WHY WE DO NOT HAVE UNITY

To the discerning reader, it seems hopeless thatbrethren will find the unity of the faith with theirapproach to the word of God. I am not talking aboutmatters of judgment such as whether to sing two songsor three at the beginning of public worship, or whetherto have the Lord's Supper before preaching or afterpreaching. I am talking about obeying the authority ofChrist in all things (Col. 3: 17). Some are urging that we must all agree that we cannot have unity on manythings, therefore, we should accept each other as beingfaithful and true to Christ while holding our differences,and extend the right hand of fellowship to each otherwithout qualification. This presents too many problemsfor all those who respect the authority of Christ. In thisarticle I want to present the case as it really is and askhow we can accomplish true unity as required by the word of God.

There are many issues that well illustrate this hopeless effort at Bible unity. One is the use of instrumentalmusic in worship. Presently, many are trying to generate fellowship between those who oppose the use ofinstrumental music in worship and those who use it.Those who do not use the instrument of music in worshiptake that position because they believe it is not authorized by scripture. They cannot in good conscience singpraises to God with the use of instrumental music. It isa matter of faith just like being immersed in water forthe remission of sins. No other action for any otherpurpose is acceptable as scriptural baptism. In that same sense no other music in worship to God is acceptable but vocal without any accompaniment.

The only possible way for unity to exist is for thosewho use the instrument in worship to give it up foreverand sing only as public worship to God. Those who holdthe position that instrumental music is acceptable toGod, also say that they can sing acceptably without theinstrument. Few if any contend that the instrument isessential to scriptural worship; they admit that they canscripturally worship God without the instrument. But all those who oppose the instrument of music in worship do so because they believe the instrument is sinful; it iswithout authority and thus not of faith. These cannot compromise their conviction without violating theirconsciences.

Now how can unity exist? We say that unity must bebased upon God's word; that means that God's wordmust authorize its use by command, approved exampleor necessary conclusion. Not many argue that instrumental music is essential to scriptural worship — a matter of faith. The only conclusion that can be reached is that Bible unity is possible only when those who use the instrument of music in worship give up the practiceand sing only psalms, hymns and spiritual songs,making melody in their hearts to the Lord. We know therefore why we do not have unity, and who is responsible for the divided condition. It is because those who use the instruments will not give them up for the sakeof unity among brethren. This has been the case for over150 years. It will continue to be the case as long as theinstrument is used in worship to God. These are the veryones who are begging for the unity for which Christprayed in John 17, and yet they are the very ones whoare causing division, and perpetuating it by insistingupon the instrument in worship.

Those with whom I stand did not cause the division;we did not initiate any action or attitude that broughtabout the division. Unity was lost because the instrument was introduced in worship. To restore things asthey were before the division, the instrument must beeliminated. When this is done, unity will exist as it wasbefore the instrument was introduced. The only otherway unity could exist would be for all to begin to use the instrument in worship, but then it would involve ALL in the sinful practice because it is without divine authority, and such would cause many to offend their consciences by doing what they believe to be wrong.

All that I have said gets back to the standard of God's word as the only basis for that unity for which Christprayed. "Neither pray I for these alone, but for themalso which shall believe on me through their word; thatthey all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I inthee, that they also may be one in us: that the world maybelieve that thou hast sent me" (John 17: 20, 21).

Scriptural unity involves more than action; it involves attitude toward divine authority, the word ofGod, and the right respect for brethren in the Lord.Until the hearts of men and women are turned to the Lord and His word, they will walk in different directions and destroy the unity for which Christ prayed.When men are interested in pleasing God and not men,they will inquire what the scriptures say and abide therein. They will not add to nor take from the wordsgiven by inspiration. Only then will they walk by faith,and Bible unity will prevail. May God hasten the daywhen brethren will walk together in the light of God's eternal word. But until that day comes, division willexist because some will add to His word.

Page 3

PRINCIPLES OF TRUTH AND MEN OF HONOR

The November, 1988 issue of CHRISTIANITY MAGAZINE, contains a three page article by Ed Harrellentitled "Homer Hailey: False Teacher?" In it, brotherHarrell laments what he calls "the personal attack onHailey" and offers what he calls "my personal defense ofHomer Hailey as a man who has earned the respect andesteem of the Christians of our time." He further states "I confess that the recent personal attacks on him seemto me to be an unheroic assault on an 85-year-oldwarrior." Other statements in the article seek to explain why brother Hailey has been held in such high esteemfor so many years and judges him to be a man of integrity with a "devout desire to please God."

Focusing the Issue

If anyone has made an "assault" on the character ofHomer Hailey, or challenged his integrity, I have beenkept totally in the dark about it. We have all benefitedby his study. The integrity of Homer Hailey is not indoubt. If you read only what brother Harrell wrote about this you would think that the most ungracious comments had been made about brother Hailey, as a man.That is absolutely false. In the process of defendingbrother Hailey from personal attacks, which have not, infact, occurred, brother Harrell has seriously indicted thecharacter and motives of those who have questionedHailey's teaching on whether or not an alien sinner issubject to the law of Christ, and the ramifications of thatdoctrine in terms of the marriage and divorce issue.Some have expressed the opinion that those who havewritten about brother Hailey's teaching on this subjectare "politically motivated." I deny that and call for the proof, if anyone thinks he has it.

As I pointed out in an editorial in this paper inSeptember, 1988, many of us have known for manyyears that brother Hailey held a view on this subjectwhich a great many believe to be false, the presentwriter included. So far as we knew, he did not seek topress this view to the disturbance of churches and it wasmore or less a "study point" which he has always beenwilling to discuss with any interested enough to ask. But in a meeting at El Cajon, California, he preached on the subject during a gospel meeting. Later he was involved in a disturbance over this question at Belen, NewMexico. A letter from him, which we published in ourJanuary issue, is his account of what took place. Much has been made of the argument that this was just aprivate meeting with a few people and not a "whole church" affair. But the whole church suffered from it. People involved in questionable marriages left thechurch in the aftermath of this dispute and remained intheir condition martially. The brethren thought thematter serious enough that they invited another brotherto come in and review what brother Hailey had taught.Having preached on the subject (brother Hailey made reference to that in his remarks at Belen), and thenhaving stated that he would become more outspoken onthe subject, it was in order to take him at his word. Hisletter indicates that he does not intend to press thematter at this present time, but that was not the indication from what he said at Belen.

A Doctrine With Serious Consequences

While brother Harrell says he opposes the positiontaken by brother Hailey, he has nonetheless rendered agreat disservice to the cause of truth and right bymaking the issue a man and his integrity. Brother Hailey is a man. All. of us know he is a man who wantsto do right and who acts out of sincere motives. I willdefend his character as quickly as anyone else. But heespouses a doctrine which argues that the alien sinneris not amenable to the law of Christ, therefore, God'smarriage law does not apply to him, and should he havebeen divorced and remarried a dozen times without fornication as the reason, he can obey the gospel and continue to live in the same relationship as before. Or,if a believer is married to an unbeliever and the unbeliever leaves the believer, because of his or her faith,then the believer is free to marry for the simple reasonthat the unbeliever was never under law to Christ in the first place.

I believe this to be the most serious doctrinal issue since the premillennial and institutional controversies.If true, then the mission of the church is invalidated.What is the point in preaching the gospel to those whoare not subject to it? The work of every gospel preacheris an exercise in futility.

Here is where the doctrine becomes entangled withanother serious fallacy: the false and arbitrary distinction between gospel and doctrine. It is argued by somethat you preach gospel to the alien and teach doctrine tothe Christian. Thus, the gospel is not actually a part ofthe law of Christ. It is upon this basis that the questionof fellowship can be placed on a par with eating meats(Rom. 14), the wearing of a covering, and militaryservice. We have our disagreements over these andother questions, but they are, after all, just "doctrinal"differences. Ketcherside, Fudge and all who took thatpath were wrong in making such an arbitrary distinction and then using that as a broadened base for fellowship with the Christian Church, institutionalism andyou name it. Romans 14 was bent out of shape and morethings were pressed into it than the Lord ever intended.

We are mixing oranges and apples when we decide that remaining in an adulterous state is in the samecategory as whether or not to wear a covering in theassembly. Paul did not believe adultery was to be tolerated in the church at Corinth and taught as much in 1 Cor. 5. But, mark my word, brethren, before all this is done, you will discover that the doctrinal base for such advocated tolerance, is this false distinction between"gospel" and "doctrine." That has already been injectedinto the controversy over this marriage question amongthe liberals. It has been involved in the published debatebetween McClish and Billingsly on "The Amenability ofAlien Sinners To The Law of Christ" and in the exchanges between Thomas B. Warren and James D.Bales. The gospel of Christ IS the doctrine of Christ andthe doctrine of Christ IS the gospel of Christ.

Rampant Factionalism

Brother Harrell argues that "doctrinal unanimity...does not, and probably cannot, exist." Question: Is itimpossible for all to know and practice truth on thissubject? He then spoke of military service, marriageceremonies in church buildings and head coverings and warns about branding as false teachers any who disagree with us on such subjects and says this will lead to"rampant factionalism." But the subject here is thedoctrine of whether or not the alien sinner is subject tothe law of Christ. Is it "rampant factionalism" to contendthat the alien IS under law to Christ? Is it "rampantfactionalism" to point out the consequences of this doctrine? Brethren, it is a false doctrine fraught withfrightful consequences. Is it "rampant factionalism" to insist that those who seek congregational fellowship bepeople of upright moral behavior who, in true repentance, severed themselves from whatever sinful relationships they formerly occupied, whether drunkenness, thievery or adultery?

Differences on the Question Yes, it is true that brethren over the years have differed touching several points on the issue of marriage, divorce and remarriage. Brother Harrell referredto the exchange which we carried in this paper between

H. E. Phillips and Marshall E. Patton. It is certainly truethat they differed in application on one aspect of thissubject. But both of them stated their objections to anynotion that the guilty party has any right to remarry,and to the view that the alien is not under law to Christ. They both contended that fornication is the only scriptural cause for divorce and remarriage, whether we arespeaking of aliens or Christians. Neither of them took a position which eventuates in nullifying the Great Commission, rendering useless the evangelistic effort ofevery congregation and nullifying the work of everypreacher of the gospel. Those who hold this view maydeny the acceptance of these consequences, or the foundation stone of a false distinction between "gospel" and "doctrine," but they logically follow as the night followsthe day. Others may proceed as they think best, but Iintend to press these consequences wherever this doctrine raises its head. My quarrel is not with any man, ona personal level, but with the doctrine being taught.

A Danger

Brethren, it is right for us to give "honor to whomhonor is due." But it is a dangerous thing to reach thepoint that we cannot call in question the public teachingof any brother, regardless of how much good he has doneand how much he is respected. We must not "think ofmen above that which is written." It is also in order to point out that great respect places great responsibility on those who preach. All of us are going to answer for theinfluence we wield in teaching others. Because a brothermay become "a legend in his own day" does not exempthim from facing the consequences of what he teachesand the effect it has on the lives of Christians and the fortunes of congregations.

On Fellowship

If we will all preach the truth as plainly as we can,expose error for what it is, and call the teachers of errorto account, then those who love the truth will hold up ourhands and stand with us and those who do not want the truth will oppose us. The fellowship will sort itself out,if we will let it. "I am a companion of all them that fearthee, and of them that keep thy precepts" (Psa. 119: 63).The fellowship of the people of God is a precious thing.None of us should teach or practice anything foreign tothe truth which would endanger it. But we must not choose sides over men, even admittedly the best of men.Doctrines are advanced by people, and people havenames. But this dispute is not about one good man andwhether or not his integrity has been challenged; it isabout principles of truth and right. We must keep theissue clearly focused. Are alien sinners under law toChrist? If they are, then those who teach otherwise are teaching a false doctrine, regardless of how much we esteem them. If they are not, then those of us who teachthat aliens are amenable are wrong, regardless of how well respected any of us may be. "What saith the scripture?"

Page 5

ANTIOCH — THE POWER OF THE LOCAL CHURCH

Acts 11: 19-26 introduces us to the newly establishedchurch in Antioch of Syria. It wasn't easy being aChristian there. Living in the midst of a mega-population center known for its corruption and crime was a terrific challenge to these young believers. The perils ofpersecution were to be faced daily. But they were there and they were committed!

Christianity wasn't stale to the Antioch disciples. They didn't take it for granted. They certainly weren't Christians because their parents were "church of Christ" (as in: "He's a 'church of Christ' preacher." Doyou cringe when you hear that, too? It affects me aboutlike fingernails scraping across a blackboard. Sorry... )These Antioch saints understood what it meant — the commitment, the challenge, the pressure. And, so,armed with the knowledge that tough times follow thosewho follow Jesus, they climbed out of the pit of paganismin order to live on a higher plane of illuminated light inJesus Christ. Thank God for their courage!... and theirinspiration to us.

2. The Antioch church made a commitment to teaching. After seeing last month that a commitment to teaching means a commitment to people, we now turn our attention to the second phase of theirteaching program found in verses 24b-26:

And considerable numbers were brought to theLord. And he (Barnabus) left for Tarsus to look for Saul; and when he had found him, hebrought him to Antioch. And it came about thatfor an entire year they met with the church, andtaught considerable numbers...

A Commitment to Teaching Means aCommitment to Excellence

The church at Antioch knew what some today fail toappreciate: A successful, growing, and strong churchbecomes that way by making an all out effort and noholds barred commitment to excellent Bible teaching.No half-heartedness here. No room for mediocrityamong these people. They served a risen Savior and were dedicated to giving Him their very best. Excellence, nothing less.

Antioch was committed to quality teaching.

And just what is "quality teaching?" It has nothing to dowith style, or mode of delivery or a preacher's personality. On the other hand, it has everything to do with a lovefor the Book, an earnest plea to adhere to divine truth and a teacher who will himself seek to live up to thestandard he proclaims. It's a longing to give all you havein the pulpit, in the classroom and in every teachingsituation. It's a burning passion to do your VERY BESTwith the talents and opportunities that God presents.The bottom line: it's an attitude — an attitude toward God, His will, and the lost. "Quality teaching." It's what gave a solid foundation to a new church. It's what will strengthen any church.

Paul came. The opportunities in this mega-population center were endless. Originally a "large number"had turned to Christ (vs. 21) and now "considerable numbers" were being added (vs. 24). Barnabus could seethe vision of future possibilities if only he had more help.Verse 25 reads, "And he left for Tarsus to look for Saul. "

Why Paul? (referred to as "Saul" until Acts 13: 9) (1)

First, Barnabus knew the kind of man Paul was.

Back when Paul had first arrived in Jerusalem it was Barnabus who reached out to welcome the man nobodywanted (Acts 9: 26-27). Barnabus believed in Paul. Heknew that his commitment was strong and that God'struth would be upheld at all cost. He knew that Paulwould give the Lord and the work at Antioch all he had.

Second, Barnabus knew that Paul had been divinely appointed to preach to the Gentiles (Acts

9: 15). And if ever an opportunity presented itself for theapostle to set in motion his mission, it was Antioch.

Look again at 11: 26. What a year that must havebeen! Barnabus (the encourager) and Paul (the apostolicteacher) working in tandem in a two-preacher arrangement with the result being an opportunity to teach"considerable numbers" (vs. 26).

A Twentieth Century Application

For a congregation of Christ to succeed in the eyes ofGod in 1989 (or, for that matter, anytime), it must get serious about the business of TEACHING! "Considerable numbers" weren't brought to the Lord in Antioch byaccident. It happened because they worked hard andmade quality teaching their top priority. We must do the same.

But there is a point to be made concerning teachingthat I'm afraid has been overlooked at times. It has to do with (now how can I say this?) how we present the gospel. (It's the old adage that if something is worth doing, it's worth doing RIGHT!) Do we present God's message as the most important message in the world deserving our very best effort at communication or... do we treat it as a half-hearted hobby that warrants only mediocre commitment? Tough question. Let's get specific.

I had the occasion not long ago to visit a well established church in a rather large city. I left with a feelingin my mouth similar to the one I get when I've eaten one of those onion-ladened hamburgers from the corner fast-food place (you know—the feeling that you could scrapethe grease from the roof of your mouth!) The exterior ofthe building was shabby. There were more weeds thangrass and it looked as if the bushes hadn't been trimmed since Eisenhower was in office. The interior wasn't anybetter. The yellow paint was now beige and peeling. Thesmell reminded me of my grandfather's old storage shed

Page 6 __________________________________________________________________________________________________

and I thought at first I had entered a museum of earlyAmerican cobwebs. The tracts in the rack had obviously been there for a very l o n g time and each was yellow(not their original color). The classrooms were no betterand looked more like a broom, paint, and trash collection center than a place of learning. And, by-the-way, who was collecting all those wrinkled up periodicals inthe corner? Grot the picture?

Listen up folks: WE REPRESENT THE KING OFKINGS AND LORD OF LORDS AND WE HAD BETTER DO OUR VERY BEST IN PRESENTING HIS MESSAGE. We need to:

1) Take a look at our classrooms. Are they brightand cheery places with appealing decor generating anatmosphere of warmth or are they rooms of cold storage? (If my child's schoolroom looked like some of theBible classrooms I've seen I wouldn't stand for it. Would you?) And by-the-way, some of the ones I've heard say we can't afford better sure have nice stuff at home and in the driveway. It's a matter of priorities.

2) Take a look at our teaching aids. Are we using materials that are outdated and stale? Do our film strips, tracts, and other teaching tools look fresh or dothey carry that "nostalgic" look? Check into the possibility of purchasing a video system for the church to usein its teaching program. Many materials are now available on video tape including Norman Sewell's series for the non-Christian as well as Rodney and Carla Miller's series on teacher-training. More things are becomingavailable as time goes on.

3) Take a look at our church buildings. Do they have that "nobody's home" and "nobody cares" look orare the grounds kept and the appearance clean?

4) Take a look at our advertising. Are our meeting announcements well laid out? Does the bulletinhave "eye-appeal?" Have we done our very best?

5) Take a look at our services. Are things done decently and in order? Do we start on time? Do the men who wait upon the congregation do so with an air ofrespect for the occasion? Do the services tend to be longdrawn out endurance contests or periods of spiritual refreshment?

What I am attempting to say is that while the message must NEVER be tampered with, updated orchanged, the way that message is presented and ultimately perceived by the world needs to be reviewed. Dowe present the greatest message in the history of manwith only a half-hearted attempt at mediocrity or arewe committed to excellence in the proclamation of His Good News? That's the point.

The Gospel is NOT a second-rate message. It deserves our best. Antioch took their commitment seriously. All growing churches do.

MAY A CHURCH DRAW INTEREST?

QUESTION: Can a church take money given by it'smembers for the Lord's work and buy C. D.'s or other formsof interest bearing offerings? If so, what is the differencein that and investing in a business and running it for profit?

ANSWER: The Bible teaches how the church is to raise money (1 Cor. 16: 2), but it does not specify how to hold or keep it. Obviously, we would want safety andsecurity for the treasury. Churches generally use banks to keep their contributions. This is much safer than in asafe at home, or in a sugar jar or coffee can. It is also moreexpedient as banks offer checking accounts.

But mainly the querist is asking about C. D.'s (Certificates of Deposit) and other forms of interest bearing deposits. The C. D.'s would be just as Scriptural asthe Savings Account or the Checking Account as far asa depository for the money. The issue is a question of achurch drawing interest. Of course, if a church mayreceive interest on one kind of account, it may receiveinterest from another kind.

A congregation turns thousands of dollars each yearover to a bank, which in turn loans the money out forprofit. This is the bank doing this, not the church. Thebank simply guarantees the money and it pays a small interest rate for the use of the money. The interest simply helps offset the inflationary spiral so that the money deposited has close to the same buying power when it iswithdrawn as it did when deposited. Certificates of Deposit do have a higher yield, but they must be left inthe bank until maturity or there is a penalty for earlywithdrawal. C. D. s might be practical under peculiarcircumstances, like a building fund.

A congregation who refuses interest on its money may actually lose money as far as its buying power. Why is itright to lose money value, as some reason, but wrong to draw interest in order to have the same value when withdrawn? Such thinking is fallacious and irrational in my opinion.

Motive or purpose is involved in this controversy.Certainly, the church may not go into business in orderto make a profit, nor invest its money for the purpose ofenhancing a bank account. Money raised by the churchis through free-will offerings by the saints on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16: 2). But there are special circumstances where there is no intent or purpose to raisemoney contrary to the Scriptural procedure stated in the

___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7

New Testament.

A church may sell its meetinghouse for double ortriple the amount it cost to build it in order to build a new one. A large tract of land might be willed to or given toa congregation and the church may want to sell part ofit or all of it, gaining possibly hundreds of thousands ofdollars. A down-payment may be put on church propertyby a business establishment, say for $2000, to hold it forthree months. But the business decides not to buy, and forfeits the down-payment to the church. Alien sinnersmany times contribute on Sunday when they are present at worship. Other examples could be given but these suffice to show that money is received in additional waysby the church than just through contributions from itsmembers.

If a church began buying and selling property to raisemoney or soliciting alien sinners for contributions, thenthe purpose is evil and a divine principle would beviolated. I don't know anybody who prohibits an alien sinner to give into the collection basket (this wouldnecessitate barring all aliens from our Sunday services),or refuses to take land that is willed (or given) to thechurch, or sells church-property for what it originallycost and not current market value. If we can realize money from these special circumstances, then we canaccept interest given to us by a bank. The bank says, "Weare giving you 5 percent on your money," and wisdom, itseems to me, teaches us to accept it on the same basis weaccept a tract of land that is donated by a generousperson, or the forfeited money on a down-payment. It isstrange that we can take money from an alien sinner,land from a beneficent person and a forfeit from a business, but we cannot take interest given to us from abank. What have we got against banks?

All Christians are stewards of God (1 Cor. 4: 2; 1 Pet.

4: 10). Elders are stewards (Tit. 1: 7) as the overseersof the church, including its work and resources. Theywould be remiss in their duty as caretakers if they werenot prudent in the financial transactions of the church.

Let's say a congregation has a building fund with theintention of building in five years? Where do the eldersput the money? If there are $50,000 and the eldersrefuse interest, then they have relinquished several thousand dollars to the bank and diminished the buyingpower of the money. For all practical purposes, the church has indirectly donated those thousands to thebank. Is this good stewardship? I think not! It is about like the one talent man who hid his talent in the earth (Matt. 25: 24-27).

Some congregations love their bank accounts, but ifwe would be more involved in the spending business topreach the gospel, and less involved in the saving business, we would not have near the problem of whether itis right to draw interest, be it from C. D. s, SavingsAccount or Checking Account. I venture to say that thereare likely millions of dollars lying in the banks in theaccounts of churches of Christ that are being saved forthat "rainy day" or "emergency" which will never comein most cases. The Lord may come before our imaginaryexigency occurs. The emergency is now; men are dyingdaily unprepared to meet God.

I have no qualms with a "cushion" or operating fund,but too many of these "cushions" have become excessiveand exorbitant amounts, far beyond the needs of the operation of a local church. Too, a church inherits a large amount of money or it sells a tract of land for thousandsof dollars, and several months, or longer, are needed todispense the money in a responsible manner. I have noproblem with this.

This question of churches drawing interest is a "sticky" issue among us and has caused some churchesno little distress, even division. Each congregation willhave to use sound and wise judgment in dealing withthis matter to maintain harmony and peace.

WHERE DID GOD GO WRONG?

If a child becomes delinquent, the parent often asks,"Where did I do wrong?" Society is often held responsible for the conduct of the criminal. There may be times thatboth parents and society are partially to blame for those who rebel against authority, for "to err is human." Evenso, I doubt if there are many cases where all the blame should be shifted away from those who show contemptfor civil law.

But, there are those who will hold God responsible ifanything should happen to the disobedient and ungodly. IsGod unrighteous (wrong), if He punishes the evildoer?Some say yes, but if so, I ask, "Where did God go wrong?"If God is at fault, then we should be able to trace Hisdealings with the human family, and find out where God made His mistake.

The earliest account of God's dealings with man is increation. "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female createdhe them" (Gen. 1: 27). Is this where God went wrong? Ifnot, let us continue.

Next, God placed man in the garden of Eden, and supplied his every need. Every other form of life wasunder man's dominion, and at his disposal. This wasman's first taste of "the paradise of God." Did God go wrong here, by placing man in Eden?

The next incident in God's dealings with man is theconfrontation between the two which developed afterman's transgression. Yes, God could have made man like the beast, whose spirit "goeth downward to theearth" (Eccl. 3: 21), or He could have made him like asycamore tree, but man was made in God's image, andgiven the power of choice. God didn't force man to eat ofthe forbidden fruit, the Devil tempted man (Gen. 3: 13).

Did God do wrong when He drove man from thegarden? This was man's only hope at the time—get him away from the tree of life in his fallen condition, that hemight be returned to it in a justified state.

Every since the transgression, God has been mercifuland longsuffering toward man, planning and bringingabout his redemption. God is still trying to bring all to repentance (2 Pet. 3: 9), and would "have all men tobe saved" (1 Tim. 2: 4). Is this where God went wrong?

God gave His only Son as a sacrifice for man's sins,and Jesus has prepared the way to heaven (Jno. 3: 16;

14: 1-6). Did God do wrong to man by the manifestation of such grace?

Now, God has provided an invitation for all, and provisions for their salvation (Rev. 22: 17; Mk. 16: 15,16), that man may once again partake of the tree of life(Rev. 22: 14). Is God unrighteous in this matter? And, ifGod is not at fault anywhere, or at anytime, in Hisdealings with man, why say that God is unrighteous"who taketh vengeance" (Rom. 2: 1-11; 3: 4-6)?

Man, disobedient and rebellious, needs to quit tryingto place the blame on God for his own sinful condition,and get busy and obey the very gospel which can alsocondemn him.

STUDIES IN 1ST AND 2ND TIMOTHY 2 TIMOTHY 3

ANTICIPATE AND KNOW THE NATURE OF APOSTASY (V. 1-9)

If a minister of God is to save himself, through faith-fullness in the discharge of his "gift" (charge), he must beaware of the possibility, even certainty, of apostasy, ofwhich he has been forewarned by the Spirit (1 Tim. 4: 1),and take heed lest he himself be ensnared. He must also,by this awareness, be concerned for those who hear him,constantly warning them of the things that are threatsto their faith, lest they be lost. Thus, the salvation ofboth the minister and the hearer is at stake.

The "last days," when the perilous (difficult) timeswould come, may refer to that great struggle between truth and evil preceding the coming of the victoriousChrist in judgment (When Satan is loosed for a little season - Rev. 20: 7-8). The nature of the apostasy described mentions characteristics of men that have existed in every age, even in the days of Christ and whenPaul wrote them to Timothy, but such actions and characteristics would become worse — continue to grow and become manifest before the end, or the coming of Christin judgment. Because of this, Timothy, every minister,and every saint would need to increase their watchfulness and zealous heed, lest souls be lost.

Characteristics of Ungodliness (v. 2-9)

These are now listed, by the Holy Spirit, so that allmay know and recognize those characteristics in men that will damn the soul.

"Lovers of self has always been, is now, and continues to be a worsening characteristic of many. Thisfeature is the foundation for many other evils. Makingself the center of one's life is that which keeps one fromobeying the gospel. Denying self is a prerequisite tocoming to Christ (Matt. 16: 24). As long as self is enthroned, submission to God and true love for our fellowman is impossible. In seeking the cause for absenteeism(assembling with saints - Heb. 10: 25) or lethargy inservice, everything points to "love of self." The guilty donot think of their responsibility to edify others, set agood example, grow in knowledge, teach others, or praytogether, but of pleasing self. They had rather pleaseand satisfy self than show consideration for God or theirbrethren.

"Covetous" (lovers of money), the root of all evil (1

Page 9

Tim. 6: 10), is next listed as a characteristic of apostates,or godlessness. Paul has previously warned Timothy,and others through Timothy, of the dangers and folly ofthinking "gain is godliness" (1 Tim. 6: 5-10) and that the success of man is determined by the amount of things hepossesses (Lk. 12: 15). This characteristic of godlessnessis manifested in those who spend their time, energy andmoney on things that satisfy the flesh, to the neglect oflaying up treasures in heaven by giving and doing forGod and their fellowman.

"Boasters" (boastful, braggarts) is a characteristic ofthe ungodly who claims great qualities that he does nothave, or possesses in a much lesser degree than isclaimed; makes promises he can not keep, and claimspowers or ability that he does not have, for personalgain. Such is often found among politicians, businessmagnets and preachers. True ministers of God, however, magnify only the truth, and not themselves.

Being "proud" (filled with conceit-arrogant) is closelyrelated to the boastful (braggart). The braggart will,with claims and promises, bluster his way into prominence, but the proud does so, holding in his heart contempt for everyone other than self. "God resisteththe proud, and giveth grace to the humble" (1 Pet. 5: 5;Jas. 4: 6; Prov. 3: 24).

"Blasphemer's are people who speak evil againstothers. The enemies of Jesus were guilty of this whenthey charged him with casting out devils by Beelzebub,the prince of devils (Matt. 12: 24-31). It is a matter ofhurling insults against others, even the Lord. The NASB uses the word "revilers." Those who espouse afalse doctrine, anxious to deceive others and discreditcontenders for truth, often engage in this evil action.

"Disobedient to parents" is rebellion to the law of Godin both the Old and New Testament which says "Honorthy father and thy mother." In Roman law, we are toldthat to strike a father was as bad as murder. Anyone whowould disregard authority in this area could not beexpected to respect God or any other authority. Jesussaid that following Him might involve "foes in your ownhousehold" (Matt. 10: 36).

"Unthankful" (ungrateful-NASB) is a trait of those who do not feel they are indebted to either God or man.Their own self-esteem keeps them from feeling anyobligation to others.

One who is "unholy" is actually irreligious. The Greekword is Anosios and Vines (p. 170) lists "unholy" and"profane" as it's translation. The unholy act and speak disdainfully of that which is divine and sacred.

"Without natural affection" (unloving-NKJ; NASB)involves the love that parents have for children and thechildren have for parents and one another. It is a familylove. This is found even among animals, but somehumans, without this, are worse than brute beasts.

"Trucebreakers" (implacable-ASV; unforgiving-NKJ; irreconcilable-NASB) are people who will not keeptheir word or promises or make any truce with anenemy, or one from which he is alienated.

"False accusers" (Slanderers-ASV; NKJ; malicious gossips-NASB) spread tales on others that are designed to damage or destroy one's reputation or good name. The tale is usually false, though, sometimes, it may havesome truth in it, but is circulated with the evil motive ofinjuring or destroying.

"Incontinent" (without self-control-ASV, NKJ,NASB) is to be unrestrained in appetites and passions,involving money, the tongue, pleasures, touch and taste.

"Fierce" (brutal-NKJ; NASB) is from "ferus," meaning wild, savage. The illusion is to savages and wildbeasts. With such, there is no restraint or control of theirpassions.

"Despisers of those that are good" (no lovers of good-ASV; despisers of good-NKJ; haters of good-NASB)suggests someone who has no desire or appetite for goodpeople or things. They have become so enthralled withevil that the thought of God or the things of God provokes hostility on their part toward good.

"Traitors" (treacherous-NASB) will readily betraythe trust that others have in them, and the cause thathas been committed to their trust.

"Heady" (headstrong-NKJ; reckless-NASB) is an inability on the part of an individual to think wisely,because of passion and impulse, so that he stubbornly pursues his own will or desires.

"Highminded" (puffed up-ASV; conceited-NASB;haughty-NKJ) describes one who is puffed up (inflated)with his own importance.

Being "lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God" (rather than-other Versions) causes one to make anysacrifice to obtain earthly pleasures, but gives nothing up for the cause of Christ or truth. With these, honoringGod must never interfere with their own fleshly desires.This characteristic is clearly seen in those who growlukewarm or become reprobate concerning faith.

It is sadly true that these numerous characteristics ofungodliness are seldom, if ever, found existing singularly in an individual. Possessing one quickly multipliesinto all. Those thus afflicted may profess godliness andhold to many forms, but that's all it is — a profession...a sham (v. 5). Their actions show that their professed faith lacks the power to influence their heart and life.Paul's instruction to Timothy, and all saints, is to turnaway from such. Of course, Christians must exhaust allscriptural means to save such, but when people refuse tosubmit themselves to the word (will) of the Lord, theymust not be allowed continued fellowship with thesaints.

Verses 6-7 describes the determined action of these apostates and the effect they have on some, particularlywomen who were controlled more by their desires thanthe word of truth. Such women were ladened with sin,being condemned by their own conscience. These falseteachers offered a teaching or philosophy (Gnosticism)that would allow them to follow fleshly passions and still have a clear conscience, being convinced by false teaching that they have done no wrong. The teaching thatonly the spirit matters and nothing done in the fleshdoes, is false and results not in salvation, but condemnation. God's ministers must ever do battle with these apostates and their philosophies if they are going to besuccessful in saving themselves and their hearers. Such false teachers are ever studying every new theory or idea that comes along and discussing them, but are ignorant of truth.

An illustration of such opposition to God's truth is given in verse 8 in the mention of Jannes and Jambreswho withstood Moses. These are not mentioned elsewhere in the scriptures. Early Jewish writers say thesewere magicians in Egypt who "by their enchantments" apparently duplicated some of Moses' miracles, bywhich Pharaoh was deceived, and withstood Moses andGod in delivering Israel. The false teachers Paul is herewarning against, may have claimed some mysticalpowers, as they often did, to better deceive and influencethe people. Truly, such have "corrupt minds" and are"reprobate concerning the faith." The words "corrupt"and "reprobate" indicate these men were once Christians, members of the body of Christ, and embracers oftruth, but their minds had been so filled with error(theories and philosophy) and their own self esteem,that now they were enemies of truth. This has happened, can happen, and will evidently continue to happen, hence this warning to all of God's ministers who are interested in their own salvation, and others.

In verse 9, Paul says that false teachers (apostates)and the havoc they cause among saints, "shall proceedno further": that "their folly shall be manifest unto all men." Moses exposed Jannes and Jambres, having thepower to do so, and all Egypt saw it. Christianity (theGospel-Truth) has always been able to prove itself overthe numerous and strong actions of Satan and his messengers, and it still has that power today. God willraise up faithful ones, like Paul and Timothy, who willfaithfully contend for the faith (exposing every falseway), diligently teach it to others, and constantly warnand edify the saints, thus truth will always be manifestand will triumph.

Follow Paul's Example Of Suffering For ChristAnd Others (v. 10-13)

That divinely revealed to Paul (Gal. 1: 11-12), he haddiligently and fully made known to Timothy and others(1 Cor. 2: 1-5; 4: 1-2; Acts 20: 26-27; 2 Tim. 1: 13; 2: 2).In doing this, his purpose, conduct, faith,longsuffering, love, and patience were well known andrealized by Timothy and other saints. Such was Paul's manner of life in the midst of numerous persecutionsand afflictions, but the Lord was his deliverer. He assures all true saints that they too will suffer persecution (v. 12), because the evil men and seducers(false teachers) that confronted Paul would continue toincrease. In view of this, it would be very importantthat Timothy and all saints act as Paul did, lest they bedeceived and lose their souls.

Be Steadfast In The Scriptures (v. 14-17)

Timothy, to save himself and his hearers, is told tocontinue in the things he had learned and been assured of from Paul, an inspired apostle (v. 14). Since Paullearned what he taught by revelation (Gal. 1: 11-12) andit was confirmed by miracles (Acts 15: 12), it was truth-the Word of God-Scripture. Scripture, divinely revealedtruth, is something Timothy was acquainted with in youth, and respected. It is that which makes one wiseunto salvation through faith in Christ (v. 15). The importance of being scriptural (All we believe and do byinspiration of God) is further emphasized by pointing towhat Scripture does (v. 16). It is profitable for doctrine(teaching). No man, interested in saving himself and hishearers, has any business teaching anything that is notfound in Scripture.

"Reproof," in the Greek, is "Elegmas," which Vinessays "denotes a proof, proving, test, as in Heb. 11: 1"(Page 283). This means if you want to prove a doctrineto be true, Scripture is the thing to use. Human reasoning, philosophy, or theorizing won't do it.

"Correction" simply means to "make straight." When one relies on scripture for his doctrine it is straight;otherwise it is crooked. The only thing that will correctcrooked teaching is scripture. Pitting one theory againstanother will never reveal truth.

Scripture furnishes us with all the "instruction inrighteousness" there is. Any doctrine or religious practice not found in scripture is no part of God's righteousness. Scripture, alone, completely furnishes man untoall good works (v. 17).

I am appalled at the popular belief in the religiousworld, and even among some brethren, that one does nothave to be scriptural in all his beliefs and practices to besaved. This exhortation to Timothy to continue in thedoctrine divinely revealed, which Paul enjoyed manyother times in these letters, was given in order thatTimothy might be successful in saving himself and themthat heard him. Abiding in truth is a condition ofsalvation.

Page 11

I guess in much of my writing I am a reactionary. Thatmeans that I read something written by another and write in reaction to it. That is not all bad but it doesn't always lead to healthy, upbuilding constructive articles.This article is something of that type. Many months ago I read an article in this magazine devoted to our use ofthe word "sound" in describing a congregation. I don't think I really disagreed with anything that was actually said in the article but did disagree with some things Isaw implied in it. I put the article aside and in timeforgot it. Recently, I came across it and this is a result ofmy reaction.

The first time I remember the word "sound" being used in regard to a congregation of God's people was inthe mid 1950s. I was preaching in Illinois and the wordwas used to describe those churches that were not influenced by the teaching of Carl and L. E. Ketcherside.I also found them using it to describe those churchesthat did not have "full time preachers." In the followingyears the word came to be used (by me and others) torefer to churches that did not support any human institutions from the common treasury. And when weused it that way those with whom we conversed understood what we meant. Then as time passed, conceptschanged and the word came to be used in other areas.

It came to mean (as the writer of the former article setforth) a church that taught the truth on (1) the plan ofsalvation, (2) a scriptural name, (3) a rejection of humaninstitutions, (4) opposition to the social gospel, and (5)the right order of worship. We need to stop using suchterms without an explanation as it is not really fair. Thefirst definition in my dictionary of the word "sound" is: "Free from flaw, defect, or decay; undamaged or unimpaired" (Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, Second Edition).

The implication of the aforementioned article wasthat in addition to the five things above we also need toinclude (6) punitive church discipline. The authorshowed the lack of such in his experience and rightfullycalled upon individuals and churches to practice thatdoctrinal and practical purity in this matter as in othersif they were to be considered "sound." I can agree withsome of that but the danger is we will then have to listother things and finally will have a "creed" that identifies what is a "sound church." Let's get away from such terminology.

But to the matter of punitive church discipline. I havebeen a member of the body of Christ for about 43 yearsand during that time have been a part of eleven congregations scattered over six states and the District ofColumbia. These congregations ranged from a smallrural one to a very large, metropolitan institutional oneand then to all sizes of non-institutional ones. I know of no other way to describe them. Now to my point — in all of these (save one about which I don't remember) punitive church discipline was practiced! I remember two cases in the rural church of my youth when a deacon wasdisciplined for drinking whiskey and one of the othermembers disciplined because he cheated a man in amule trade. In other churches I remember people being spiritually punished for things from forsaking the assembling of the saints, to sowing discord, to drunkenness, to adultery. All of this done in obedience to Matthew 18: 15-17; Romans 16: 17; 1 Corinthians 5: 1-13; 2 Thessalonians 3: 6-15 and Titus 3: 10.

Since I have been preaching the gospel ALL of thecongregations with which I have worked have practicedpunitive church discipline. One elder told me at oneplace he just couldn't have a part in putting one out ofthe church. However, in less than three years he wasworking with the others in punitive discipline as well asin other areas. Through patience he learned what theBible taught and then led (with others) in doing it. Iknow that I have been blessed in being able to work withsome of the better of God's people. Others (as the writerof the former article) have not been so blessed.

Now, another point. In NONE of the churches whereI have worked as a preacher was punitive church discipline always carried out EXACTLY AS I THOUGHT ITSHOULD BE! Sometimes I thought they waited toolong, at other times I thought they acted too quickly.Sometimes I thought they were not completely impartial in such practice. In other words, they didn't alwaysdo it the way I thought it ought to be done — but theyDID IT! And generally, they did it well. It didn't take me long to realize that a lot of judgment is to be used here.The Lord didn't say how long to wait between the threecontacts in Matthew 18: 15-17. And Paul didn't tell Titus how long to wait between the first and second admonition in Titus 3: 10 nor how long to wait after the secondadmonition before the heretic was to be rejected. How quickly was the one in Romans 16: 17 to be marked andavoided? Judgment must be used in these areas.

Brethren, we have to learn to be patient in our effortsto teach one another what the Bible has to say aboutpunitive church discipline. Paul told Timothy to reprove, rebuke and exhort with ALL LONGSUFFERING and TEACHING (emphasis mine, jfd - 2 Timothy 4: 2). Inhis appeal to the Ephesian saints to keep the unity of theSpirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4: 3) there wasto be the exercise of meekness, longsuffering andforbearance (Ephesians 4: 2). This is not justificationfor over-looking and condoning sin of any sort. But it isan appeal to recognize that we have to give people time tolearn and then help them develop the courage to act.

We are not going to find PERFECTION in a congregation. And should a church accomplish such if one of uspreachers moved there we would probably "mess it up."I write that in jest but I think you can see my point.Sometimes we are looking for perfection all at once and

Page 12 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

don't give people time to learn and grow. Let's strive to build congregations that are "free from flaw, defect, ordecay." At the same time let's recognize that there aremany things that do not affect our working and worshiping together over which we will differ and we needpatience to work them out. There are many matters ofjudgment in serving the Lord and we must not divide over them. We need to use care that we don't "draw lines" against all who disagree with us. For some reasonwe expect them to learn as quickly as we think we did.I still recommend a church as being a "sound" or "good" church if someone is asking for a place to worshipwhile away from home. I use these terms to describe one where I believe they can worship without violating theirconscience and where truth is upheld. If someone isconsidering a move to an area and asks me my opinionof the churches there I go into more detail and describethem as honestly as I can. There are a lot of fine brethrenand fine congregations (is that another word that willhave to be explained?) scattered around over the world but I still don't know of any PERFECT ones.

The title of this article, is copied from the title of abook, published in 1980, by the University of CaliforniaPress. The original manuscript was initially submittedas a Ph. D., dissertation, by Jean-Guy Vaillancourt,who is now an Associate Professor of Sociology at theUniversity of Montreal. Basically, this book deals withthe relationship between Papal power and the submissive strata of the Roman Church, termed bythem, "the laity. "

Let us quickly picture the pope as "the man who sitson the throne of Saint Peter, since the pope is anabsolute ruler, elected for life, who is not accountable toany judiciary or legislative control." (Papal Power, page 10).

The Catholic author has the pope "on the throne ofSaint Peter," however, this is an assertion that restsupon ancient legends rather than upon historical fact.

"The organizational image that still most oftencomes to mind when reference is made to the Church is that of a pyramidal or monarchical structure. On the top is the pope, the Supreme Pontiff, with his chiefassistants and advisers, the cardinals, who also holdthe top positions in the Roman Curia. Below the cardinals come the various types of bishops and monsignors: the archbishops and metropolitans, theresident bishops, the vicars and prefects apostolic,abbots and prelates and apostolic administrators. Below these august figures are pastors, priests, brothers, and nuns. Finally at

the bottom, in another world practically, is the greatmass of the faithful, the laity. The development of thisstratified and basically two-tiered conception of theChurch, shaped during many centuries of history, waschallenged at Vatican II, and other, more collegial,models were considered in its place. One such model isthat of an organism, a body, the mystical Body of Christ. Another is that of a new Israel, the pilgrim people, the people of God. A third is that of an open communitywhere those in positions of authority consider themselves to be the servants, rather than the masters of thewhole community. This third model seems to be the original form that predominated in the early Christian church." (Ibid, page 12. Underscoring mine. LWM).

The above description is a "far cry" from the NewTestament description of the Lord's church, as established and implemented by the Man of Galilee and the twelve apostles.

"From its inception, the Catholic Church has moved gradually from grass-roots democracy and collegial authority to a vast concentration of power and authority inthe hands of the clergy and hierarchy, and especially inthe hands of the pope and his curia." (Ibid, page 19).

Once again the Catholic author describes the gradualchange that has occurred in Catholicism. Although Idisagree with his use of the term "grass-roots democracy"if by that expression he implies any practice of "majorityrule. "

"The New Testament view of authority in the church was based on functionality and service rather than onlegality, dignity, and power. The leaders were those whohad certain charismatic gifts and who were chosen by the apostles or by the community to render certain religiousservice to their religious brothers and sisters. They werecalled overseers (bishops) and elders (priests). The laos was not a body separate from these leaders and dominated by them. Although in the Greek language the wordlaos referred to the mass of the people, as distinguished from their rulers and leaders, this usage does not occurin the Bible except in a few places in the Septuagint(Greek Old Testament - LWM). The more comprehensivemeaning, just described, is the one generally found inboth the Old and New Testament. The laity-clergy dichotomy as we know it today is never mentioned in earlyChristian documents, because it did not exist as such.The earliest functional classifications we know of in the Christian communities (assemblies - LWM) around theMediterranean are those of apostles, disciples, prophets,overseers, elders, and deacons, never those of priests (or clerics) and laymen." (Underscoring mine. LWM. Ibid, pages 20-21).

Copying more from Papal Power:"The early Christian gatherings were local churches,presided over by a number of elders. Then the elders,along with the rest of the membership, elected an overseer. At first this overseer, or bishop (episcopos), wasonly "primus inter pares," (first among equals - LWM),but his authority grew, influenced in good part by pagan and Jewish conceptions of priesthood, and especially bythe fact that he controlled the funds of the local church.

Page 13

"The first use of laikos in the sense of "the masses" appears in a letter written to the Corinthians byClement of Rome around AD. 96. The letter is a strongPaulian defense of Corinthian bishops who had beendismissed by a rival party. It expresses loyalty to theempire and has a certain tone of Roman arrogance (theobedience of Roman legionnaires is cited as an example to be followed, in the church of organization, at a timewhen Roman emperors were persecuting Christians).The doctrines of apostolic succession and irremovability of the clergy are among those affirmed by Clement.He makes use of laikos to mean the rank-and-file members of the church, as opposed to the clerical and episcopal leaders.

"With the increasing Romanization of the Western church during the second century, this definition oflaos and its derivative laikos rapidly prevailed, especially among the Gentile Christians. From the thirdcentury onward, the definition of laos as a peopledistinct from church authorities becomes the onlyaccepted one..." (Ibid, page 21).

Disregard For Scriptural Authority!

The admissions made by the Catholic author are generally historically accurate. His conclusions describe the departures of the Roman Catholic Churchfrom the New Testament blueprint. This pattern ofapostasy has been repeated over and over, in manyplaces, in many centuries, dealing with many differentdoctrines, and by many and various peoples.

Among the latest being from the pen of Reuel Lemmons, Action, April 1988; when he makes reference to brother Darrell Foltz, as "a lay preacher. "

Another, and more spectacular departure has featured in recent years the Crossroads Philosophy and more recently the Boston-based satellite-church, discipler-discipling ministry.

In recent decades, a number of Catholic scholarshave come to a realization of the departures of the Roman Church... yet some of our brethren are repeating the same mistakes and departures from the NewTestament, that Rome made centuries ago!

Amos 5: 10 reads, "They hate him that rebuketh in thegate, and they abhor him that speaketh uprightly." Thesewords were written to an apostate Israel who had knownGod and seen the works that He had done for them (seeAmos 3: 6-16). However, Israel had not been faithful infollowing god's Law. Instead, the people were followers ofthe false religion set up by Jeroboam (1 Kings 12: 25-33).In their departure from God, Israel had become so corruptthat even civil rulers who spoke truth and judged righteously were no longer desired, as our text shows. Israeldesired those judges who "afflict the just, take a bribe, and turn aside the poor in the gate from their right" (Amos

5: 12). For that apostasy, Amos, the prophet from God

(3: 1), plainly passed the sentence "... prepare to meet thyGod, O Israel" (4: 12).

Today many Christians have the same attitude asIsrael. Whereas it used to be that evangelists could speak forthrightly about sin and problems among God's people,that is no longer the case. Indeed, many "hate him thatrebuketh in the gate, and they abhor him that speakethuprightly" in reference to preachers and their preachingthe truth of God's Word. We see that so easily in the "liberal" churches where Christians have been led father and farther away from the truth by weak and "Bible-less"sermons. Sadly, that type of preaching is even desired among "conservative" churches. I believe we have reached a turning point. A point that, if left unchallenged and uncorrected, will direct us straight toward apostasyand ultimately into hell! The cry from the pews in manyplaces is no longer for the clear and forceful proclamationof the Truth, but for the latest pop-psychology andhuman wisdom. I have heard of days long ago whenpreachers boldly proclaimed God's Word, without worrying whether or not they may be disliked or whether theymay lost their jobs at local churches. They had deepconvictions and were not ashamed to speak their convictions when opportunity came knocking. Why don't we hear that same preaching today? The answer is simple.Let me offer my answer with an illustration.

In my Western Civilization class in college, the teachermade a statement that makes very much sense. In reference to the French dynasties of the 1500's and 1600's, hesaid, "As was the king, so was his kingdom." So it is withmany churches now.: "As is the desire of those in the pews,so it will be the preaching that comes from the pulpit." Iam certainly aware that this is not true of every individual of every church. I am also aware that weak preachingdoes not come from every preacher. But, we cannot ignorethe simple fact that this is true in too many places (and really one place is too many!). It appears to me that weare becoming concerned with sophistication and polish more than the unashamed and truthful proclamation ofGod's Holy Word. Brethren, learn lessons from history (Rom. 15: 4, 1 Cor. 10: 10-6)! Do you remember Israelwho wanted a king so they could be like all the nations around them (1 Samuel 8)? They were concerned with their appearance before neighboringnations rather than being righteous before God. We also must be more concerned with our condition before God rather than follow the trends of the denomi"nations" around us.

I hope that you will sincerely and seriously considerwhat I have said. I am not an enemy of positive preaching (as long as it is positively Biblical) or of eloquence perse. But what I am worried about is the attitude that is behind brethren who would rather be entertained than taught. Fellow Christian, if you would rather be entertained, "thy heart is not right in the sight of God" (Acts

8: 21). If you would rather be taught, "desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby" (1 Peter

2: 1).

"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork" (Ps. 19: 1).

With the increase of man's knowledge comes the constant confirmation of the Psalmist's statement. The evidence continues to build that this universe is not the product of chance but a system of order and design. Thedesign of the universe points to a designer.

The argument from design is a powerful argumentthat proves the existence of God. Atheists feel the force of this argument in discussion and debate and they are often compelled to take a rather strange position. Torefute the argument from design, the atheist will oftenassert that there is as much disorder in the universe as order. The conclusion is drawn that the existence of randomness and disorder in the universe disproves atotal system of order and design, thus there is not adesigner.

This argument was presented in the Bales-Tellerdebate by the atheist Woolsey Teller. Mr. Teller repeatedly argued that the world and the organisms in it areso poorly made that this world could not have beendesigned, thus there is no designer. Mr. Teller said, "Anycomment on the God idea and design in nature would beincomplete if we failed to consider the arrangement ofthe planets in their relation to the sun, that is, theirplacements in point of distance, and what occurs because of their positions. Now, if the universe was designed (and the universe includes our solar system), itwas designed in a very peculiar way" (Bales-Teller Debate, 1947, p. 49).

Mr. Teller proceeded to argue that the lay-out of the planets of the solar system was "ridiculous" because ofits lack of order thus the universe could not be the creation of divine being. This general line of argumentation has been used by atheists in numerous debates.

While the atheists' "argument from chaos" soundsimpressive, it is built upon a faulty premise. The assertion that there is chaos or disorder in the universe is an unproven and false premise. Recent scientific studieshave concluded that what superficially appears to berandom behavior in systems, closer observation revealscomplex patterns and design!

Within the last decade, a number of scientists havestudied apparent random behavior of various systemssuch as the turbulence of a stream, air turbulence, the development of sun spots, the spread of flames, waterdripping from a faucet and water movement in theoceans. Studies in this area have even advanced to the point that this year there was a scientific conference onthe subject in Monterey, California, the InternationalConference on the Physics of Chaos and Systems FarFrom Equilibrium. Scientists involved with these studies have concluded, "There is order in chaos. Underlyingchaotic behavior there are elegant geometric forms thatcreate randomness in the same way a card dealershuffles a deck of cards or a blender mixes a cake batter ... Random-looking information can be explained interms of simple laws" (Scientific American quoted in the"Miami Herald", Jan. 14, 1987).

The atheists' "argument from chaos" is an argumentfrom ignorance. For an atheist to declare that a particular system or organism is without order, design orpurpose simply reveals that the atheist is ignorant of theorder, design and purpose or that system. Closer examination and study of what appears to be without designor purpose can often expose design and purpose.

A good example of the atheists' argument from ignorance is the once weighty "evidence' of vestigial organs.A vestigial organ is an organ or structure of the bodythat has no apparent purpose and has supposedly degenerated because of lack of use. One hundred yearsago, science listed over 186 organs of the human body as"vestigial organs", organs with no apparent purpose.These "useless" structures were seen as evidence of evolution and disproof of the existence of God. Today,only five organs remain on the list of vestigial organsand even the classification of these five as vestigialorgans is hotly debated by the scientific community. Theproblem with "vestigial" organs was not that they had nopurpose, but that men were ignorant of their purpose.

Order, design and purpose, not chaos, rule throughout the universe. Even seeming chaos is carefully ordered. Order and design demand a Designer. That Designer is the God of the Bible. "Thus saith the Lord,the Holy One... I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out theheavens, and all their host have I commanded" (Isa.

45: 11-12).

___________________________________________________________________________________________________Page 15

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

URGENT APPEAL FOR HELP IN CHINA JEFFERY KINGRY, AMCONGEN Shenyang, Box 45, FPO SanFrancisco, CA 96655 — (The following is a summary of informationgathered from recent letters and reports from brother Kingry. Editor)Six have obeyed the gospel, the first fruits of the effort in China. The visa for the Kingry's expires in June and they will have to return to thestates to get the children settled in school. It is urgent that someonecapable of teaching English come to follow up the work started. Thereis a need for at least three other men to volunteer for Shanghai and Fuzhoy, Fujia for at least one semester.

There are two ways to gain entry into China: (1) English Teacher. No Chinese language required. You will not be teaching on a U. S.College level, but a fifth grade level (modelling native English,outlining, topic sentences, conversation, vocabulary, etc. ). A Bachelor's degree would be good, but is not absolutely necessary. You would teach 6-18 hours a week with wage of about $200/month. (2) Intensive Chinese Language Instruction. Come as a student, pay tuition, live ina dorm or hired house, and learn the Chinese language for one or two semesters. School year is Sept. 1989 - Jan. 1990, March 1990 - June 1990. SHANGHAI: The East China Univ. of Chemical Technology inShanghai needs teachers for the 1989-90 school year, Shanghai is the biggest city in China, 11. 5 million. It is crowded, but has diversehistory and many western refinements. The atmosphere in Shanghaiwould be very liberal for a worker. Brother Lu Wei Min would be there to provide a reliable Chinese-speaking helper and fellow-laborer.FUZHOU, FUJIA: The Fujian Normal University, a teacher's college needs an English teacher for the same time. Fuzhou is the capital ofFujia, a city of 1. 5 million people. Fuzhou is a historical city withwestern housing, temperate climate, and close contacts with Shanghai. While sister Li Xiu-zhong is only 22, she is by far the quickeststudy I know and fearless. She needs someone to work in her community for Christ.SHENYANG, LIAONING: I have two choices, teaching English atDong Gong (NW Tech. Univ. ) or taking the Chinese language semester at Liaoning Univ. There are advantages and disadvantages forboth choices. But, I would stay in Shenyang to bridge for another man or to continue my work with the little church here. Whether I returnor not, there is work here for two. Xue Xiao-bin and Jie Wen-jie wouldpresent a permanent presence to help any incoming preacher.

Brethren everywhere (at lecture programs, in the journals, inmeetings, between brethren) need to talk this up. I will help all I can.But we need to do it NOW. It will take a minimum of six months to make arrangements, raise support. We need also to find support forplane tickets, monthly support, shipping, literature. If good men canbe found, in whom brethren have confidence, the rest will come. Theyhave to be willing and competent men willing to give of themselves for this work. The door is now open. We have made a start and it will be easier for those who follow. We are not looking for people to commit forthe rest of their lives, but to come and help on a short term basis. Ifanyone is willing, I will arrange to meet them in Hong Kong, Manilaor Tokyo and help all I can. (ANOTHER EDITOR'S NOTE: Brethren, this situation cries for help. It is too important to ignore. Who can go? Who WILL go? Pleasecontact brother Kingry quickly. ) P. J. CASEBOLT, P. O. Box 1487, Chiefland, FL 32626 — Lord willing, we shall be leaving Chiefland as of April 30, 1989. We plan toreturn to Elk Fork, WV, where we previously labored for nine years(1969-1978). We should be in a position to conduct more meetings, and our address will be: Rt. 1, box 210, Middlebourne, WV 26149, after May l.

CARLOS CAPELLI, Casilla #83, 1665 Jose C. Paz, Buenos Aires, Argentina — I spent 20 days preaching in El Salvador in November, 1988. Three were baptized during this time. We helped a congregationwith some internal problems about the elders and deacons. I preachedat Santa Eugenia Church in San Salvador, at Matazano (where theyhave two men who preach and support themselves as taxi drivers). Ialso preached in Santa Ana where Hugo Luna preaches. We had 70each night. They have their own building. Then I preached at Zacatecolucas and in Santiago Nonualco where Daniel Alvarado works. Ispent three days preaching in Lomas De Perulapia. All brethren thereare farmers and three brethren take turns preaching — Florentino Hernandez, Benigno Lopez and Manuel Melgar. I saw one day someof the damage from the guerrilla war with the army of El Salvador.The war is terrible! I also preached in Guatemala and Panama on myway back home.

PAUL A. JONES, 1563 41 st St., Columbus, GA 31904 — I want to geton the mailing list of churches that have good teaching bulletins. Deaf people have souls that need to be reached with the gospel, too. Doyou know of sources or churches that have video-taped sermons withsign language interpretation? I want to teach my deaf friends, so I tooka course at night on sign language, but I need more help.

RICK A. HUBARTT, 301 Fern St., Newark, OH 43055 — I was involved in video taping the Nashville Meeting and can make the tapes available for $45 a set. There are 7 tapes at L. P. speed with 4hours a tape, 23 hours of actual recording. Write or call me at (614)366-7115.

OWEN H. THOMAS, 5327 S. Tryon St., Charlotte, NC 28217 —Afterfive and a half years with the church in Charlotte, we will be movingthe last of February to begin work with the Tomlinson Run churchnear Georgetown, PA. All correspondents please note my new address. It will be: Rt. 2, Box 117, Georgetown, PA 15043. The churchhere is looking for someone to work with them. Anyone interested may write them at the above address or call Bill Mayo at (704) 739-3944 orJim White at (803) 547-4291.

DERREL STARLING, 412 Mariner, Victoria, TX 77901 — Gospelmeetings at the Glascow St. church for 1989 include Oliver Murray,March 5-10, and Delmar Hightower, Oct. 15-20. We encourage faithful Christians looking for mild weather, to retire in Victoria. Ill beglad to supply any information needed.

ROBERT H. FARISH, Rt. 4, Box 4384-D, Belton, TX 76513 — We have moved to Belton, Texas. My plans are to hold meetings, preachat any congregation which wants a Sunday "fill-in" and do more writing. We are worshipping with the Leon Valley church, 306 E. Ave.C, Belton, TX 76513. Tim Coffey preaches regularly here. Work is setto begin on a permanent meeting house in the near future. I have been asked to teach a Bible class on Wed. evenings.

WARREN E. BERKLEY, Wallisville Road Church of Christ, Highlands, Texas — In 1988, we appealed to churches and individuals onbehalf of a family in need, the Luther White family. At that time, brother White was suffering with terminal cancer, his wife was ill, and his daughter was not in good health. In addition and as a result ofthese calamities, there was no income. Churches and individuals all across the land came to the aid of this family, in a regular andsubstantial way. We are thankful to God, and to you for this generosity. On January 17, 1989, brother White passed from this life, and hisbody was placed in the earth on January 19. The cards, letters,prayers and funds sent will remain as a refreshing memory to thefamily.

FROM CHILE — SOUTH AMERICA — On December 8, 1988, Efrain Perez, his wife and two daughters left for the USA and then onto Spain. Chris, their older son will remain in Chile until he finisheshis medical training. Most of the Chilean preachers and some othersgave them a "going away" party. The Lord's work in Chile has been tremendously blessed with the work of brother Perez. His preachertraining classes will be missed. His work allowed us to grow, toexercise true autonomy as congregations and as individuals. The work of the Lord has grown in Chile and part of this growth is due toEfrain's dedication. Spain claims him. The Lord has other work forhim there. The Spanish Conquerors brought their false religion to thiscontinent, but one "more than conqueror" will take the Lord's gospel to them.

WAYNE S. WALKER, 310 Haynes St., Dayton, OH 45410 — At Haynes St. in 1988 five were baptized and two families placed membership with us. Sunday morning attendance now runs in the 80swith increases on Sunday and Wed. nights and in the contribution. Weare happy that unity and peace prevail. We had fall meetings withRoger Hendricks and A. C. Grider. In the spring of 1989 we will havea meeting with Steve Wolfgang and Dale Pennock will present a series during a vacation Bible school on "The New Age Movement." In the spring of 1989 I am scheduled for meetings at Greenwood, SC,Madison, Wisconsin, and Southside in Mansfield, OH.

NEY RIEBER, 6413 Zion Church Rd., Sanford, NC 27330 — The work in the prisons continues to be encouraging. Where else could yougo and have access to over 100 people and have them to be glad to seeyou? At Blanch there are from 25-50 each week and at Polk there are from 25-40 for a class each week. I baptized 3 at Polk in December. Thechurch in Chapel Hill is small but we have unity and things look betterthan they have for a long time. Besides the work here, I have committed to preaching twice a month at Sanford. Our schedule atChapel Hill is such there will be no conflict. Sanford is also a small butdedicated group. They are also looking for a fulltime preacher.

PAUL WILLIAMS, P. O. Box 324, Eshowe, 3815 South Africa—A 12 day tent meeting in rural Zululand saw about 100 percent each nightand five were baptized. Services ran from 7-9 each night and somecomplained that we closed too soon. So, the services were lengthenedto 10 P. M. and no one complained they were too long. We had lengthyquestion and answer sessions which had much to do with convertingthe five young women.

OBITUARIES SHERRELL D. JACKSON of Conroe, Texas passed away on May 5,1988 after an 8 year bout with Leukemia. He did fairly well for 6 yearsbut began failing after that. He worked for 38 years for the PostalService and only took five days sick time during his tenure. He and hiswife, Helen Ashberry, were married 42 years and 5 months. Sherrelltaught a young people's class as long as his health permitted. He wasa good student of the Bible and many young people were baptized fromhis teaching. Preachers he had worked with for years officiated withan overflow crowd at the funeral. These were: W. H. Hance, Eris Ritchie, Robert Goodman and W. R. Jones. He is survived by his wife,Helen and two faithful children and three grandchildren.

W. R. Jones DANA HAMPTON HALSTEAD — It is my sad duty to report thedeath of Dana Halstead, a husband, a father, a grandfather, a gospelpreacher and debater, a Christian and a member of the church inBossier City, LA, and my friend. He was born, March 13, 1927 inDanville, WV and died in Shreveport, LA, Nov. 8, 1988.

Dana married Evelyn McGowan Aug. 31, 1950, while in the AirForce. He was not a Christian at the time, but was baptized soon afterstudying with Thomas D. Rose. Dana had great zeal, and very shortlyafter his conversion he began to teach classes, and then to preach at small churches in the Ark-La-Tex area.

In the beginning Dana held the no-class and no-located preacherpositions. But after his first debate, with Gene Frost, he decided brother Frost was right and changed his views. Following this debate,he had two eight night debates with F. I. Stanley on the institutional question. He probably did his best job when he debated Chester A.Guinn, professor of Bible at the Bible Theological Seminary, held inCleveland, Texas. In 1961 he debated a brother Brown of the Mansfield, LA church on the institutional question. The debate was described by many of his friends and foes as being brutal in nature, butto this day the institutional churches in Desoto Parish remain weakin comparison to the faithful brethren. Dana also debated Ronnie Wade and a brother Thomas of Kentucky on the one cup/no classposition, and had a similar exchange with Buff Scott, Jr. Buff affirmedthat there will be many unimmersed individuals who will be saved due to their piety in other matters. Dana had great zeal for what hebelieved to be right, and when he discovered he was wrong, he waswilling to change to be right with his God.

Dana preached for the church in Stanley, LA; Cleveland, TX;South Flores in San Antonio, TX; East Houston Rd. in Houston, TX; El Dorado, AR; Marshall, TX; and the Union Rd. church in Kansas City, MO.

At this time he moved to Columbus, GA and went into the retailingbusiness and worshipped at Rose Hill while there. Shortly afterwardshe was struck with a form of multiple sclerosis and moved back to theShreveport-Bossier City area where, in spite of his crippling disease,he worked hard with me and the church at Bossier City. In 1965 he began alternating the preaching duties with Huey Hartsell and myself for a new work in Magnolia, AR.

He held meetings in Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri and Oklahoma. He performed many marriages and preached many funerals, but would not accept money for these services.

He was a Christian of strong convictions, and enjoyed talkingabout the Scriptures. When you visited Dana you talked about the Bible. Though barely able to get around, he seldom missed services,and when I had to be absent was available to preach. The church willmiss him as will his family and the brotherhood. —B. J. Thomas

PREACHERS NEEDED PRINCETON, WV — The Old Athens Rd. church in Princeton is looking for a full or part-time preacher. We are a small congregationwith our own building. We are partially able to support a man, thoughsome outside help would be needed. We can help with that. The southern part of WV is an inexpensive area to live in, and also verybeautiful. If interested, contact: Leonard Matlock, Rt. 1, Box 258A, Rock, WV 24747, or phone (304) 425-4627.NASHVILLE, TN — The Bell Road church is seeking a fulltimepreacher. Full support will be provided within our ability. The churchis financially debt free and is at peace. We believe there is a greatpotential for growth. If you are interested, please call (615) 832-1979or (615) 776-1134.DONIPHAN, MO — The Southside church is in need of a preacher.We are a small group of about 30 and can provide $250 a week towardsupport. Those interested may contact Lial Holland at (314) 996-3513,or Rex Holland at (314) 996-3251, or write c/o Lial Holland, P. O. Box4, Doniphan, MO 63935.CARLISLE, PA — The Walnut Bottom Road church near Carlisle in south central Pennsylvania needs a fulltime preacher. We have about25 members and are able to supply $200 support weekly. Additionalsupport would have to be raised by the preacher. Those interestedshould contact Garry Adams (717) 423-6707 in the evenings.

AVAILABLE FOR APPOINTMENTS JEFF SMITH, 103 Beth Dr., Lawrenceburg, KY 40342 — I amavailable to preach Sundays on a fill-in basis for churches in drivingdistance of my home in Lawrenceburg. You may reach me at the above address, or phone me at (502) 839-3205.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH

BAPTISMS 383 RESTORATIONS 59 (Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)