frustration, how we cope with being ill-treated andpassed over for a promotion or a raise, how we treatthose that do not love us, how we respond to criticism,and as we invite them to see that in our lives, then theycan see how Jesus lives upon this earth. Jesus came and walked for 3 1/2 years and was open to total scrutinyby those that were close to him and around about him.He built a relationship with them. We must, then, seekto develop relationship with those that we live around.

We have got to become a people conscious body ofbelievers. We have got to become genuinely in love withthe souls of people. We must first begin by realizing that we do not deserve the love of Jesus Christ. For while we were yet sinners, he died for us. He cared for usfirst before we ever deserved it or before we ever mer-ited it. So, as a result, we have not earned the love thatChrist has for us. We must learn then to become peopleconscious. We must understand that people do not haveto earn our love or merit our concern for them. If this were true, you and I would still be unsaved and Jesus would not have reached for us. We must take how God,through Christ, feels for us and apply that across thespectrum to other people. We must love people, we mustcare for people and we must seek to build relationshipswith people. It does not matter whether they are worthit or not. If we will simply love and teach people intoJesus Christ, we can find our effectiveness being farincreased because this is the divine plan rather than thehuman plan.

It goes against our basic nature to try to love peoplethat are not lovable, but remember, our God loves usand we often times are very unlovable. People mustlearn to see that we care about them, that we love themand that we are concerned about them. They must seethat we care about them whether they will be baptizedor not. It is not like here is a pie and here is a tract onbaptism. Eat the pie and read the tract, leaving themwith the full idea that if they are not baptized, we willcome back and try to reclaim the pie. They need tounderstand that we are reaching for them in an uncondi-tional, no strings attached, loving, caring attitude andrelationship. This means going out of our way to takeour time, our talents, our ability and to spend them inthe lives of other people. This means that we mustbecome an unselfish people rather than an extremelyselfish group of individuals. We must be willing to giveup our golf, our tennis, our hobbies and our recreation tospend our time working and building a relationship inthe lives of those that are not Christians. When they seethat we really love them, then, and only then, can wefind that we can have a marked influence upon them intimes of crisis, troubles, and reversals. Who will theyturn to? They will turn to us because we have been a friend to them.

We need to spend time and prayer for the lives ofother people. But, not only that, we need to spend timeand prayer that we can meet their needs. That we canhave the opportunity to serve them and to care for themin the daily activity of life. We might start with makingconcentric circles; circles that begin with those that arethe very closest to us and moving out to those that arefarther away from us. This is the exact point of Acts 1:8 where the gospel started in Jerusalem, the second con-centric circle was Judea and Samaria and the third concentric circle was then to the outermost part of the earth. It started in Jerusalem and gradually went to the outermost parts of the earth. Thereby, we start with theinner circle of our closest friends and our closest rela-tives. We begin, first of all, by developing Jesus Christin our own lives and then we begin to pray, "Lord, helpme to meet the needs of my immediate family and rela-tives." Every day you pray, "Lord, help me to be able tomeet the needs of these people. If they need something,give me the ability to know it and the ability to supplyand answer their needs." Then secondly, you begin topray, "Lord, help me with my close friends. When theyhave a need, let me be the one to respond to their needsand help them and care for them." And, then thirdly wemove out to our neighbors and to our business associ-ates, "Lord, help me meet the needs of this group of unbelievers, of my neighbors, of my business associ-ates. When they have a need, help me to be the one thatresponds to that need." Next is all of our acquaintance.These may be the fellow at the service station, the clerkat the grocery store, or whoever they may be. "Lord, help me to meet the needs of these people." And, finally,"Lord, help me to meet the needs of person X, whom I asyet do not even know." If we can establish in our ownhearts and minds an attitude of meeting the needs ofother people, we can establish a principle by which wewill be looking for every single possible opportunity toreach and to care for other people. The key is "relation-ship". "Help us, oh Lord, to build relationships withthose that do not know Jesus Christ.

IS "THE EXCEPTION" APPLICABLE TODAY?

There are those who say that the "exception" thatJesus gave with regard to those who divorce and re-marry is not applicable today because it is nowhererepeated after Pentecost. This is to say that unlessinstruction given by the Lord during his personal minis-try is repeated after Pentecost (Acts 2) it is in no wayapplicable today.

Those who have taken this position, however, would be forced, by consistency, to take the same position onmany other things taught by Jesus during His personalministry. But where is the Bible authority for such a rule? After all, the four gospels were written to Christians telling them of the life of Jesus, as well assetting forth some of His teachings that were applicableto the kingdom. Let's look at a couple of examples.

In John 3:3-5 Jesus tells Nicodemus that one must be born again in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven.Jesus describes this "new birth" as a birth of water and the Spirit. All of us (including those who take the posi-tion on the "exception" of Matthew 5 and 19 not beingrepeated after Pentecost) understand and accept thefact that one must be "born again" in order to enter thekingdom. But where is the "new birth" explained asJesus explained it in John 3, after Pentecost? Obviouslyit is not.

Second, just one chapter before Jesus' instruction on divorce and remarriage, Matthew 18:15-17, He givesinstruction regarding the man whose brother has tres-passed against him. He tells the man what should bedone to try to correct the situation. Where is this in-struction repeated after Pentecost? It is not.

Was Christ Explaining The Law of Moses?

Another objection to using the teaching of Christ inMatthew, Mark, and Luke on the subject of divorce andremarriage, is that Christ was not teaching somethingdifferent from the Law of Moses, but rather was giving the proper application of the Law to the Pharisees. Theytell us, for example, that the Lord had a specific purposein telling the people that unless the "putting" away was"for fornication" they could not remarry. They then goto Deuteronomy 24:1 and try to make the "unclean-ness" found in this passage mean that the bride was nota virgin, and had committed fornication before theywere married. Thus Jesus was simply explaining this tothese people. However, this is an assumption. There area number of different opinions among scholars as towhat the "uncleanness" was in the new bride in Deuteronomy 24. However, I believe this to be inconse-quential. For, first of all, it is assumed, by those who believe this doctrine, that the word "fornication" al-ways referred only to the unmarried. This is neither true in the Old nor the New Testaments. As we stated in a previous lesson, the word "fornication" is only foundfive (5) times in the Old Testament, and every time it isused, it is used figuratively to describe the spiritualcondition of Israel which constituted those who were "married to" or belonged to God.

And even though it is sometimes used in the NewTestament to describe those who are single, it is a gen-eral term that is also used to describe every kind ofsexual activity. (It is used in I Corinthians 5 to describeone who had married a married woman which would usually be referred to by the word "adultery"; homosex-uality and sodomy in Jude 7 which obviously couldinclude those who are married, unless one wants to takethe position that all homosexuals and sodomites aresingle persons). However, it is obvious in some passageswhere both the words, fornication and adultery, areused that sometimes a distinction is made. cf. I Corin-thians 6:9. Thus we can readily see that in order for theabove position to be true, the word "fornication" wouldalways have to be committed by an unmarried person,and this is not the case.

Did Christ Change Moses' Law?

Second, the problem with saying that Jesus was try-ing to correct the Jews regarding the Law of Moses andwas telling them that the only reason to put away underthe Law of Moses was for fornication, cannot be sub-stantiated. In fact, this would mean that the Law ofMoses only allowed divorce "for fornication," and theone who was "put away" could not remarry; for that iswhat Jesus said in Matthew 19:9b. However, when weread the instructions in Deuteronomy 24, we find justthe opposite.

Notice in Deuteronomy 24:1 that the man whosebride did not find favor in his eyes, because of theuncleanness, (which, as we have pointed out manybrethren believe is fornication) gave her a bill of divorce-ment and sent her out of his house. But Deuteronomy 24:2 says when she is sent out, she may be another man's wife. However, this is not what Jesus said at all.He said, "whosoever marrieth her which is put awaycommitteth adultery" (Matthew 19:9b). Also, under Moses' law, according to Deuteronomy 24:3, Mosestells us that if the second husband hate her, he may giveher a writing of divorcement and send her out of hishouse. Thus we see that Jesus' teaching comes no where near describing Moses' Law.

We have already substantiated the fact that in both the Old and New Testaments the word "fornication" can include those who are married; thus include theadulterer. But notice why Jesus' teaching in Matthew5:32; 19:9 could not be discussing the Law of Moses. InDeuteronomy 22:22, Moses' Law described a man lyingwith a married woman. The consequences under Moses' Law was that both were to be stoned to death. Jesus could hardly have been giving regulations for remar-riage regarding either of these, now could He? And, ifHe was, then he was changing the Law of Moses, whichHe denied He had done. cf. Matthew 5:17.

So, Christ's teaching in Matthew 5:32; 19:9 could nothave been applicable then, for it would have changed Moses' Law. And if it is not applicable now, when was itapplicable?

HOW'S THIS FOR EXTRAVAGANCE?

The Tulsa World, Sunday, Sept. 11, reported on thebuilding plans of the Garnett church of Christ of thatcity. With current attendance running 2,000 plus, thecongregation plans to construct an auditorium complex that will seat 2,400 on the lower floor and 1,500 in the balcony.

Extravagance par excellence seems to be the name oftheir game.

"A baptistery near the pulpit will be surrounded by plants and flowers to recall timeswhen baptisms were held 'in the crick.' Skylightsand indoor trees and plants will highlight an entrymall by which the proposed auditorium will be tiedto the existing building...

"This addition will also permit an informationdesk for visitors and greatly enlarged toddler andnursery areas, available to both the auditoriumand the fellow-ship hall.

"An existing auto turnaround will become a pedestrian mall and canopies on the north side ofthe educational building will be extended to provide covered walks to either parking lot on thecongregation's 40 acre site."

All this is but "phase two" in their long-range plans.A housing facility for the elderly, a counseling center,and a chapel are being projected for the future.

The congregation is presently meeting in two morn-ing services in the facility "originally intended as a fellowship hall in the educational building completedfour years ago at a cost of 4,4 million.

Now instead of having "fellowship" (which to theliberal brethren means to eat a sandwich and have a socially good time, see I Cor. 11:34), they are reduced tousing this space for worship (which is fellowship accord-ing to the true New Testament usage of the term).

The news article assures us, however: "With comple-tion of the proposed auditorium, the meeting place inuse now will revert back to its original purpose: a fellow-ship hall to seat approximately 1,000 at meals, withspace for an already-planned commercial kitchen..."

The architect who is a member of the congregation, isquoted as saying, "We have studied every aspect of thechurch program, and we are trying some innovations wethink have not been utilized in other churches."

He was referring to the facility, of course, but hiswords could well apply to the work and worship of thechurch as well, with the exception that one would find it doubtful that any innovation into such is not being utilized by other churches.

The big news story in all this was in the more than$1.5 million dollar contribution they were attemptingto raise the following Sunday.

Marvin Phillips, "their minister", was so certain ofsuccess that he had accepted an invitation from anOklahoma City congregation to address them on Sun-day afternoon on "How We Raised $1.5 Million In ASingle Day."

"A helicopter will pick him up from the Tulsachurch grounds following morning worship. It willreturn him to the 31st Street site in time to address a 5

p.m. worship service to be followed by a 'victory picnic' on the church grounds."

They had their victory picnic.

Monday's edition of the Tulsa World reported theyhad pushed the total to more than $5,000 over the $1.5million mark. They thus shoved Robert Schuller'sCrystal Cathedral out of third place in the running for the largest single day offering of any church in thiscountry.

Many "collectible" automobiles were contributed. Di-amond rings, even some wedding rings, and homes weredonated. Many members borrowed up to $10,000 todonate with the church backing the loans.

"A mission congregation begun by the Garnettchurch in Augusta, Ga., numbers 60 members. They took a collection last Sunday and sent $1,105."

Sounds to me like they're mixed up on a thing or two,not the least of which is the New Testament authorityfor one church to send a contribution to another church for such an extravaganza as this.

And so it goes.

4.5 billion people are living and dying without thegospel while brethren spend their resources on perisha-ble bricks and stones and carnivals.

They're competing with the denominations and it's a losing battle. Newsweek reports that Second Baptist inHouston's new building cost $34 million, of which only$3 million remains to be pledged. It will have eight bowling lanes. I suppose you really do try harder whenyou're second. But First Baptist in the same city has aChristian Life Center "featuring two full-size basket-ball courts, a roller rink, six bowling lanes,four glassed in racquet-ball courts, a suspended jogging track, saunas, whirlpool baths, and a restaurant called 'The Garden of Eatin'."

Mr. Fred Williams, a member of Second Baptist, isquoted in the Newsweek article regarding the churchbowling lanes: "It makes sense to me."

That is apparently authority enough for most folks.It makes sense to them.

Another Baptist preacher in the city, however, isquoted as commenting: They're measuring themselves"with a different measuring stick than God has."

The classic passage to which Calvinists have tradi-tionally appealed for the support of their concept ofsovereignty is Romans 9:6-26. They find in these versessubstantiation for the doctrine of unconditional partic-ular election, and thus a deterministic mode of divinerule as well. They focus primarily upon the following: verse 11 and what is stated there about God's choosingJacob over Esau, "Though the twins were not yet born,and had not done anything good or bad, in order thatGod's purpose according to His choice might stand, notbecause of works, but because of Him who calls. . .";verses 15 and 18, "He says to Moses, 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion onwhom I have compassion'... So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires";verse 23, "And He did so in order that He might makeknown the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy,which He prepared beforehand for glory."

No passage can be correctly understood isolated fromits context. It is especially disastrous when the isolatedpassage is then used as the standard proof text for anentire religious system. Calvinists have customarily re-garded this section of Romans as a definitive and com-prehensive explanation of what the Bible has to sayabout election. But these verses need to be looked at objectively, keeping in mind always the immediate con-text of this part of Romans and the overall teaching ofthe epistle.

Romans 1:16-17 gives the theme of the letters: "(the gospel) is the power of God for salvation to everyonewho believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek."Chapters 1-3 demonstrate the total helplessness of bothJews and Gentiles to attain righteousness on their ownmerits, and show how justification can come onlythrough God's grace. Chapter 4 presents Abraham asthe classic illustration of justification by faith. His be-ing justified without circumcision proves that faith isthe condition for salvation and not meritorious works or physical ancestry. Thus, salvation is offered by God tothe Jew and the Gentile on the same basis. Chapter 5glorified Jesus, whose atoning death makes possible man's justification. Chapters 6-8 discuss the justifiedindividual's present relationship to righteousness.

Beginning in chapter 9 Paul addresses the practicalproblems which the Jewish Christian faced because ofJustification by faith; namely, the rejection by God ofthe disbelieving Jewish nation and the acceptance in-stead of the Gentiles to the messianic hope. Were notGod's promises to bless the Israelites left unfulfilled?The Jews were God's chosen people; did they not de-serve better treatment than pagan nations? It is impor-tant to realize that what Paul has under consideration in Romans 9 is the circumstance of the Israelites nation-ally, not the matter of the personal salvation of individ-ual men. The truth regarding the latter had been al-ready discussed.

Thus, Paul begins the chapter with a solemn affirma-tion of his personal grief at the rejection of the Jewishnation (verses 1-5). "But," he stresses, "it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not allIsrael who are descended from Israel; neither are theyall children because they are Abraham's descendants" (verses 6-7). Paul shows how the Old Testament scrip-tures testified that the intended recipients of the messi-anic benefits were not those of a certain lineage, butthose of faith. These were the "children of the promise"whom God had chosen (verse 8, 24-31). And the choicewas God's own to make, for salvation is His gift and Hehas the right to bestow it to whomever He desires ac-cording to His terms.

Paul illustrates this divine prerogative by referring toGod's choice of Isaac and Jacob, both of whom wereselected over others also of Abraham's lineage. Godchose them, not because of how righteous they had beenor because of how wicked others had been, but becauseHe, sovereign God, desired it that way. Paul's point isthat God has every right to extend salvation to thebelieving Gentiles if He so desires. It is His prerogativeto "have mercy on whom I will have mercy" (verse 15).

In verses 19-21 Paul harshly condemns the JewishChristian who answers back to God and pompouslysays that God's final rejection of the Jewish nation wasnot right. God is the sovereign ruler of man, and He hasevery right to endure with sinful men (as He had donewith the Jewish nation for so long) in order that Hemight finally bestow His mercy on others who wouldcome to Him in faith—even if these others were Gen-tiles. Paul says, "God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured withmuch patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruc-tion ... in order that He might make known the riches ofHis glory upon vessels of mercy, which He preparedbeforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, notfrom among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles"(verses 22-24). These verses are not speaking of a divinedecree to save particular individuals and destroy othersunconditionally. Verse 32 states that the reason themajor portion of the Israelite nation was condemned was "because they did not pursue (righteousness) byfaith, but as though it were by works." They rejectedJesus as the Messiah and "stumbled over the stumblingstone." Calvinists consistently overlook the clear senseof verses 30-33 which give faithlessness as the reasonfor some persons becoming "vessels of wrath preparedfor destruction."

Calvinists also view reprobation as final; a vessel ofwrath can never become otherwise. Paul teaches the opposite in chapter 11. Speaking of the divine rejection of the Jewish nation he says, "They did not stumble soas to fall, did they? May it never be!" (verse 11). Inverses 17-22 Paul figuratively describes the Jews as the natural branches that had to be broken off of God's olive vine; but he adds, "They also, if they do not con-tinue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is ableto graft them in again" (verse 23). The Jews could still be God's chosen people if they would repent and believein Jesus as the Messiah. Their rejection by God was notan irrevocable reality; it was contingent upon their con-tinued unfaithfulness. Similarly, God's present accept-ance of Gentile Christians was contingent upon theircontinued faith. Paul warns these Gentiles, "You stand by your faith. Do not be conceited but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spareyou" (verses 20-21).

It is true then that Romans 9 strongly emphasizes thesovereignty of God. But it is not propagating uncondi-tional particular election and a deterministic mode ofdivine rule. All men possess an independent will, andGod expects each to respond voluntarily to the gospel inorder to be saved from their sins.

Final Comments

As we have seen in this study, traditional Calvinismconsiders determinism to be a necessary aspect of sov-ereignty, and argues therefore that unconditional elec-tion must be true in order for sovereignty to be estab-lished. Not only is such a view unbiblical, it is a purelyunwarranted assumption. Robert Shank's commentson this point are excellent:

The sovereignty of God does not need to beestablished. As an essential aspect of Hisbeing and person, it is in no way contingent. The sovereignty of God does not depend, for either its existence or its manifestation, oneither the fact or the mode of election. God is sovereign, regardless of whether He elects,or does not elect... whether He elects some,or all... whether election is conditional, orunconditional. Neither the fact of election nor the mode of election nor the extent of election affects the fact of the sovereignty ofGod, and the assumption that unconditionalelection is necessary for the preservation ofthe sovereignty of God is a theological hum-bug which for generations has been used byCalvinists to beg the question.

(Elect in the Son, p. 144) The assumption which Calvinists make regardingelection they make regarding divine determinism gener-ally. But determinism is not an essential facet of sover-eignty. God could have chosen to rule the world whichHe created in an absolute, deterministic way, but Hechose not to. He could have created men with no free-dom of will, as robotistic creatures incapable of func-tioning except in accordance with their programming.Yet God chose not to do this. He made men autono-mous, not automatons. That this is the case does notimpugn God's sovereignty. It is because God is sover-eign that He has the right to create men as He pleases.Ironically, in trying to magnify God's sovereignty byaffirming determinism, Calvinism has actually limitedGod. Calvinistic theology restricts His rule by not al-

lowing Him the prerogative of creating independentbeings if He so chooses.

The Bible affirms that God did give men an indepen-dent will. He does not force men to comply with Hisdesires. He wants them to submit freely to His right-eous mandates, not because foreordination necessitatesit, but because morality compels it. That men possessself-determination does not diminish God's glory; it ac-tually makes possible His greatest glorification. Forwhen men decide for themselves to acquiesce to thesovereign's will, God receives the highest possible formof praise. This is what gives the apostle's admonition such import: "Whoever speaks, let him speak, as itwere, the utterances of God; whoever serves, let him doso as by the strength which God supplies; so that in allthings God may be glorified" (I Peter 4:11).

Only when the errors of Calvinism are made manifestcan God's sovereignty be elevated in man's heart to thehighest plateau. And yet, this should also bring home toeach of us the gravity of our personal accountability toGod for our actions. If the reason for our being createdas free agents is truly to glorify God by our submission,we must ask ourselves, how well have we carried out ourfunction? God cannot be blamed for our failures, theresponsibility is ours. It is not enough to understandhow Calvinism has perverted the biblical presentationof divine sovereignty. We must make certain at alltimes to live in accordance with that truth we have come to understand. If we do not do this, then howmuch better off are we than the Calvinist?

Page 13

REPENTANCE AND CONFESSION

QUESTION: I recently heard a well known preachersay in a gospel meeting that all the Bible requires in theconfession of an erring child of God is to say "I havesinned." A comparison was made to the alien repentingof his sins in a general way. Must the child of God bespecific in repentance and in confession or will general repentance and confession suffice?—DVR

ANSWER: The answer to the above question canhardly be determined or appreciated without a clearunderstanding of 1 John 1:9, which reads:

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just

to forgive our sins, and to cleanse us of all

unrighteousness."

The verse begins with the word "If." This makes for-giveness conditional. Obviously, the condition is that"we confess our sins." It should be noted that the condi-tion is not "If we confess sin." Again, it is not "If weconfess that we have sinned." It reads plainly "If weconfess our sins" (plural). The use of the plural ("sins")does not mean that one must be guilty of more than onesin before confession is in order, but it does mean thatwhatever one is guilty of is the thing that must beconfessed. This throws a great deal of light on the ques-tion submitted.

Furthermore, the word "confess" is significant andenlightening. The Greek word for confess is "Homolo-geo" and is defined as follows: "(a) to confess, declare,admit, John 1:20; e.g., Act 24:14; Heb. 11:13; (b) toconfess by way of admitting oneself guilty of what oneis accused of, the result of inward conviction, 1 John 1:9;

(c) to declare openly by way of speaking out freely, suchbeing the effect of deep conviction of facts, Matt. 7:23,

10:32 ..." (.W. E. Vine, EXPOSITORY DICTIONARYOF NEW TESTAMENT WORDS).

In the light of the full definition of "confess," we mustconclude that forgiveness demands that one "speak outfreely" the "inward conviction" of guilt. Since this"speaking out" (confession) is not the fact of guilt, butrather the thing of which one is guilty, it follows thatone has knowledge of the guilt confessed. This excludessins of ignorance from consideration here.

This does not mean that a child of God must confess specifically every sin of which he may be guilty. Hisconfession may be generic to a degree and still comply with the demands of our text. For example, one mayconfess dishonesty in the realm of business transac-tions without recalling and naming in particular everyact of dishonesty involved. He would be confessing more than the fact of sin; he would be confessing whathe was guilty of, namely, "dishonesty in business"without identifying all the specifics of the genus. If one were guilty of wholesale apostasy, then that is what heshould confess, without naming all the specifics. Onemight be guilty of "riotous living," as the prodigal sonof Lk. 15. If so, one could confess the same withoutnaming all the specifics of the genus. If one's sin weremore limited, so should his confession be. All suchwould comply with the demands of our text.

Concerning "repentance," it, too, demands a greatdeal of study. It should be obvious that repentanceshould precede the confession of 1 John 1:9, otherwise,it would be a hollow mockery. Repentance is a conditionof forgiveness to both the alien and the child of God(Acts 2:38, 8:22). But what does repentance involve?

Basically, repentance involves a "change of mind"

(W. E. Vine). This is confirmed in the parable of the twosons (Matt. 21:28, 29). The father said to the first,"Son, go work today in my vineyard." Verse twenty ninegives his response, "He answered and said, I will not: but afterwards he repented and went." Obviously, the son changed his mind, and by obeying his father's command brought forth the fruits of repentance.

The repentance that is related to the confession of 1John 1:9 necessarily involves a change of mind withrespect to that of which one is guilty. A good questionto consider here is: How can one change his mind aboutany guilt of which he is not aware? In fact, such a personwould not change his mind or turn from his guilt, butlikely would continue in it. The very nature of repent-ance demands a knowledge of that of which one repents.The child of God is called upon to repent of and confessthat of which he is guilty. This involves the specifies ofthe genus sin, i.e., specific enough to identify what he isguilty of.

The repentance of an alien is somewhat different. Thedifference is found in the object from which he turns orof which he repents. His repentance is not related to aconfession of sins. This is not a part of God's law ofpardon for an alien. The alien is in a state of alienation, and is a rebel against the divine authority by which onebecomes a child of God. He must be brought to a knowl-edge of his guilt—see himself as a sinner—and turn fromdisobedience to obedience. His repentance relates to thewhole genus of sin without necessarily recalling all theparticular instances of sin in his life. His repentance issomewhat like that of a child of God guilty of wholesaleapostasy (mentioned earlier in this article). There is afirm resolve in his heart to henceforth live in submission to the divine will. However, after one becomes a child ofGod, whenever he sins he must obtain forgiveness ac-cording to God's second law of pardon, namely, repent-ance, confession, and prayer (1 John 1:9; Jas. 5:16; Acts8:22).

Paul instructed young Timothy saying, "Take heedunto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them:for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and themthat hear thee" (1 Tim. 4:16). As Timothy would bepreaching to others about how they were to live, he wasto consider himself as well. He was to take heed unto the things he taught. Paul is simply saying "practice whatyou preach!"

Too often those who preach God's word do not takeheed to their doctrine. That is what is under consider-ation in Matt. 7:1-5. Jesus said, "Judge not, that ye benot judged" (v. l). He is not saying it is wrong to con-demn someone, but you really don't have that rightwhen you are guilty of the same things. Jesus furthersaid, "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thybrother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is inthine own eye?" Nothing wrong with trying to removethe mote out of your brother's eye. Yet when you have abeam in yours, who are you to say anything? Such aperson is called a "hypocrite" (v.5).

The Jews of Romans 2 had the same problem. Theywere ones who would point their fingers at the Gentilesand cry, "Oh, what sinners!" They would instruct theGentiles in the right way (vs. 21-23). Nevertheless Paulsaid, "Therefore thou art inexcusable O man, whoso-ever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgestanother, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judgestdoest the same things" (v. l). They were not practicing what they preached. Believe it or not, theydid the same things that they condemned. Paul goes onto give some examples of this serious problem. "Thou that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thouthat preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal"(v.21)? They preached against adultery, yet they committed the same (v.22). They abhorred idols (in their teaching), however they committed sacrilege(v.22). They would boast of the law and yet by their actions dishonor God. What's the point? THEY DIDNOT PRACTICE WHAT THEY PREACHED!

Now what kind of an effect would that have on the Gentiles whom they were trying to teach? Would theGentiles just ignore their practices and follow theirteaching? Paul answered that saying, "For the name ofGod is blasphemed among the Gentiles THROUGHYOU, as it is written" (Rom. 2:24, emphasis mine DVR).Israel could have no influence on the Gentiles as long asthey lived as they did. This is no doubt why the Gentiles

did not come to salvation (as a whole) until these Jews

had been cast off (Rom. 9,10,11,12,30). Would you listen

to someone who doesn't endeavor to practice what he

preaches?

Preachers, like everyone else, need to examine them

selves, whether they be in the faith (2 Cor. 13:5) If

preachers would judge (examine) themselves, then they

would not be judged (condemned) (1 Cor. 11:31).

Let us consider just a few areas wherein preachers

need to take heed unto their teaching.

1. Pride and Arrogance: All preachers at some timeor another will find themselves teaching the Bibletruths along this line (1 Pet. 5:5-6). It seems that we canso boldly tell others about how their pride is a great sin.Yet sometimes preachers can seem to be the most arro-gant people of all. Because the work involved in preach-ing the gospel requires constant studying and a goodknowledge of the Bible, preachers can easily look downtheir noses at those who have less knowledge than they.Are we willing to preach before large numbers but turnup our noses at the invitation to preach and work withthe handful of brethren who meet in a rented hall? I see some preachers who can deliver excellent lessons on theChristian's attitude toward criticism, and then swell upwhen someone questions a point in their lesson. Wesometimes urge people to discuss the Bible with us andshow us where we are wrong. Then when they do, weoften act as if we are infallible.
2. Jealousy: Nearly every gospel preacher that hasbeen preaching very long has at one or another taught alesson on envy and jealousy. That is as it should be forthe Bible condemns such (Gal. 5:19-21; Rom. 1:29-32; 1Pet. 2:1). If there were a problem of this nature in a localcongregation, the preacher would naturally becomeconcerned and "lather up" a lesson on the evils of jeal- ousy. In this also, preachers are not exempt from sucha sin. It is possible to envy the success of anotherpreacher, his number of converts, his number of meet-ings, his influence or even his ability. Naturally theenvious hearted preacher will be tempted to defame thecharacter and influence of his brother. Preachers should rejoice at another preacher's success (Rom. 12:15).
3. Worship in Spirit: Jesus commanded that we wor-ship in spirit as well as in truth (Jno. 4:24). That is, weare to worship Him from the heart, inwardly as well asgoing through the motions (cf. Rom. 2:28-29; 1 Cor.14:15). We as preachers need to warn the members ofthe body of Christ about the dangers of merely going through the acts of worship and not thinking upon whatis taking place and having our minds centered upon theproper thoughts. Yet we too can find ourselves thinkingon our sermons, etc. during the songs, prayer or Lord's Supper. Just because I am about to get up and deliver alesson doesn't mean that I don't have to worship inspirit like the rest of my brethren.
4. Fornication: Fornication is a common problem insociety and in the church as well. It is nothing uncom-mon to hear of an "affair" going on between those whoare supposed to be the backbone of the church. Whensuch is the case, any preacher who thought much of the

Page 15

charge that has been given him would "lay it on hard"concerning what the Bible said about this sin (Gal. 5:19-21). However, preachers need to take heed and be care-ful of their actions and where they go without theirwives lest they be guilty of the same. It is no longershocking to hear reports of some preacher who is alsoengaged in an "affair". (I actually prefer to call it "forni-cation" or "sin".) When such is the case we are no betterthan those Jews who would teach the Gentiles not to commit adultery and yet they did the very same thing(Rom. 2:22). Preachers, lets all take heed to the doc-trine!

1. Divorce: There are about as many divorces asthere are marriages, even among "Christians". We aspreachers find ourselves teaching what the Bible saysabout divorce (Mt. 19:9; 5:32). We warn that it is a sin,and try our best to keep couples together. And yet, asyou can guess, a good number of preachers have passedbefore the judge in a divorce court. Some for reasonsother than fornication. Would you be willing to listen tosuch a man as he labors to tell you what the Bible saysabout the sin of divorce?
2. Time and consideration given to family: Any manthat is married and has children is obligated to give hisfamily much consideration. He cannot come and go ashe pleases or constantly stay away from home and be agood husband and father. What preacher wouldn't seek to correct the brother who ignored his wife and chil-dren? What would he say to the father who doesn't have time to spend with his children to make sure theyare guided in the right way? And yet preachers at timescan be the world's worst at the proper treatment of thefamily. Their wives get mighty lonesome while theirhusbands spend many many hours on the road in meet- ings and in the study. Children often wonder why daddy can't spend a little time at home. I have personallywatched preacher's children beg their dad to just takefive or ten minutes to answer a question or throw a ball,while he repeatedly refused. Preachers seem always tohave time to straighten out everyone else's family prob-

lems but their own. Preachers, lets continue to preachon the home and family relationships, but lets apply a little at home when we do.

On we could go making application of this principle.The point is: PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH! Bean example of the believers (1 Tim. 4:12). In so doing you not only save yourself, but also those that hear (1Tim. 4:16). Otherwise both may be lost (Rom. 2:23).

Send all News Items to: Connie W. Adams, P.O. Box 69, Brooks, KY 40109

LECTURESHIP IN RIVERDALE, MARYLAND There will be congregational singing from 7:15-7:30 each night andWILSON ADAMS, 6334 Auburn Ave., Riverdale, MD 20737—also from 8:05 to 8:15. We invite all who have the opportunity to beThe Wildercroft church of Christ in suburban Washington, D.C. will with us during this week (a week normally noted by Washingtonians

be having a special series of sermons the week of April 9-13 onas being Cherry Blossom week) to worship and praise God. Our mem

"Striving As Saints." The speakers will be Connie W. Adams andbers will be more than happy to open their homes to folks from otherHarry Pickup, Jr. At 7:30 each night Connie W. Adams will present a places. For more information please phone me at 301-474-8133/474series on Colossians—Completeness in Christ: The Preeminence of7460. Christ; Christ In You, The Hope of Glory; Established In The Truth;The New Man; and Complete in Christ. At 8:15 each night HarryFIELD REPORTS Pickup, Jr. will speak on 1 and 2 Peter—Living As A Saint In A JOHN GERRARD, 639 E. 56th St., Indianapolis, IN 46220—After

Modern World: The World In Which We Live; Becoming a Saint; Thefour years with the church in Hamilton, Ohio (my second full-timeTesting of the Saint; Saints Demonstrating the Excellencies of God;work with them), I have moved back to Indianapolis. I will be availa"Receiving the End of Your Faith... In A Little While." ble for preaching appointments in the area and for some meeting work.

JODY BROYLES, 375 S. 6th St., St. Helens, OR 97051—In March of this year my family and I will begin work with the church inBremer-ton, Washington. We have been with the St. Helens churchsince January, 1982. During that time there have been 13 souls addedto the body for which we thank God. There is much more that can andwill be done in the future. The brethren at St. Helens will need a preacher to labor full-time with them. The congregation consists of35 members and can offer partial support. Phone 503-397-6766, orMark Wingfield at 397-0668. Or write the church. 1911 ColumbiaBlvd., St. Helens, OR 97051

GOOD NEWS PROM AFAR

RAY VOTAW, Box 801, Springs 1560, South Africa—"Holiday" peri-

ods are always busy times among the blacks in southern Africa.

Brethren who live and work in the urban areas use this time well to

return to their villages in the homelands to preach the gospel. Usually

during these periods I travel with these brethren to these village areas.

Over the Christmas season just passed I took Eric Reed and Hendrik

Jourbert (up from the Cape) along with Ephraim Radebe and went into

Kwandebele for preaching work. I thrilled to hear these good men tell

the "old, old story" so effectively among these Swazis. Some were

baptized and the churches were certainly strengthened. One very

promising young man from Tembisa in this area was baptized in the

efforts there.

The church in Alra Park is making good progress on their new

building—the first to be constructed by a non-white church in South

Africa. The building will seat comfortably around 200, has been

built by the members and without any indebtedness. They should be

in this . new house by June of this year.

BrotherPaul Williams did a very fine job of exposing the error of the

Moslems and teaching the truth concerning the resurrection of Jesus

Christ in his recent debate with Ahmed Deedat. There were between

two and three thousand present at the stadium where the discussion

took place and there was rapt attention. Although Mr. Deedat ignored

Pauls affirmation the gospel was simply and powerfully presented.

Christians from as far afield as Zimbabwe to the north and Capetown

to the south were present for the debate, but the Muslim people were

by far in the majority.

REPORT ON TRIP TO COLUMBIA

ROYCE CHANDLER, 3891 Bunnell Rd., Lebanon, OH 45036— I have just returned from 11 days in Columbia and am happy toreport the churches in Bogota and in Manizales are doing well.Herman Genton, an elder with the Lockland church in Cincinnati, went with me, as that church has had a strong and consistentinterest in those works for several years.

BOGOTA: There had been reports of some possibly severe problemsrelative to the idea that apostolic examples and necessary inferencesare not binding as a part of the law of God for us today. Two or three ofthe young men had been studying this issue and we were fearful thatthey might reject these two means by which the Lord has revealed His will, but I am happy to report that after several hours of discussion onthese things, that these men expressed their acceptance of the things I taught and said that we were all in agreement that these things are all means of divine revelation and, therefore, cannot be ignored or re-jected as means by which we establish authority. The last night of mystay there, Santiago Castro, the full-time preacher there, apologizedfor all the trouble he had caused over the questions he had been raising and for the fears caused in those who have been close to that work over the past six years. We had a delightful week with those brethren.

MANIZALES: another wonderful week with Herman Urdinola and the brethren. He continues to be "the cream of the crop" in my judg-ment so far as overall maturity, stability and Bible study goes. He isdoing a very good work and we rejoice in our visits and studies there.Lord willing, I will leave February 20 for a week in Chile, with EfrainPerez, and then a week in Buenos Aires, Argentina, for a week-long lectureship planned by those brethren. Later in the year I hope to dosome preaching in Puerto Rico or the Dominican Republic.

* * * * * * * * * *

FERNANDO VENEGAS, Casilla 122 C.C., 5500 Mendoza, Argentina—Another soul has been added here by baptism. ValenteRodrigues of Laredo, Texas was with us for three days in November onhis month long trip to Chile.

CARLOS A. CAPELLI, Casilla 83, 1665 Jose C. Paz, Buenos Aires, Argentina—The Lord continues to bless the efforts in Jose C. Paz with two more souls added to the body of Christ. One was formerly aJehovah's Witness and the other formerly a Catholic. The church inBoulogne has been blessed with three more souls converted to Christ.Two of these were Pentecostals. One man came 15 blocks in his wheel chair to be baptized. After Bible studies with the San Miguel church,two persons were baptized. February 20-24 there will be a lectureshipin Presidente Derqui, Buenos Aires with these speakers: Bill Reeves,Royce Chandler, Efrain Perez, Marcos Morgan, Ivan Valdez, RaulCaro, Roberto Perez, Nestor Sanchez, Fernando Venegas, Waldo San-chez, Tommy Holly.

CAN YOU HELP? DEAN BULLOCK, P.O. Box 35, Nacogdoches, TX 75963-0035—The Northside church in Georgetown, Texas, began meeting some three or four years ago. They began with eight persons and nownumber about twenty. Their collection averages about $200 perweek. They are sound in the faith and zealous for the cause. The Georgetown area is growing. Roy Fields, a retired military man,recently moved there to work with them. The local church providesabout $300 a month. The bulk of his support comes from faithfulchurches elsewhere. Three in the immediate area (Wonsley Dr.,Austin; Oaks-West, Burnet; and Southside, Temple).

The Georgetown brethren have no central meeting place. They wererenting a place but had to vacate it, and have been unable to rent orlease anything else. They are meeting in homes, but every house is farfrom where they need to be. They have about $7,000 for a downpayment on lots and are searching for a suitable location. A few contributions from individuals would mean much to them. Address: Northside Church of Christ, c/o Bill Kenas, 803 Cavu Rd., George-town, TX 78626.

DEBATE IN PHILIPPINES

Romeo S. Quesada of Ipil, Zamboanga del Sur, Philippines will debate Cyrus Gesulga this spring on Premillennialism. Cyrus Gesulgaseems to be the chief man relied upon by the premillennial folks tosubvert preachers and churches. It is odd to see American premillen-nial churches of Christ aid and encourage a henchman in debatingwhen they would not touch a debate here with a ten foot pole. Here they think it is beneath them. They will hobnob with W. Carl Ketcher-side and fellowship the Christian Church and fraternize with the sec-tarians freely. But they could not get very far in the Philippines unless they are willing to publicly debate their cause. I suppose necessity isthe mother of invention. An all-out effort is being made to infiltrate as many churches in Mindanao as possible. Thank God for faithful menwho are willing to stand up for the truth and be counted.

ITALIAN PREACHER NEEDS SUPPORT

DUDLEY ROSS SPEARS, Rt. 1, Box 121A, Alvaton, KY 42122-Brother Francesco Fosci is a very capable dedicated young man whowants to devote his entire time the remainder of his life to preaching the gospel. At present, he is able and willing, but must limit thepreaching he does in order to support his family. He has a wife and twochildren. He comes highly recommended by brethren Rudolfo Berdini,Allesandro Corazza, Roberto Tondelli and this writer. Any congrega-tion who is able and wants to support a worthy work should giveserious consideration to supporting this man. His address: FrancescoFosci Via Leopardi, 5 0411 APRILIA (LATINA) Italy Or you maywrite to: Rudolfo Berdini

Via Giusepee Perego

58-H

00144 Roma

Italy

Page 17

The faithful brethren now at work in Italy are men of good characterand are doing as much or more as is being done anywhere on the globe.I urge brethren to consider helping this man add to the work force inItaly.(Editor's note: I also know brother Fosci and highly recommend him.He is mature in the faith, well prepared in study and practical experi-ence and badly needed on a full-time basis.)

DAVID FRASER AT REST

David Fraser (age 48) succumbed to a malignant brain tumor onDecember 2, 1983. About two years ago he began work with theMiddleground Rd. church in Savannah, Georgia. In May X-rays re-vealed the tumor and an operation confirmed the severity of his condi-tion. On November 27 he lapsed into a coma and died the same week.He was married to Judy Tate of Bessemer, Alabama and preachedthere for two years. His was a brilliant mind with a phenomenalmemory of the scriptures and a fine, clear voice to deliver the word of God in the many meetings and congregations where he proclaimed the word of God for 28 years. Judy is left with three children: Jonathan(15), Hamilton (11) and Elizabeth (8). They presently live at 933 BlackWeiner Rd., Savannah, GA 31419.

The funeral was conducted in Bessemer by E. Ray Coates withHuey Hartsell and David Tant assisting. A son, a husband, a father, a preacher, a saint has departed this life and is really missed by all whoknew and loved him.

—E. Ray Coates

DEBATES ROGER L. SHOUSE, P.O. Box 903, Greenwood, IN 46142—April23, 24, 26 and 27 there will be a debate between L.A. Stauffer andBen Vick. April 23 and 24 the sessions will be held at the ShelbyvilleRd. Church of Christ in Indianapolis and will concern direct support to an evangelist and also the sponsoring church arrangement. On April 26-27 the sessions will be held at Greenwood Church of Christwith the subject being church support of orphan homes. For furtherinforma-tion call 888-8288.

HILLSBORO, ALABAMA—A public debate on "Unconditional Salvation" will be conducted on March 12-13 and 15-16, 1984, between Eddie K. Garret (Primitive Baptist) and Thomas N. Thrasher (Christian). This will be the third debate between thesemen since 1971. The sessions will be held in the building of thePiney Chapel Church of Christ, Alabama Highway 20 (Alternate U.S.72), Hillsboro, Alabama. This is about 8 miles west of Decatur. Sessions begin at 7:30 P.M. For additional information, call 205-353-3085.

PREACHERS NEEDED HARRISON, OHIO—Congregation seeks a faithful gospel preacher.We are a small work located 15-20 miles west of Cincinnati. We can provide partial support and would assist in locating possible sourcesof outside support. We especially are interested in someone with per-sonal work skills. For more information contact: Jim Farris, 102 Circle Dr., Harrison, OH 45030. Phone 513-367-6153.

SHEBOYGAN FALLS, WISCONSIN—Mature preacher needed for a challenging work. Contact: Church of Christ, c/o Mabrey Tayse, Route 1, Bridgewood Rd., Sheboygan Falls, WI 53085.

FRED R. SMITH, P.O. Box 31, Telford, TN 37690—I will be lookingfor a new location as of April 1, 1984, Anyone interested may contactme at the above address or call 615-257-6215.

-----EDITORIAL LEFT-OVERS-----A NAGGING QUESTION

After six months of sowing seed without seeing any harvest inNorway in the late 1950's we rejoiced in the interest of a young manwho became the firstfruits of that work. In the course of our study oneday, he fixed his gaze on me and asked me a question which terrifiedme then and yet disturbs me. He said "If you are teaching the truth,and it is clear that you are, then I am lost and so are all my country-men. WHY HAVE YOU WAITED SO LONG TO COME AND TELL US?" He accepted my answer but I am not sure it satisfied me. For along time I awakened in the night thinking about it.

All right, brethren, I'll just drop it on the rest of you. WHY AREWE WAITING SO LONG TO PREPARE AND SEND MEN TO REACH THE LOST OF THIS WORLD? While there are native preachers at work in Canada, India, South Africa, Nigeria, Italy, thePhilippines, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Columbia and perhaps a fewother places, do you realize how pitifully few men are currently in thefields of the world from this country? If I am correctly informed, wehave about 7% of the world's population and yet about 90% of whatgospel preaching is being done to that 7%. Why is this? How manymen are preparing to go? How many congregations are seeking men tosend and sustain in this work?

Before you lay this down and dismiss the question from your mind,just exactly what would you have said to that young man in Norway ifhe had put that question to you?

**********

MEN OF CONVICTION

The great need of this, or any, hour is men of conviction. Men whoknow the truth, have counted the cost of discipleship and who cannotbe intimidated, bought off or discouraged. Men who would rather dig ditches or work in a rice paddy, or as a carpenter's helper to keep lifeand limb together than to sell their souls to the highest bidder and bepampered by rich worldlings who have itching ears and desire onlyenough religion to appear respectable. Where ears itch, there areusually scratchers who are waiting to be hired. We had a down homeexpression for that in Virginia when I was a boy. We called such an one"anybody's dog that would hunt with him."

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMS RESTORATIONS

		262
		79

(Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)