WHY DOES CROSSROADS TEACH ONE THING PUBLICLY AND PRACTICE ANOTHER?
Why does the Crossroads church of Christ teach onething publicly on a given subject and practice some-thing else on the same subject? There is sufficient docu-mented evidence to show both what Crossroads claims as doctrine and what she practices. The preacher at Crossroads is Charles "Chuck" Lucas and what he saysfairly well represents the church. If you have read theprevious articles that will be understood.
So many have written so much on every phase of theCrossroads system that it will not be my objective inthis article to discuss the various issues I mention to show the contrast between doctrine and practice.
I want to be as honest and fair as possible. I do notwant to misrepresent Chuck Lucas or Crossroads and thatreligious movement anywhere. But it is a fact that ChuckLucas, the elders and teachers at Crossroads, and Crossroads trained preachers teach and preach one thingand practice another on many subjects. Some-times thisinvolves something they preach against, but theypractice; sometimes they teach to do something and do not do it. This is the nature of the matter I am discussing.
Charles G. Goodall wrote a good booklet called The Crossroads Heresy In The Light of The Scriptures, in which he observed that there was a "wide discrepancybetween the reports of those presently in the Cross-roadssystem in contrast with that of those formerly associatedwith it." (page 2).
Charles Goodall reports a meeting he and the elders atNebraska Avenue had with Martin Bentley, preacher atSunrise church in Tampa, and four Sunrise leaders to discuss some of their practices. He said, "Their strategywas exactly as I had appraised the elders it would be;they categorically denied every indictable facet of theirpractice. Crossroads brethren have consistently done thiswhenever challenged." (page 4).
Crossroads is not the only religious system that isguilty of this sin. Many of those who will read these lines and approve every word against the Crossroadsdoctrine and practice will be guilty of the very thingwhich I am discussing. Perhaps not in the same area, buthaving to do with the authority of Christ and the obedience of the word of God.
Those churches who are involved in church support oforphan homes, homes for the aged, homes for unwed mothers, day schools, colleges, hospitals, and a dozen other social, medical, educational and recreational ac-tivities will argue long and loud that they accept NOauthority but the word of God. They claim that theybelieve the Bible is verbally inspired and the only source ofauthority. They will say, "We speak where the Bible speaks, and are silent where the Bible is silent." That iswhat they preach! But if that be true, what is all this thatI see and hear about these human organizationssupported from the church treasuries to do "works" thatthe Bible says not one word about by direct command orstatement, necessary conclusion or Bible ex-ample?
If you are wondering why many of the liberal churches are so vicious in their attack against Cross-roads, it is in part because they are more advanced intheir technique than most others. Besides, Crossroads hasbeen somewhat "unorthodox" from the liberal point of viewin their work. They have maintained an indepen-dent, highlyorganized operation, and are more success-ful in numericalgrowth than most of these others, and they are reacting.
What Crossroads Teaches versus What She Practices:
In November, 1981 Charles Lucas published "ANOPEN LETTER To the Brotherhood of Churches of Christ" in the Firm Foundation. In this Open LetterLucas listed some things he said, "I strongly believe..."
This Open Letter was as much a defense of the Cross-roads church as it was of himself. I want to state a few of these and point to the common practice of Cross-roads.
- "The gospel is the power of God for salvation—notany method, program or merit of man."
- I am in complete agreement with that statement. Ibelieve it is exactly what the Bible teaches (Rom. 1:16;Gal. 1:6-9; 2 Thess. 1:7-9). But in practice the Cross-roads evangelistic programs of Campus Ministry andpreacher training for the spread of the Crossroads phi-losophy is more important than the gospel. The "meth-ods" of "soul-talks," "workshops" and "seminars" which serve more for indoctrination of the system thangospel preaching, are deemed essential. This is the evi-dence of their practice.
- "Total commitment to Christ as our Saviour and Lord is expected of every Christian."
I believe that statement as it stands represents whatthe New Testament teaches on the subject. But in prac-tice it is not to Christ as Saviour and Lord that Cross-roads teachers and disciples are "totally committed"; it is to the system of Crossroads and its philosophy, aswell as its leaders. They demand and get total commit-ment.
Do not be mislead: Crossroads' "total commitment" is not in practice what Lucas claims for it in publicteaching. I have carefully read several reports and pa-pers from those who left Crossroads, and I have readtwo or three in defense of the system. I believe I under-stand fairly well what each side says, and the bottomline is: Crossroads preaches one thing, which Chuck Lucas, the elders and the leading element try to defendfrom the Bible, and practice another, which nearly all,both in and out of the system, who will talk about thesubject, will agree is different.
To be "totally committed" to a form of doctrine and ahuman organization to promote it, as Crossroads church is, is far from being "totally committed" to Christ as our Saviour and Lord. The later will result in unity of the faith which will not allow us to be divided asCrossroads is separated from others.
3. "The Bible alone is the inspired and authoritativeWord of God."
That is exactly what the Bible teaches. It is not onlyinspired; it is VERBALLY (word for word) inspired. (1Cor. 2:9-13; Acts 2:4; Matt. 10:19,20; Rev. 22:18,19). Itis not only authoritative, it is COMPLETELY andFULLY authoritative (2 Tim. 3:16,17; Jude 3). It would be interesting to see an article from the pen of ChuckLucas on the verbal inspiration of the Bible and thecomplete and final revelation from God in it.
4. "Real church growth should not and will not occurthrough appeals of entertainment, recreation or human-istic psychology but only through the power of thegospel."
I agree with this statement as being based in Bible truth. But again, the statement is one thing and the practice is another. The fact is Crossroads does depend
(Continued on Page 4)
THE WORD OF THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL
From the place of his imprisonment in Rome, Paulwrote a letter to the church at Colosse, a place where hehad not personally preached. These citizens of the Ly-cos Valley had become citizens of the kingdom of God'sdear Son (Col. 1:13). Paul was thankful for their faith.He wrote "Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus,and of your love which ye have for all the saints, For thehope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof yeheard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; andbringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the dayye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth" (Col.1:4-6).
It is interesting that in this passage several divineprinciples are tied together. They had faith in Christ,love to all the saints, hope of heaven, and had come toknow the grace of God. But notice that none of thatcould be enjoyed apart from "the word of the truth of the gospel." Indeed, "Faith comes by hearing, and hear-ing by the word of God" (Rom. 10:17). There is a "hear-ing of faith" (Gal. 3:2). Later in Colossians 1, Paul spokeagain of "the hope of glory" but hastened to connectthat hope with the message which he preached: "Whomwe preach, warning every man, and teaching every manin all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect inChrist Jesus" (Col. 1:27-28). You will observe also that"the grace of God" is something which they "knew... intruth."
We are living in an age of subjectivism. Too many arelooking within themselves for satisfying answers to thenagging questions of human existence. Forgotten is theprecept stated long ago by Jeremiah "O Lord, I knowthat the way of man is not in himself: it is not in manthat walketh to direct his steps" (Jer. 10:23). The hu-manist philosophy is that whatever we choose voluntar-ily from alternatives, having considered the conse-quences, is right for us and that we ought to prize thatchoice and assert it to the point of making it a pattern ofconduct. This is what is meant by "values clarification"in education today.
Denominationalism has, for many years, placed em-phasis on religion that is "better felt that told." Greatstore has been placed by being satisfied with religiousfaith and practice, assuming that whatever is sincerelydone must be right. Many have relied upon subjective"feelings" as the evidence of salvation whether the word of God taught it or not.
Much is said about salvation by grace through faith.That is Bible doctrine and is certainly taught in Eph. 2:8-10. But God's truth on any subject is the sum totalof all he said on the matter. The passage from Colos-sians 1 shows that there is a "word of truth" by whichthings may be determined and that word of truth is inthe gospel. So then, the final measure of truth in the spiritual realm is the gospel of Christ. Every doctrineand practice must be measured by that standard. TheHoly Spirit was to guide the apostles into "all truth"(Jno. 16:13). If the Lord did not teach it and the HolySpirit did not move the apostles and prophets to preachit or write it, then it is not part of "the word of the truthof the gospel." And since God proposes to save all men,Jew and Greek alike, by the gospel (Rom. 1:16-17), thenif it is not in the gospel there is no salvation in it. If it isnot a part of salvation then it becomes a source ofdamnation. That is why we must not go beyond "whatis written" (1 Cor. 4:6; 2 Jno. 9-10).
We all need a warning here. It is not our right to offer pardon to an alien sinner on less terms than God hasprovided in "the word of the truth of the gospel." Nei-ther is it our right to offer pardon to an erring child of God on less terms that the word of God directs. In either case we have acted presumptuously and have not benefited our hearers in the least. All the fallen trees on the way to the baptistery and suddenly stepping infront of unexpected trucks, or praying soldiers in foxholes, or death bed stories, will not change what theGod of all truth has said. I will leave the right ofclemency in the hands of him who made us all, but Idare not offer it unless I can put my finger on it in "theword of the truth of the gospel." Paul said the secretsof men will be judged "according to my gospel" (Rom.2:16) and exactly there I propose to leave the matter.I can do no other without intruding into a realm whichis not mine. I appeal for others to do likewise.
AUGUST SPECIAL ISSUE
We have been concerned over the past few years to see more and more Christians come to Bible classes with an assortment of the newer translations and paraphrasesof the Bible. I fear that many are depending entirely onsome of these for their Bible study without understand-ing the danger involved. Certainly there is some valueto be gained by comparing different translations on apassage. We believe that, regardless of what some havesaid, the best and safest translations of the Bible are still the King James Version and the American Stan-dard Version. These are based on the Textus Receptusand have been declared by all concerned to be the mostaccurate and exact English translations available. Infact, proponents of some of the newer translations havecriticized these two versions for being "too mechani-cally exact." Well, I would prefer to be as exact aspossible in studying the word of God.
Unless some study is given to this matter, we aregoing to soon have a generation which is Biblicallyilliterate and which has absorbed much error due to faulty translations. One of the versions we see more andmore people using is the NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. We think this version has serious flaws and that it teaches outright error in a number of instances.Those who produced it have defended their right tocomment in the text as well as to translate. This is extremely dangerous. For instance, they translated theword SARX, rendered "flesh" in reliable translations,with the words "sinful nature" on 25 occasions. Theydid it 9 times in Romans 8 and 6 times in Gal. 5. This is inexcusable and actually is blatant Calvinism.
Dorris V. Rader and his son Donnie V. Rader have done a considerable amount of work on the NIV and we are going to publish their material in the August issueof this paper. There will also be related articles byformer editor H.E. Phillips and the present editor ofthis paper. We believe the material is such that manybrethren might want to consider extra copies of thisedition to put in the hands of members where you wor-ship. If so, we would appreciate some indication of yourinterest so we might be able to better project the num-ber of copies we will need to print. This material needsas wide circulation as" possible.
(Continued from Page 1)
upon the Crossroads Singers and other forms of enter-tainment for "church growth." Do not be naive; if all thesocial and entertainment functions were eliminated from Crossroads completely, it would die as far as itspresent reputation is concerned. The very things thatLucas says will not make real church growth are the things that make Crossroads what it is. Thus, it mustnot be "real" church growth.
What Crossroads Teaches Against But Practices:
In the same Open Letter Chuck Lucas gave a list ofthings he says he never believed, taught nor sanctioned.Among these are some things they teach against butpractice.
1. "That every sin of thought or action should or must be confessed to a prayer partner."
Now I have never been in their "prayer-partner" oper-ation, and by actual practice I do not know what is doneor not done. I must take the evidence supplied by othersto draw the conclusions that form my conviction. I havethree sources of testimony: 1) those who have beenprayer partners but are no longer in the system; 2) thosewho are still in the Crossroads church and are prayerpartners, both mature and novices; and 3) the literaturewritten both by Crossroads and those aligned with herand others who have been there as a part of it. Nowwhere would I go to get better evidence? To ChuckLucas or the elders? I am quoting from an Open Letterfrom Chuck Lucas. I know what he says about it. I amsaying that what they preach and teach is one thing,and what the overwhelming evidence shows the prac-tice to be is another.
The junior prayer partner is taught to confess all sinsof deed or mind to the senior prayer partner and seek hishelp and advice as he prays for him. It is so widelypracticed among all of the Crossroads philosophy that Iam amazed that one would deny it.
- "That women may lead men in prayer in the as-semblies of the church."
- I suppose by "assemblies of the church" Lucas meansthe Lord's day morning and evening worship in themain auditorium of the church building. Other assem-blies where men and women are together for worshipand Bible study are excluded because both Lucas and the elders practice it. That is fact I have encountered with some from Crossroads or who have been taughtunder Crossroads influence. These all learned the prac-tice at Crossroads, even though Lucas says he has neverbelieved, taught nor sanctioned it.
- "That the book by Robert Coleman, THE MAS-TER PLAN OF EVANGELISM, or any book otherthan the Bible, should be the basis for our doctrine orpractices in evangelism or personal relationships."
Charles Goodall says in his tract, page 5: "The Sep-tember 21,1975 Crossroads bulletin lists this book to bereviewed in their Campus Ministers Training Program.It does not take a scholar to see that it is the blueprint ofthe Crossroads philosophy. Roger Lamb, a proponentof the Crossroads system, said in a speech promoting the Campus Advance program: 'This is it; this is the plan; it's all in this book.' (He referred to THE MAS-TER PLAN OF EVANGELISM he was carrying in hishand.)11" (Ref. quote from Jackie M. Stearsman, in Con-tending For The Faith, XII, No. 4,12).
In some of the printed material and on cassette tapesof sermons and lectures, Lucas and the elders havedefended the use of Coleman's book in their programs.
4. "That peoples' sins or other confidential matters should or may be freely shared with others in thechurch."
This is the main function of the prayer partner con-cept. The junior partner is urged to confess all of hissins, private and public, to his senior partner in the hopethat he will be relieved of the guilt of sin. He is expectedto seek counsel from the senior partner about all areasof his life, with the promise that he will be made closer tothe Lord and sin less. The attitude and teaching of theleaders and more mature members of a soul-talk groupbring out the confessions and confidential matters of one's life or he soon leaves the class. This is almost a universal report of behavior at these sessions.
5. "That there should be any superior/inferior orjunior/senior concept of spiritual ranking amongChristians."
It is somewhat startling that Chuck Lucas wouldmake this statement when his writings and taped ser-mons and lectures are so filled with the idea of a prayer-partner concept of a mature and young convert as part-ners. If this isn't a "junior/senior concept" I do not know how one would be created. The idea of this ar-rangement is to have "confessions of sins (and it isalways from the weak to the strong, the young to theold, the junior to the senior, the inferior to the superiorin spiritual maturity, it is supposed), and the one whohears the sins can pray for the sinner. Lucas says hedoes not believe this and has never believed it, but hehelped create the prayer-partner arrangement and pro-motes it.
Chuck Lucas concludes this list with the statement that even though he has never believed and taught anyof these things, he is aware that some of them are takingplace. I do not understand why he does not get in thepulpit and denounce all of them. He should call upon hisbrethren at Crossroads to repent and forsake these un-scriptural practices! Over two and a half years havepassed since he wrote this Open Letter in the FirmFoundation and they are still doing all these things Ihave stated in this article. It is a matter of teaching onething in public and practicing another.
The Crossroads system is a false one. The Crossroadsphilosophy is a dangerous one. It is a promised panaceafor apathy and worldliness, but its carnal appeals drawaway disciples after the human rewards of this life. Itsnumerical growth stems from the dynamic personalityof the leadership, the entertainment, the social gospelwith all its empty fruits and rewards, and the individualinvolvement in time and energy consuming programs. And finally the system will fall to rest with all otherschemes and relics of men. God's word will live forever (Matt. 24:35).
I have been amused in recent days by the television commercial in which there is a large bun but only a verylittle beef. Somebody in the back asks several times"Where's the beef?" The thing that makes it interesting isthat, indeed, many times you can hardly find the beef insome of the hamburgers you buy.
But in spiritual matters we also have a question. It ispresented as a caption for this piece. Where's the scrip-ture? I maintain there is absolutely no scripture for thefollowing:
- Where is the scripture for the church helping anykind of a home. Call it the original home, or the substi- tute home, or the restored home, or the legal home, orthe divine home. I don't care what you call it, where isthe scripture for the church supporting it? I say there is none.
- Where is the scripture for a church helping anotherchurch to preach the gospel? Of course, I suppose, wheneach church does all of the preaching it can do they arehelping each other. But I am talking about scripture forone church sending money to another church to preach. Isay there is none.
- Where is the scripture for the church helping any-body but saints. I can read several scriptures that teach churches to help poor saints. But where does the scrip-ture teach churches to help non-saints? I say there is nosuch teaching in the Bible.
- Where is the scripture that instructs churches tobuild and maintain benevolent organizations such asorphan homes? I say there is not such scripture.
- Where is the scripture where two churches everpooled any money to preach the gospel? Two or threethousand are doing it but where is the scripture toauthorize them to do so? I say there is none.
- Where is the scripture for a church to take chargeof another church's money for any purpose whatso-ever? Churches are to assist sister churches in takingcare of their poor saints when they are unable to do sowithout assistance. But where is the scripture for achurch soliciting or otherwise obtaining money to bespent as it is being done among our liberal brethren? Isay there is none.
- Where is the scripture for a church assuming awork which is beyond its ability to pay for? I am nottalking about some kind of a calamity where a churchmight be temporarily short of funds to carry on. I amtalking about assuming a work that it knows it will notbe able to support and who then must solicit help from
other congregations. I say there is no such scripture.
8. In short, where is the scripture for a sponsoring church of any kind, at any time, for any purpose? I saythere is none.
Our brethren have simply overstepped the bounds ofthe Bible and they are completely without chart or com-pass in what they are doing. Most of them have realizedthat and have quit trying to defend what they are doing. We are going to keep on asking where's the beef, I meanwhere's the scripture? Until they find it I am going tocharge that they have gone on and are not abiding in thedoctrine of Christ and that they have not God. See 2 John 9-11.
"TREATY SIGNALS END OF CATHOLICISM AS OFFICIAL STATE RELIGION IN ITALY"
In the closing paragraph of our last article we said,"Ironically, about the time our ambassador to the Vati-can was announced, it was reported that the nation ofItaly and the city of Rome were taking steps to break some relations with the Vatican! They have hadenough, while we are just getting started."
We consider this development to be of great signifi-cance and importance to the two nations and the world,therefore we desire to present additional material forour readers. Under the above heading, the followingarticle appeared in the Arkansas Democrat, a daily newspaper, February 19,1984:
"ROME (AP)—Italy and the Vatican signed a revisedtreaty Saturday that ends the status of the RomanCatholic Church as state religion and reduces the em-phasis on religious instruction in public schools.
"Premier Bettino Craxi, a Socialist, and CardinalAgostino Casaroli, the Vatican's secretary of state,signed the agreement revising the Lateran Pacts thathave been in effect since 1929.
"Pope John Paul II did not attend.
"The revised relationship between church and statecomes at a time of increasing secularity in Italy. Manypractices defy church teaching. Nudity is routine on television programs, surveys show more and more Ital-ian women use contraceptives, and abortion and di-vorce are legal, despite the church's condemnation.
"The signing ceremony at Villa Madama, a Renais-sance palace now used as a government guest house for visiting dignitaries, was broadcast live.
" 'The state and the church are, each in its own area,independent and sovereign,' Casaroli said, borrowingphrases from the new agreement. 'Both collaborate for the promotion of man and the common good.'
"Craxi, standing by his side, added: 'We are closing ina happy way a long and sometimes difficult chapterinvolving the church and state.'
"Negotiations for the revised agreement began in1967.
" 'Catholicism had and continues to have deep roots in the Italian heritage,' said Craxi, Italy's first Socialist premier. He read the entire Concordat, asthe pact is known, to the television audience.
"The 14-article treaty starts by noting the 'process of political and social transformation witnessed in Italyduring the last decades.'
"Under the treaty, Rome loses its status as a 'sacred city' and becomes a capital city of 'particular signifi-cance' for the world's Roman Catholics, who numbermore than 790 million.
"The treaty does not alter the Vatican's status as an independent state run by the pope.
"The agreement says Catholic religious education will continue to be offered in public schools but parents willhave to specifically request it. Now, Italians who do notwant the instruction have to ask for an exemption.
"The Vatican has retained some privileges. For exam-ple, Italian priests will still be exempt from militaryservice and the state cannot take over Catholic churches without approval from church authorities.
"The Vatican will turn over control of Italy's Jewish catacombs to the Italian state. Rome's small Jewish community hopes the state will allow the Jewish cata-combs in the city to be opened to tourists. The Vaticanwill retain control of Italy's Christian catacombs, whichare a popular tourist attraction.
"Before Parliament decides whether to give the pactfinal approval, a special commission has six months tosort out the most complex issues—including the taxexemptions of some charities and religious institutionsnot part of Vatican City or its extra-territorial prop-erty."
We regret that this separation has been caused, atleast in part, by the increase of humanism and immoral-ity among the Italian people. We have the same prob-lem in America.
There's another interesting aspect of this change. Formany years the Catholic Church has tried to convincethe world that Catholicism is the antidote of commu-nism, socialism, and immorality. History and present facts do not support the claim. The truth is, totalitari-anism breeds totalitarianism, and enslavement breedsdefiance. That's what Catholicism is experiencing.
Seven hundred ninety million Catholics in the world!What a task before us! Each of them should be con-verted to pure and simple New Testament Christianity. Of course the majority of those people were madeCatholics without their knowledge or consent. It hap-pened when they were infants.
From the Vatican viewpoint, we have serious doubtsthat this change in relationship between Rome and Ca-tholicism came about "in a happy way."
We would hope that this development in Italy mightbe a warning to America concerning the problems anddangers of entangling alliances with the Vatican.
There are those who want to fellowship everybody nomatter what they do. Men like Carl Ketcherside, andothers, want to fellowship everybody, and I heard Ket-cherside make the statement that any baptized believerwas his brother and, therefore, was in fellowship withhim and he with him. Even though they might be inerror, they were still in fellowship.
III
Well, the word, "fellowship," may be used in differentsenses. We'll have to use it in the light of the context inwhich it appears and in the relationship in which it isused. But from that standpoint he reasons then thatpeople in the so-called Christian Church who brought ininstrumental music without divine authority are to beaccepted in full fellowship because they may be wrongin that, but he says because they have been baptizedback here, and are people who have been baptized intoChrist, he says, then God will not look at their imperfectservice, but He will reach over here and take Christ's perfection and put if over here to their account.
And though they live and die in this erroneous doc-trine and practice which has divided the people of Godand has opened up the door for all kinds of error, Godwon't hold it against them. That is why I'm saying untoyou it's going to produce the doctrine of the impossibil-ity of apostasy among us. And one step leads to an-other.
And he has gone so far now as to say we ought tofellowship even those who have not been baptized, byimmersion, who are believers. Why, the unbaptized hesaid are his brethren in prospect—in prospect. So, weought to go ahead and fellowship them. And it opens upthe door for extending the hand of fellowship to all ofthose who have brought in their institutionalism and all kinds of promotional schemes and have disrupted thepeace and harmony of God's people and have opened thedoor for all of the errors that are now sweeping astrayhundreds and even thousands of people. Because theysay, "Well, after all, they are sincere, and earnest, andGod will just take the perfectness of Christ and put itover here to their account. And he'll go ahead and save them anyhow; he'll impute righteousness unto them."
IV
My friends, I want you to see something of what theBible teaches along that line concerning this matter offellowship. Over in 1 John, chapter 1, John says, "That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, thatye also may have fellowship with us and truly our fel-lowship is with the Father, and with his Son, JesusChrist. And these things write we unto you that yourjoy may be full." Alright, this is why he was writing theletter. And this is what he is writing unto them—what he and his fellow apostles were declaring unto them.
Now then, he goes right ahead to say, "This then isthe message which we have heard of him and declareunto you." Alright, here's the message. Now the fellow-ship that we may have with them is conditioned upon conforming unto the message they were declaring. Themessage is the instrument or the means by and through which they might obtain unto fellowship. Alright, thisthen is the message which we have heard of him and declare unto you, that God is light. In Him is no dark-ness at all."
Now get the message. The message is that God islight. In him is no darkness at all, not one bit. Nowwatch the next statement, which is a conditional sen-tence and the condition, of course, must be consideredand accepted in order for the result to follow. But just assurely as the condition is true, the consequent result isalso true. Now watch it! "If we say we have fellowshipwith him," that is with God, "and walk in darkness, welie and do not the truth." Could you put it any plainerthan that? If we say we have fellowship with God, orwith Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not thetruth.
There are two realms. One of them is the realm of lightand the other is the realm of darkness. So, here is therealm of light. (Draws diagram on chalkboard.) And here is the realm of darkness. Now the realm of light isthe realm in which we walk with God. The realm of darkness is the realm in which we walk in sin. Light stands representative of righteousness. Darkness stands representative of sin. And so, here you havelight and darkness.
Now this is the message. God is light and in him is nodarkness at all, not one bit. Now if we say we havefellowship with God, that is, we are partners with him,we jointly share with him, and walk over here in dark-ness, we lie. He did not soften it by some euphemism,either. He did not say, "We miss it slightly." He didn't say, "We prevaricate." He said, "We lie!" That's justwhat it is, and do not the truth. No man can claim tohave fellowship, partnership with God, be sharing withGod and be walking in darkness. If he does he lies aboutit. That's what the Scripture says. Do you believe theScripture?
Now that just simply means, my friend, we can't getout here as Christians and dabble around in the world and be walking in sin, having our course of conduct, andour way of life, our mode of conduct in sinful practices, no matter what they are. For, fellowship with God de-mands that we walk in the light. Now if we are walkingin darkness and claim fellowship with God, we lie aboutit. That will be the result if that condition is true.
V
Now watch the next passage. "If we walk in the lightas he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanses us fromall sin." Alright, now then, here again you have a condi-tional sentence. "If we walk in the light," but the walk inthe light is to walk in the counsel of God, to walk inrighteousness, to walk with God. That is our mode ofconduct, our way of life, our habit, our procedure, and soif we walk in light as he is in the light, then we havefellowship one with another and the blood of JesusChrist, his Son, cleanses us from all sin.
Now then, the next verse says, "If we say we have nosin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." Now, none of us are perfect. If we say we have no sins,we are deceiving ourselves. We're not deceiving manyother people. I've bumped into a few people in life whoclaim to live sinlessly. They claim that they live withoutever committing a sin of any kind. And so John says, "Ifwe say we have no sin (there is your condition), wedeceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." There is your consequent result. So, we cannot claim to be with-out sin.
But, now then, notice the next statement, "If we confess our sins," here is your next conditional clause,"If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgiveour sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."The forgiveness of our sins and cleansing from un-righteousness is conditioned upon our confession of our sins. And our confession of sins is conditioned upon therecognition of the fact that we have sinned, but ourcleansing by the blood of Christ is conditioned upon our not continuing to walk in sin or in darkness. And wecannot continue to walk in it and claim fellowship withGod, without lying. Now those are simple sentences ifwe will just look at them and accept them for what they are.
Furthermore, an interesting thing that is noted hereis that the tense of all these verbs here is what is called,"present tense." And in the original language in whichthe New Testament was written, which was the Greeklanguage, tense does not have nearly as much to do withtime as it does in English, but rather places the empha-sis upon the stated condition of action. Only in theindicative mode does it have to do with time and even then it is not the primary point of emphasis.
Now in the "present tense," the state or kind of actionis "durative action," that is, it is "continuative action,"going on and on and on. It is continuative. But there isanother tense called, "aorist tense," which is called,"point action." And so it has to do with just a point.And it comprises the entirety of the action. When itbegan, when it ended, how long it continued is not setforth in that tense. It is simply the action of undefined,but the action considered is a point.
VI
Alright, now I want us to notice some things here. Ifwe say we are having (that is present tense, continua-tive action), we are continuing to have fellowship withGod, and we are walking, continuing to walk in dark-ness, we are lying. Just as long as we are claiming tohave fellowship with God and as long as we are walking in darkness, we are lying. But if we are walking, (presenttense, continuative action), if we are continuing to walk in the light as He is in the light, then we are having(continuing to have), fellowship one with another andthe blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, is cleansing (continu-ing to cleanse), from all sin.
The blood of Christ continues to cleanse us from sin just as long as we continue to walk in the light as he is inthe light. When we cease walking in the light, then theblood of Christ ceases cleansing us from our sin. Butyet, it may be said that we are not without sin, and thatis true, if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves andthe truth is not in us. But we cannot continue in that sin. We cannot continue to walk in it and still have the cleansing blood of Christ.
Sin may sometimes invade our lives in the moment ofweakness or sudden temptation but continuative action is prohibited. We cannot continue in it day after day,week after week and month after month and year afteryear and still be constantly being cleansed by the bloodof Christ. For the cleansing is commensurate with the continuing to walk in the light. That's what the passage is teaching.
Now then, one might commit a sin over here, pointaction, and not continue in it, finding himself guilty ofsin, stop it right there, quit it. But then he is to confesshis sins. So if we are confessing our sins, He is faithfuland just to forgive us of our sins and to cleanse us fromall unrighteousness.
—To be continued
WHAT THE BEER COMMERCIALS DON'T SAY
Advertising is the most obvious symbol of free capi-talism. It symbolizes competition and, ideally, allowsthe consumer to be a smarter buyer, It's all around us. Billboards, match-book covers, on buses and taxis,park benches, even American graffiti is a form ofadvertising. But the media is the giant of the advertising industry, Radio, television, and newspapercapture most of the advertising dollar in America.
Media advertising has become very sophisticatedduring the last several years. Talented writers, musi-cians, actors, and production experts have joined forcesto produce works of art in twenty-second vignetteswhich not only capture your attention, but tug at yourheart strings (remember the "Mean Joe Green" com-mercial?). In such a short time they can set the stage,tell the story, and tempt the buyer. Anyone not im-pressed with the finely tuned abilities of today's elec-tronic media has not been watching it.
Perhaps the cleverest of all today's commercials are being done by the beer companies. Even those of us whowould never use the product are amused by their com-mercials. The ability of the producers to paint a picture of and thereby appeal to the average worker is astound-ing. They can make any profession seem as if it is the most important job around. And every holiday seasonthe air waves are saturated with timely and beautiful pictures of family and friends, warm fires, and the spiritof togetherness. And who has not felt chills of excite-ment at the sight of beautiful horses pulling sleighs ofhappy people through the snow-laden country side atdusk, passing lighted houses half-buried in the newfallen snow, and gliding effortlessly toward the small village and on to the country home elaborately adornedin the decorations of the season. The comedy of theircommercials ranges from subtle innuendoes to vaude-ville slapstick and is done with flawless capability.Some of the most entertaining moments on televisionare the beer commercials. Actually, there's more profes-sionalism in them than in most of the programs.
But in the midst of all this professionalism and in-triguing production there is something terribly wrong.The commercials don't tell the whole story. I suggest toyou that while the commercials are works of art, theproduct they advertise is helping to erode the moralityof our people. We are being "sold a bill of goods."
You will not find a word in the commercials about all the heartache the product causes. They don't show ahusband coming home in a drunken stupor slapping hiswife and kids around. They don't show how many mar-riages have been sacrificed to the foam-crowned goldenbrew. They don't picture for us the problems encoun-tered by the teenage alcoholic. They don't show us pic-tures of a man's liver which has been eaten away byexcessive use of the so-called "heavenly potion." Thereis never any mention of the grieving mother and fatherwho have lost a son or daughter because of some teen-age drinking party, many times "just down the street."They don't tell us that about half the arrests made inAmerica last year were alcohol-related. And they don'tever show the medical reports that link alcohol to suchthings as heart disease, emotional breakdowns, and lit-erally dozens of other health problems.
The beer commercials don't show the number of acci-dents and deaths caused by their product and otherslike it. Did you know that in the past ten years alonemore people have died in alcohol-related auto crashesthan were killed in the Vietnam war? And the National Highway Safety Commission estimates that from 1980to 1990 the figure will double, to about 500,000. Itshould also be noted that huge outlays of cash are re-quired to investigate, prosecute and otherwise handleall the legal ramifications attached to these cases. I sawone recent report that said that citizens of this countrypay out an average of $616 in losses for every dollarcollected by the government from taxation of alcoholic
beverages. But we don't see that on the commercials, do we?
And why is it that the fancy dressed, appealing com-mercials don't tell us what alcohol does to the eternal welfare of its users? Beer and whiskey and other inebri-ants are the adhesive that holds much of todays immo-rality together. The practitioners of immoral actionsand lewd conduct almost always accompany that actionwith some kind of intoxicant, alcohol being the mostprominently used. Alcohol, by destroying inhibitionsand eroding shame, breaks down resistance and encour-ages all manner of illicit and lewd activities. Drinking ishabit-forming and anyone who says differently is notyour friend. It very often introduces its users tostronger drugs. It takes away a man's will and leaves him devoid of the mental mechanism he needs to be wise in his judgments. He turns to situation ethics becausesuch a standard releases him from obligation regarding morality. Such loss of control is sinful and wrong andwill cause a man to lose his soul. But do the commercials tell us anything about Hell? I haven't seen it, have you?
The next time you decide that "weekends were madefor beer," or that "this one's for you," or it's "filler time,"just remember that the beer commercials which have soimpressed you with those little musical slogans didn'ttell you the whole story.
MAY ONE MARRY A "PUTAWAY" PERSON?
If only men would accept what Jesus said about thematter of divorce and remarriage in Matthew 5:32 and19:9, we would not have the problems that we havetoday on this subject. The majority of the problems arecaused on all religious subjects, not by what the Bibleactually says, but by what men want it to say. Paulwarned of this when he told Timothy that men "... aftertheir own lusts shall leap to themselves teachers, hav-ing itching ears; and they shall turn away their earsfrom the truth, and be turned unto fables" (II Timothy4:3-4).
In the passages under consideration, Jesus gives arule and then gives the exception to the rule. Here is therule. "Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marryanother committeth adultery." No question about it.The one who puts away his wife and marries anothercommits adultery. However, Jesus made an exceptionto this rule. "Except it be for fornication." That's the "exception" made by Jesus. The obvious conclusion isthat if one does put away his wife "for fornication" (thatis the reason he put her away), he does not commitadultery when he remarries.
TO illustrate the above point, let's look at another rule given by Christ with an exception. Jesus said, "Yeshall all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3). If there had beenno exception to this rule set forth by Jesus, the peoplewould no doubt have perished. However, there was anexception given. Jesus said, "Except ye repent." So, Jesus made the rule, but He also gave an exception to it. Thus Matthew 19:9a is very clear as to what God autho-rizes regarding the person who does the "puttingaway." If he puts away his wife for any cause other thanfornication, when he remarries he commits adultery.However, if he puts her away "for fornication" and remarries, he does not commit adultery.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia setsforth seven things for which a Jew could put away hiswife and give her a writing of divorcement under theLaw of Moses. The following chart shows some of thesecauses along with the only cause Jesus gave.
Today the majority of people are put away and given awriting of divorcement for "every cause" besides thecause given by Jesus, even as the Pharisees expressed.Jesus said Moses allowed it because of the hardness of their hearts, but from the beginning it was not so (Mat-thew 19:8).
In discussing this subject, some have taken the posi-tion that "committeth adultery" is a one-time-act, andtherefore after the act is committed, those involved may then repent of this "one-time-act" and be free toremain together. The original language, however, will not bear this out. In fact, to the contrary. The expres-sion "committeth adultery" in the original language ispresent indicative, and is used "to denote that whichhabitually occurs, or may be reasonably expected tooccur." Or, "to describe that which recurs at successiveintervals, or is conceived in successive periods" (Danaand Mantey, Page 183-184). In order for it to be a simpleone-time-act, it would have to be in the aorist tense.
May The Guilty Party Remarry?
Some have come to the conclusion that the personwho has been put away "for fornication" (the guiltyparty) is not under consideration in these passages.However, it would be ridiculous, as you can see from thefollowing chart, to say that the one who has been "putaway" for fornication is not "a put away person." Yes,they have been "put away." What did Jesus say on thissubject? "Whoso marrieth her that is put away com-mits adultery." Thus Jesus said that one who marries a"put away person," (whether she is put away for "burn-ing the bread" or "for fornication," she is still a "putaway person"), commits adultery."
Matthew 19:9b Not In Text
In an effort to try to circumvent God's law regardingthe "put away fornicator," some have suggested thatthe latter part of Matthew 19:9 is "spurious," not in theoriginal text, and therefore should not be considered.However, 48 Greek scholars believed there was enoughevidence for it in the manuscripts, to place it in the textof the King James Version. And, 101 Greek scholars ofthe American Standard Version thought there wasenough evidence to leave it in the text, but with a foot-note that states, "The following words to the end of theverse, are omitted by some ancient authorities." How-ever, if you decide that Matthew 19:9b should bethrown out, which I am not ready to admit in view ofwhat 149 Greek Scholars who wrote the King Jamesand American Standard Versions did by placing it inthe text, you would still have the same statement inMatthew 5:32b about which there is no question regard-ing its authenticity.
Does The Exception Clause Apply ToBoth Parts Of The Passage?
Some say that the one "put away" for fornication isnot committing adultery when she remarries, because the "exception clause" in the first part of the passage also applies to (and could be inserted in) the last part of the passage.
There are at least two things wrong with this posi-tion. First, by reason of the position of the "exception"in the sentence it cannot modify both clauses. And if we move the "exception" to the second clause, it would nolonger exist with the first. This is clearly seen in oursecond point.
Second, as you can see from the chart which I haddiagrammed of the Greek, simply giving the literaltranslations of the words in English, of Matthew 19:9,the phrase "except it be for fornication" is an adverbialphrase which modifies the verb "shall put away." But ifit is transposed to the latter part of the sentence itwould have to modify "her that is put away." Thatwould mean that you would have to change an adverbialphrase to an adjectival phrase. This cannot be donegrammatically.
MATTHEW 13:23—"AND HE THAT WAS SOWN
UPON THE GOOD GROUND,
THIS IS HE WHO HEARETH
THE WORD, AND UNDER
STANDING IT, VERILY
BEARS FRUIT, AND BRINGS
FORTH, SOME AN HUN
DREDFOLD, SOME SIXTY,
AND SOME THIRTY."
I realize that many good righteous souls have obeyed
the gospel in other areas, and that much good is being
done in sowing the seed to a lost world. I believe, how
ever, that the story of brother Howell is worthy of
relating, because of its' unique nature, in our modern
world.
Hubbard Howell is a simple man. He is 54 years old and married with four girls and one son. He is a secondgeneration pulp-wood hauler who works hard and is known as a man of his word. He expects people to behonest and he deals this way with others. He was bornand raised in Shelby County, Alabama and has had aninteresting life. He is one of the few pulpwooders, who will still take the time to hitch up a team of Belgianhorses and go "stump a field", which is thankless work.He lost an eye in an accident with a chain-saw, but he isable to see in other ways than with his eyes. Hubbard isalso my friend and I love him.
He recently has a heart attack while working in the woods and had a life-threatening situation for a while asa result. While in the hospital, I went to see Hubbardand found he was very humble about his lost statebefore God. We had a word of prayer, which I began,and in which Hubbard intervened. He cried out "Oh God, Oh Jesus, my Lord, please help me to do what isright, I am lost, and I know that I ain't got many morechances to do what I ought, help me find what is rightand do what you want me to do, I don't want to go tohell, I just want to love you and know you, Oh Jesus, OhGod, Oh Lord, IV sure been mean but I am going to dobetter..."
He stopped here, because he was crying, and I fin-ished up our prayer and wiped my eyes also. Here was asoul who prayed as Cornelius must have for salvationand the right way. Two other brethren and I went to seeHubbard in the hospital and read the Bible to him andprayed with him. You see, the reason we read to Hub-bard is that he never learned to read for himself.
He has had the blessing of working with a faithful and devout Christian for many years. This good saint hasbeen working on Hubbard for several years and Hub-bard respects him dearly. He believes that this man is what a Christian ought to be. Hubbard has had someexperience with "religious people" before, and theymade him think that he had to "feel" something beforehe was saved. He never could get that feeling for somereason. I guess He was just too honest to have fallen forany false idea about "feelings." He had been to our gospel meeting before he had his heart attack and wasreally impressed with "Bible preaching" as he called it.He came in his overalls and brought his granddaughter, who came barefooted, because she hadno shoes.
After he was released from the hospital, Hubbard metwith his friend from work and they continued to talkabout the Bible. I received a call from our brother one night stating the good news that Hubbard wanted to bebaptized. I met them at the building and before baptiz-ing Hubbard, asked him a few questions. He answeredthis way: "I am not going to try to fool nobody, I don'tknow what the Bible says cause I can't read it, but Iknow that I am lost and going to hell, and from whathas been read to me, I know that I should be baptized. Ibelieve that Jesus is the Son of God, and I am willin' to change my life to be like Him. I want to go to heavenand I am on my way to hell like I am. I want to start nowto do what he said. After a word of prayer we baptizedthis man into Christ, after hearing him make the goodconfession. The cold water did not bother him a bit,and he was certainly a happy soul when he came up outof the water.
Hubbard told us to be sure and tell him when he messed up so he could make it right. He told us he wasserious about going to heaven and that he wasn't just hoping to go, he was "aimin" to get there. We hadanother word of prayer and heard him express his grati-tude for salvation and then returned home refreshed.
I could not help thinking as I drove home; "Isn't this what it is all about"—one honest precious soul with atender heart, who wants to serve God and do what hecan in the kingdom. I had ask myself, whether I hadbeen plowing the wrong fields. I would probably havebypassed Hubbard's house, while going door to door,because it is real messy and rough, and they probablywouldn't listen anyway. How many others like him areout there waiting to hear the truth? But, I am ashamedto say that many of them will never be reached, becausetoo many are too busy planning how to do personalwork in the safety of their office, and too good to get outthere and dig into the business of plowing the spiritualsoil. Under the guise of organization, we often neglectthe fields which are white unto harvest. We often streamline our "programs" for the middle class, whooften have so much of this worlds goods, it blinds themto the need for Christ. They have everything withintheir grasp and overlook the greatest need of all, Jesus.Yes, Hubbard is a case of a simple, down-to-earth manhearing the Truth, believing it, and obeying it.
Hubbard has adjusted well to our services and feelsaccepted by the kind brethren here. We are thankful forHubbard and his example to us. He has helped us morethan he will ever know. One Wednesday night I readMatthew 27 about Christ's' crucifixion, and noticed thatHubbard was wiping his eyes with his handkerchief. He told me after services that he had never heard that theyspit on Jesus, and it was a good thing he wasn't there when they spit on his Lord. He has said that he thinkshis talent is to lead people by example. He did not tellhis wife, he had obeyed the gospel because, he figured itwould be better for her to notice his change, than forhim to have to tell her.
Hubbard is progressing well in the kingdom and brings his grandchildren with him to what he can. Hefervently wants his family to obey the gospel, and weare working on that now. He is not an ignorant man, hejust cannot read. He has to rely on memory while we canlook up what we forget.
Hubbard Howell has helped me to be a better Christian and has shown me that there is a lot of goodsoil right in front of us if we will but open our eyes andplow the right fields. I have rediscovered the simple joyof just reading the precious Word. I have also learned again, that happiness lies not in what we have in thislife, but in the spiritual peace which is available to all through Christ. I am afraid that in some instancesmany who claim to be Christians, are little more thanspiritual bigots, in regards to whom we teach. There arecongregations all over this land that have worked foryears establishing a work, only to close it up, after a fewyears, making no effort to reach those who surroundthem. Instead, they abandon an area and move to a"better" part of town and sell the old building theylabored so hard to purchase, to a denomination. We mayhave come a long way, materially, in a lot of places, butcould it be in our quest to be like others, we have setourselves up as an elite club of spiritual snobs? Whomade us the standard, anyway? Perhaps, we have lost agrasp on the true purpose for which we preach andteach. We have made a long journey from the simple, plain teaching, which rocked the hills of Zion and turnedthe world upside down for Christ. Let us resolve tofervently sow the seed to every creature, and may Godbless the church with more servants like Hubbard Howell.
"FEED MY SHEEP"
As Jesus drew from Peter a three-fold affirmation of love for him, he charged Peter to "feed by sheep" (John21:15-17). Jesus was not a literal shepherd with literal sheep and in need of someone to help tend them. Both"sheep" and "feed" in this text are obviously figurative.
Paul spoke of his work of evangelism and ministering as "feeding". He said to the Corinthians, "I have fed you with milk and not with meat" (1 Cor. 3:2) and re-ferred to himself as a "minister by whom they hadbelieved" (vs. 35). This activity is further signified bysuch figures as "planting" and "watering" (vs. 6).
Elders in the church at Ephesus were told to "feed thechurch of God, which he hath purchased with his ownblood" (Acts 20:28). They would do this through teach-ing that would protect the flock from those "speakingperverse things" (vs. 30J and "convince the gainsayers"(Tit. 1:9). Peter charged elders to "Feed the flock of Godwhich is among you" (1 Pet. 5:2). The word "feed" (K. J.) is poimaino in the Greek, meaning "to tend-to shep-herd" (Vines). Actually, the word means "to act as ashepherd. It is used of feeding cattle (1 Cor. 9:7; Lk. 19:7). The thing signified is the teaching, protecting,admonishing, and leading that elders are to do, and areable to do because they have the qualifications of 1 Tim.3:2-7; Tit. 1:6-9.
The Sheep
In all the afore mentioned texts, sheep is figurative.The context shows the sheep under consideration arepeople—a special kind of people. The charge given toelders (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2) involved the church ofGod (flock) where they were elders. The sheep were notthe property of the elders, but of the Lord. They wereHis church (flock) and elders were charged with feeding(tending) them.
The sheep that Peter was told to feed involved theLord's people-sheep- in prospect. Besides those earlydisciples of the Lord, many others would enter the foldthrough Peter's feeding, and that of the other apostles,to whom they would have a continual feeding responsi-bility. The Lord said "And other sheep I have which arenot of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shallhear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and oneshepherd." The sheep of this passage were people whowould be a part of the one fold through hearing (heed-ing) the voice (word) of the Lord—the true shepherd,and owner of the flock.
The Lord informed Paul, by a night vision, that hehad much people in Corinth, the result of his "speakingand holding not thy peace" (Acts 18:9-10).
The sheep of the Lord are all those people who will anddo "hear his voice" and "turn to the Lord". In every caseof people becoming sheep in the Lord's fold, theyheard the gospel message, believed, repented, confessedand were baptized into Christ-His body-the fold of God.
The Feeding
Reflecting upon who the sheep are, and how theybecame such and remain, reveals the nature of the"feeding". People become the sheep of God through the"feeding" done by Peter, Paul, and all others who shoul-dered the responsibility of "Go into all the world andpreach the gospel to every creature"—"preach the word... reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering anddoctrine..." The thing fed (Bread of life) is what resultsin salvation... in everlasting life. Indeed, it is the wordof God that quickens (gives life), builds up, and saves.
The Importance of Feeding
God still wants every soul that would be receptive tospiritual food and would "hear His voice" to be fed. Hestill says to every gospel preacher, elder, teacher andwhosoever will "feed my sheep". If we would say withPeter, "yea Lord, thou knowest that I love thee", eventhree times, we should also hear the charge "feed mysheep".
The world can not be converted and the converted can not endure unto the end unless this feeding is done. Letthere be a dirth of preaching and a lack of "watching forsouls" (tending) by elders and there will be the loss ofmany souls—spiritual starvation.
Churches that become caught-up in flesh-satisfyingprojects, material things, even to maintaining a largebank account, to the neglect of feeding the Lord's sheep,have lost sight of their primary mission. The elders ofsuch churches are more interested in numbers, projects,and an abundant, satisfying social life than in "watch-ing for souls".
Unless material things are "expedients" and "feedmy sheep", they have no place in the plans and budgetof a congregation. And, when we as individuals, losesight of our responsibility to "teach others also", byword of mouth, an exemplary life, and financially sup-porting "sounding out the word", we are not heedingour Lord's command to "Feed My Sheep".
"ALMS TO MY NATION"
Several years ago I was meeting a Baptist preacher indebate and he made what I considered a fatuous argu-ment. My moderator whispered in my ear, "Ward that argument is so silly I would not answer it." I replied,"we both think it is silly but some of his people think itis great. I must answer it." Many people feel the argu-ment I shall answer in this article to be somewhat ludi-crous and perhaps even asinine, but it must be an-swered. As a matter of fact, I have a request fromOklahoma to answer the argument.
When Paul stood before Felix the governor to urge hisclaims of Christianity he spoke of the alms he had brought to his nation. As one goes back in the NewTestament, he will find Paul as a SAINT, raised moneyamong SAINTS for the poor SAINTS in Jerusalem.Passages vindicating this position may be found in 1Cor. 16:1-3; Rom. 15:26; 2 Cor. 8, 9 and other places inthe Bible. To my knowledge, no one has ever argued thismoney was not raised for SAINTS. However, we havesome who will argue it was not raised for "saints only."They will insist that sinners were also supported out ofthe church treasury. One of the latest arguments usedto try to sustain that position is the "Nation" argu-ment. Some brethren have compassed both land and seato find a scripture which will uphold their view. BrotherRoy Deaver has kept me busy the last few years answer-ing such quibbles. About the time I think I have all ofthem answered he pops up with a new one. Even if Iconsider these arguments contemptuous they must beanswered.
In his Biblical Notes, December issue, page 98, Roy says, "As previously indicated, this collection was 'for the saints.' more specifically, it was for the 'poor among the saints' (Rom. 15:26). But, we hasten to emphasize, itwas not for the saints only." Roy then proceeds to makethe "nation" argument by saying, "in Acts 24:16 it isrecorded that Paul said (with regard to the collectionpresently being considered) 'now after some years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.' Paul took the collection to his nation. Obviously, the word'nation' cannot be limited to people who were Christians. The 'poor among the saints' were a part of the 'nation,' but the nation included more than the poor among the saints."
There are a number of reasons why the above argu-ment will not stand the Bible test and I shall give a few.First, the argument is false because Roy Deaver, him-self, will not accept it. There is an old cliche in the field ofpolemics which says, "that which proves too muchproves nothing." This argument proves too much for Brother Deaver and his colleagues. For example, theyhave argued for years from (2 Thes. 3:10) that if a manwill not work "Neither should he eat." They have in-sisted that a no-good lazy man could not be supportedfrom the church treasury. Now let us try the argumenton for size. The thrust of the argument is this (1) Anation has both saints and sinners; therefore, moneysent to a nation goes to both saints and sinners. (2) Nowlet us use the same logic on 2 Thes 3:10 (the man whowill not work). A nation has both men who will work and men who will not work; therefore money sent to a nationgoes to both men who will work and men who will notwork! This is what we call meeting oneself coming back!Brother Deaver argued that the word "nation cannot belimited." Gentle reader, if it cannot be limited then itincludes all. These brethren also argue from (2 Jno. 9)that a false teacher cannot be supported out of thechurch treasury. Well, let us use his argument again, (3)Any nation has both true teachers and false teachers;therefore any money sent to a nation goes to both trueand false teachers. Remember he said the word nation "cannot be limited." Obviously, what these brethrenwould like to do is LIMIT it in the way they want to and forget the rest. Kind friend, I apologize for having toanswer such a ludicrous argument. Speaking of Acts24:17, A. T. Robertson, the fine Greek Lexicographer,says, "To bring alms (eleemosunas poieson). Anotherexample of the future participle of purpose in the NewTestament. These alms were for the poor saints in Jeru-salem (1 Cor. 16:1-4; 2 Cor. 8 & 9; Rom. 15:26) who werenone the less Jews." Obviously, A. T. Robertson, a Bap-tist knew the word nation did not include sinners. Please note he said the money was for saints.
Another reason for rejecting the "nation" argumentis that this word ethnos (nation) does not always includeall people of that nation. Proof of this can be found inJohn 18:35. When the Lord and Pilate had their famous conversation Pilate said, "Am I a Jew? Thine own na-tion and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me."Please note the conjunction and between nation andpriests. The priests were Jews and a part of the nationbut not included in the word nation as used in the con-text. Notice Christ had been delivered by the nation(some of the Jews) and also the priests (other Jews). The conclusion is irresistible that the word "nation" does not always include all people of that nation. When theLord said, "He that believeth and is baptized," we knowbelieving is one thing and baptism is another. WhenPeter said, "Repent and be baptized" we know repent-ing is one thing and baptism is another. When the Biblesays, "Thine own nation and the priests" we know na-tion is one thing and priest is another. One does nothave to be astute to see that the so-called nation argu-ment is turned into a tail-spin.
Then again, if one will turn to Acts the 28th chapterhe will find a refutation of the "nation" argument. Paulwas in the city of Rome where he had a meeting with the chief of the Jews. In the text he says, "Men and brethren though I have committed nothing against the peo-ple, or customs or our fathers, yet was I delivered pris-oner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans." I would like to emphasize the word Jerusalem in the above context. Now notice what he said, "Not that Ihave aught to accuse my nation of." Please observe thatPaul's confrontation was not with Jews from all over the world but at Jerusalem! Paul referred to the Jews ONLY at Jerusalem as his nation. Then to seal the argument the Jews in verse 21 said, "We neither re-ceived letters out of Judea concerning thee, neither anyof the brethren that came shewed or spake any harm ofthee." Please notice these Jews did not say, "We did notreceive letter from Jews all over the world." but onlyJudea where Jerusalem was located. Yet Paul called this his nation. In summary let us observe the use ofthe word "Nation" as used in the New Testament. (1)When Pilate said, "Thy own nation and the chief priests" we understand that the word "Nation" was limited! When Paul said, "Alms for my nation" the word nation had to be limited because it could not include lazy people, false teachers or sinners. Kind friends, remember the corollary used above will helpall see the truth and thus solidify the bleeding body of Christ.
There are some things that God just does not intendto do. A lot of people have wrong concepts of what theybelieve God has in mind to do. Let's take a look at some things God does not intend to do.
God Does Not Intend to Speak Any More Truth:
There are those who are waiting for God to speaksomething more than He has already spoken. There areno new doctrines yet to be delivered. Paul wrote theEphesians, "Whereby, when ye read, ye may under-stand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ which inother ages was not made known unto the sons of men,as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophetsby the Spirit" (Eph. 3: 4-5). The word of God has beenrevealed and God "hath in these last days spoken untous by his Son..." (Heb. 1:1-2). Wait no longer for God tospeak to you except as He already has in the Word ofGod.
To Be Mocked
Paul wrote the Galatians, "Be not deceived; God isnot mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall healso reap" (Gal. 6:7). God does not intend to be mocked by allowing man to sow one thing and not reap what hesows. In fact, the apostle further stated: "For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; buthe that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap lifeeverlasting" (Gal. 6:8). We all will reap as we sow. It will be as the people of the Old Testament. "For they havesown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind. . ."(Hosea 8:7).
To Be Blamed For Confusion
Often men believe that God is the cause of all the religious confusion that exists in the world today. Notso! In fact, God does not intend to be blamed with such.He wrote the Corinthians, "For God is not the author ofconfusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints"(1 Cor. 14:33). Man, not God, is the cause of religiousconfusion in the world. God says the same thing to all ofus who read the Bible and the Bible is of no "privateinterpretation" (2 Pet. 2:20).
For His Word To Be Destroyed
Down through the ages, man has tried to destroy theWord of God—but it cannot be done! The Psalmist said,"For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven" (Psa.119:89). The word of God is eternal. Jesus said of theword, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but mywords shall not pass away" (Matt. 24:35). Most of thethings with which we have to do will not endure for long"but the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (IPet. 1:25). We might laugh at the word of God, deny it,reject it, but it will be present and face us in the judg-ment day. Jesus said, "He that rejecteth me, and re-ceiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him inthe last day" (Jno. 12:48).
To Save You In Your Sins
Sin separates man from God (Isa. 59:1-2) and Goddoes not intend to save us in our sins. In fact, Jesussaid, "... that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believenot that I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (Jno. 8:24).God commands "all men everywhere to repent" (Acts17:30). Unless you change your mind about sin and as aresult of that thinking mend your ways, God does notintend to save you! A public confession is required toplease God. Paul wrote the Romans, "That if thou shaltconfess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt be-lieve in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man be-lieveth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confes-sion is made unto salvation" (Rom. 10:9-10). God's planof salvation includes baptism. Jesus said, "He that be-lieveth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that be-lieveth not shall be damned" (Mk. 16:15-16). Did yourealize that God means that? God does not intend to save those who are responsible short of their obediencefor Jesus is "the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" (Heb. 5:9). Neither will God savethe one who has been baptized unless his living is inharmony with the New Testament. Faithfulness is re-quired of God's people in order to receive the "crown oflife" (Rev. 2:10).
Let's not be guilty of God-playing!
Please Renew Promptly
When you renew, why net subscribe for a friend? All new subscriptions are $7.
Send all News Items to: Connie W. Adams, P.O. Box 69, Brooks, KY 40109
PREACHING TRIP TO CHILE AND ARGENTINA ROYCE CHANDLER, Mason, Ohio—From February 19—March 4, Iworked in Chile and Argentina. Although I had visited brethren inColumbia eleven times, this was my first trip to these other two countries. In Chile: The churches are spread out there, but I was able to preach in Santiago, Quillota and Quilpue. It was a great pleasure to meet thosebrethren and to see the maturity and stability of those churches. Wedrove to Cartegena one day to baptize a lady there who had studied aBible correspondence course and expressed the desire to be a Christian. This week in Chile was preparatory to going to Argentinafor a week's lectureship, and 23 brethren from Chile chartered a bus (no frills, such as a bathroom), and they rode for 36 hours through the Andes Mountains and across the hot and humid plains of Argentina inorder to be in Buenos Aires for the lectureship.
The Lectureship: There were 13 preachers present, representing Chile, Argentina, Columbia and the U.S.A. Nine of those men took turns preaching five lessons each day, Monday-Friday. In addition, all five local churches in Buenos Aires held gospel meetings all week so there was even more preaching every night following the day lectures. Thosewho attended every service and every lecture (and that was most ofthem) heard thirty-six lessons during the week, going Sunday-Sunday.Quite a feast. The result of all that, besides the fellowship and edification,was seen in that eight were baptized and two were re-stored, not counting the baptism in Chile.
This has redoubled my interest in this work and I am eager to returnsomeday, Lord willing. The work is also expanding in the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Puerto Rico, and Bill Reeves and Wayne Par-tain are planning to go, for the first time, into Spain later this year. What a thrill to be a part of such a work that seems to be growing more
Page 17
and more every day. Thanks to everyone who helped with my support forthis trip. Your keen interest and fellowship are a tremendous encouragement to me and to all the brethren in the Latin world. You are a special breed!
NOTICE
The Panlener church of Christ in Las Cruces, New Mexico, is trying tolocate ERCIL RAY WARREN in regard to a bond he holds on thebuilding here. If you know of his whereabouts, please contact thechurch at1325 Panlener St., Las Cruces, New Mexico 88001.
SERMON OUTLINE SERVICE BEGINS IN MAY
PREACHER TO PREACHER begins in May with a monthly mailing which will include a minimum of four previously unpublished two-pagesermons from various contributors and a religious variety page. A three month trial subscription is available for $3, or you can send $10 and twoof your sermons ($12 with no sermons) for a one-year subscription:PREACHER TO PREACHER, do Art Adams, 2805 Russell Street, Portage, Indiana 46378.
JOHNIE EDWARDS, 4001 E. 3rd St., Bloomington, IN 47401—After seven years with the Plainfield, Indiana church, I have begun workwith the church in Ellettsville, Indiana, just outside Blooming-ton. Iworked with this congregation before the work in Plainfield. The churchpublishes a teaching bulletin mailed twice monthly and you may requestif by writing to me at the above address. Phone: (812) 336-4630.
INFORMATION SOUGHT ROSS SPEARS, Rt. 1, Box 121A, Alvaton, KY 42122. Anyone whoknows of any brethren who live in or near State College, Pennsylvania,please contact me at the above address or call (502) 781-4947. I will bestudying at Perm. State University and would like to work and wor-shipwith brethren who do not support or endorse institutionalism and the socialgospel. Anyone who knows of the nearest local church to State College,PA, please let me know that also.
MT. PLEASANT, TEXAS LECTURES
The Southside church of Christ, Mount Pleasant, Texas will conduct agospel meeting with different speakers June 17-21. The theme will be: Jesus Christ: His Church, His Mind, His Completeness. Speakers for the week will be Marshall Patton, Huntsville, Alabama; A. W. Goff, Russellville, Arkansas; C. G. "Colly Caldwell, Tampa, Florida; and Max Dawson, Beaumont, Texas. Singing will begin at 7:30 led by RichardMontgomery. Limited housing is available upon request. Call or write:Randy Harshbarger, P.O. Box 242, Mt. Pleasant, Texas 75455. Phone
(214) 572-7521/2148.
RICHARD C. SIMS, P.O. Box 57, Dubach, LA 71235—After three years with the Hwy. 80 church in Ruston, Louisiana, my family and I aremoving in June to Gatesville, Texas to help a new work. At the
present Paul Stringer and his family are living in Gatesville and driving over 30 miles to services in Waco. I will need to raise all of my support for the work and for moving expenses. If any congregations areable to help with our support we would like to hear from them. Also, ifany readers of SEARCHINGTHE SCRIPTURES live near Gatesville orknow anyone who does, please contact us. Until June we can be reached atthe above address. Phone: (318) 777-8595.
CHARLES DEGENHART, 117 Harrington Rd., Newport News, VA23602—One Air Force family of two transferred to England recently. Twoplaced membership or two were baptized. Attendance and contributions arethe highest they have been over the last three years. We would like tomove away from the East Coast to a less humid climate. If you can use uscontact us at the above address for references. Phone: (804) 874-2928.
EDITORIAL LEFT-OVERS
The month of March found us in three gospel meetings. At Perry,Florida we worked with Charles Murray in a well attended meeting. The church is blessed with two good elders, one of whom is J. Ed Nowlinwho also preached at Perry for several years and is remembered withgreat appreciation for his years of excellent work in east Tennessee andAtlanta, Georgia. This north Florida church is blessed with much talent. ..We were also in a good meeting at Mound and Starr in Nacogdoches,Texas, our third time there. Robert Harkrider and Dean Bullock providean excellent balance of teaching strength with this good church. Much lifeis added to the work by the presence of 50-60 students from Stephen F.Austin University. Alan Finley also works with them on a part-time basis.Two were baptized and one restored... Then, late March found us (Bobbie and me—not just the editorial "we") in Houston, Texas with thehistoric Norhill congrega-tion, Oscar Smith, who preached there for 17years, continues as one of three fine elders. Derrell Shaw is the local preacherand is respected by the church for his good work. Norhill is now in an older part of town and many younger families have moved into the suburbs.Many Span-ish speaking people now live in that area and there is aSpanish speaking congregation which meets in one section of the building regularly with Ruben Amador as the preacher. It was also a personal pleasure for me to spend time with Hollis Blackmon who ledsinging at Norhill for over 20 years and who is the brother of the much lovedand greatly lamented Luther Blackmon. I don't know if Luther learned hisdown-home expressions from Hollis or the other way around, but in any case, the week provided refreshing to my spirit. I greatly miss the likes ofLuther Blackmon, Franklin T. Puckett, James P. Miller and other good
| IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMSRESTORATIONS(Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor) | 205 82 |