INFLUENCES THAT DESTROY

H. E. Phillips

In Philippians 3:17 we find this language: "Brethren,be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample." This language suggests the power of personal influence upon others. Influence itself may be good or bad, but in either case one should never under estimate its impact upon present and future generations. When we speak of a "poor" or "bad" influence, we do not mean that it does not have far reaching powers; rather, we mean that it does not lead in the right direction. There are influences that destroy the spiritual nature of the church just as there are influences that build spiritual strength. It is my purpose here to discuss some of the influences that are destroying the churches of Christ in many sections today.

Influence may be defined as "Any agency or power that serves to affect, modify, or sway in some way; an impelling force producing a modifying or swaying effect upon the life and actions of a person." There are internal influences: those that originate from within the person or group; and external influences: those that originate from without. Of the two, the most damaging to the church is the internal influence, because it is so hard to convince the people involved that such an evil influence it at work.

Man by nature imitates from birth. We learn from our parents at first, then as we grow older we are impressed by the language and conduct of others with whom we come incontact. Our personal influence reaches far beyond our personal contact. A father influences his child, who in turn influences his children, and so it goes for generations. As Christians we make impressions upon the people we contact in life, both good and bad, that reflects to them the nature and spiritual condition of the church. In turn we are influenced by those people who touch our lives, both in the church and out of the church. This should make one tremble at the power he is exerting in life upon others around him. No matter who you are, someone is imitating you in some respect and will be persuaded to follow Christ or the devil because of your example. Since the church is made up ofpeople, we know that various influences brought to bear upon the church either enhance its spiritual power and glory derived from its Head, or destroy its spiritual nature and corrupt its glorious mission. What are the influences that destroy the church today?

First, the influence of ATTITUDE is destroying the church today. It is true that attitude is a fruit of influence,

but it is also true that this attitude further influences others.

The attitude of indifference and carelessness is wide spread

among Christians (? ) today. Great errors have crept into

the church because the members are indifferent to them,

and this attitude influences others to disregard these and

other errors as they come. Indifference to Bible reading,

personal responsibilities, prayer, worship, the destiny of the

church, etc. hardens the heart and darkens the spiritual con

cept of the church. It is a major destroying influence in the

church today.

Second, the influence of DENOMINATIONALISM is

destroying the church. Far too many are being baptized who

have never been converted to Christ. They are still under the

influence of denominationalism from which they came. The

"big meetings" and emotional begging have contributed to

this condition. Christ has not been preached, the difference

between the church of the Lord and the churches of men

has not been taught, the organizational functions of de

nominations have been incorporated into the church of

Christ, the special religious holidays are observed, some creeds

are being formed and the tie-ups with denominational

preachers are becoming stronger. All of this is the result of

the influence of denominationalism in the churches today,

and it will continue to bear the bitter and black fruit of

apostasy for generations to come. We need to convert mem

bers of the church in some sections all over again, or better

to say, convert them to Christ for the first time. There is

no need to deny it, the church today is being invaded by

denominational concepts, even to rank modernism. This in

fluence has to be destroyed or it will destroy us.

Third, the influence of HUMAN WISDOM is destroying the church. The Holy Spirit drew a sharp contrast between human wisdom and divine wisdom in I Corinthians 1 and 2. The Lord said that human wisdom would be destroyed, that the world could not know God by human wisdom, that the foolishness of God was greater than humanwisdom, that the apostles did not speak with the wisdom that came from man. Paul said he spoke the wisdom that came "from God and that only this wisdom would direct men to a knowledge of God and His will. This ought to be enough to show that worldly education does not make anyone an authority in the Lord's church, but it is not that way today. Churches are clamoring for men of high degree in worldly attainment to be the teachers and leaders, and neglecting the spiritual knowledge and attainment. Plans are devised and schemes perfected by human wisdom, then vain efforts are made to find scriptural approval for them to be bound upon the churches of Christ. Many are much more impressed

Page 2

by the eloquence of a learned doctor of philosophy than with the simplicity of the gospel of Christ. The influence of the wisdom of man has caused many to seek and accept the "improvements" made in the church over the first century Christians. "This is the Twentieth Century" is the explanation of human wisdom for the innovations that are apparent all over the country in many churches of Christ. Human wisdom is a bad and corrupting influence in the church of the Lord. It is all right in its place— out of the church.

Fourth, The influence of BIG BUSINESS is destroying the church. By this we mean that the methods and procedures of big business concerns have been brought into the church in an effort to make it appeal to the world. Big business knows the value of national advertising, consequently, large advertising concerns spend millions to get their products before the public. The reasoning seems to be that if it will work for business, why will it not work for the church? Human wisdom can find no objection, therefore, national advertising committees are invested with the power to "get the church before the public." Divine wisdom has made the arrangements for national and international advertising of the Lord's church in the personal life of each member of the church. If every Christian would live and work as the Lord teaches him to do, and if every congregation would teach and discipline as the Bible directs, we would have the greatest advertising power known in operation. Big business cannot help the church in this or any other respect. God has given the plans for every single function of the church to succeed, and it will if we will obey God.

Big business has suggested the "inner," "under" and "over" organizations of the church to "expedite" the Lord's work. The "incorporation" in big business has influence the same action in churches under the term "co-operation." Cooperation is scriptural and right, but "incorporation" is wrong in the church. Such titles as "director," "boards," "chairman," "president," etc. are commonly used in connection with affairs of the church. It will not be long until such terms as "district manager," "area representative," "state superintendent," "national chairman," etc. will be common expressions among members of the church. This is the growing influence of big business in the church today.

All this about big business does not reflect upon business as such. We rejoice at the improvement and growth of business concerns on all levels when the growth is morally good. We are only talking about this influence upon the church that destroys its spiritual design and work. The church cannot be operated like a commercial business either in organization or method. God has revealed to us the nature and purpose of the church, and if it is to remain the Lord's church it must be operated exactly as He directed. It is an immovable kingdom which can never be destroyed, but as individuals we can be moved away from the foundation and be lost. Let us strive to maintain the purity of the blood-bought church and give the glory to God that is given through His church.

Be careful to protect your personal influence for good. Follow after the things that lead to a holier life; imitate those who are good examples of Christianity. This kind of influence will lead some lost soul to Christ and will help preserve the glory of the church of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We call facts "stubborn" because often they won't fit the frame our fancy has created for them.

CHRIST AND YOU

Frequently we all wonder what good we can be to the church and how Christ can use us. We all become discouraged at times and feel like quitting the race because our goal seems too far away. But let us take courage in the fact that Christ can use each of us to accomplish his will if we will but give ourselves to him. The Lord does not compel any of us to work in his kingdom; it is a voluntary service on our part in every respect.

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me" (Gal. 2:20). At least three things are stated in this passage by which we are enabled to be of use to the Master. These are:

1. I am crucified with Christ. Christ cannot use anyone who persists in living the old sinful life. He must become dead in a sense before he can be made alive. Christ was crucified. Paul had just said he was dead— through the law was dead to the law. (vs. 19). By the fulfillment of the law he was dead to the law and sin. He had been made alive through the gospel. He had been crucified— suffered death like Christ had died— yet he lived. His death was not physical; he had died to worldly things and sin, as well as to the works of the law. Before Christ can use you, you must become dead to the old life of sin.
2. But Christ liveth in me. Even though one may be dead to sin, he cannot be used by Christ unless Christ lives in that person. Paul said he was dead, yet he lived. Then he explains that it was not him that lived but Christ that lived in him. The effects of Christ's death on the cross had made Paul dead to the sinful life lived before. Now this new life

he had was by Christ, thus Christ lived in him. He was the source of this life which Paul now lived. "In him was life; and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4). "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself" (John 5:26). ".. . I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly" (John 10:10). From these statements by John we know that Christ is the source of this new life. It is proper to speak of Christ as living in the one who is enjoying this new life that comes from him. Before Christ can use you, you must let him be the guiding principle in your life. Be dead to the old life and let Christ rule your new life.

3. I live by the faith of the Son of God. The one who lives by faith lives as faith directs. It is not possible for one to please God without faith. Faith is a condition of the mind that trusts in the Lord and responds completely to his will. The gospel is called 'the faith" because it is the power that directs our obedience. (Jude 3). Before we can walk by faith God must have spoken to us through His word. (Rom. 10:17). Anything that is not done by God's word religiously is sin. (Rom. 14:22). One must live by faith before he can be used by Christ in his kingdom.

Pertinent to salvation and usefulness in the church of our Lord is one's willingness to die to sin and allow Christ to live in him by obeying the faith. Some wonder why they are never able to make progress in converting souls to Christ. Perhaps it is because they have never really died to sin. Maybe they love the things of the world to the extent that Christ can not enter their lives. Or perhaps it is because they refuse to allow the faith, which is the gospel— the word of God, to be the sole guiding principle in all that they think, say or do.

A few complain that physical handicaps keep them from being of service to Christ. They are crippled, can not talk,poor, but look what Christ did with a few poor fishermen. Some do nothing because they do not have the talents that some others have. Christ does not need mental giants to do his will. He can use only those who die to sin and live by his word. A humble, consecrated life is a powerful instrument for the Lord to use in converting men and women to him. Search your own life and see if your failures may not be due to the fact that you have not surrendered your all to Christ. Let us wake out of sleep and let Christ reign in our lives instead of letting sin reign in our bodies.

"ALL THINGS CONSIST"

Wilbur Hunt, Palmetto, Fla.

The phrase "all things consist" is found in Colossians

1:17 amid Paul's discussion of the high position and divinity of Christ. "And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." Verse sixteen points out the Creatorship of Christ: "for by him were all things created." The Greek word used for "consist" means, among other things, "to cohere, hold together" (page 605 of Thayer's Greek English Lexicon). The thought is that all things in the Universe are held together by and organized around Christ through His word of power. Without this power, the Universe would fall apart, and become disorganized, empty, and chaos. Now, applying this to one's life: a life not centered around Christ and His word is a disorganized, empty, wasted, and confused life. But with Christ in one's life, he has the chance of making his life more useful, organized, and meaningful: a life dedicated to serving God as He has directed in His word.

I marvel that after almost two thousand years, we have

not yet learned to place the emphasises on the spiritual man.

The Apostle Paul in First Corinthians three, verses one and

two, wrote as follows: "And I, brethren, could not speak

unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto

babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat:

for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are

ye able." The great evils that accompany those who are

untaught in the church are listed in verse three as envying,

strife, division. This simply means that without the develop

ment of the spiritual man, the church of our Lord will be

continually beset with strife and division. When error seeks

a following it always looks for those who have not grown

spiritually. An untaught membership can only be the result,

when the emphasises is not placed on the inner man.

The inner man can not grow without prayer. When trouble comes to the body of Christ, it comes from those who have not learned to pray. The admonition to "pray without ceasing," the constant example of Jesus as He withdrew to pray, the steadfastness of the early church in continuing in prayers, all cry out for the development of the souls of men through supplication in prayer. The man whoprays recognizes his dependence upon a higher power. In so doing, he is less likely to follow his own way, and "walk as men." At the same time, he recognizes authority, in that he prays, not for his own will to be done. There is little chance that the part of man made in the image of God can ever develop without much praying.

The inner man can not grow without study. Paul wrote to Timothy, in the long ago, in 2 Tim. 2:15, that such study would cause the Christian to become full grown, in rightly dividing the word of Truth. When strife and division seeks fertile soil they inevitably find it with those who have not studied. It was this spiritually dwarfed element in thebody of Christ that cried out for the organ, the missionary society, and the innovations and the digressions of the past generation. It is this same group who refuse to study that threatens the unity of the church in our times. We are still neglecting the inner man. Brethren will not set down with their New Testament to test the scripturalness of the practices around them, but endlessly echo the hollow cries of tradition and sentiment. Just as Timothy would have to hang his head in shame if he had -refused to give the proper diligence to the word of God, brethren today should be ashamed when they can not prove their practices by the Bible. They have failed with the Corinthians of old to put off the carnal man.

The inner man can not grow without meditation. In Psalms 1:2, David declares that the man of God delights in the law of the Lord, "and in his law doth he meditate day and night." To give the inner man the proper chance for growth, God's people need not only to read his word but to store it up in their hearts, to think about it as they go about their daily task, and to turn it over again, and again in their minds. Paul teaches in Col. 3:16, that the word of Christ should dwell in us richly in all wisdom. When God's word fills the heart, there is not room for those things that destroy.

It will shape and mold and feed the inner man until he be

comes strong and able to survive. In the Old Testament, in

Eccl. 7:4, the writer declares "that the heart of the wise is

in the house of mourning; but the heart of fools is in the

house of Mirth." This could not happen to the man who

meditates on the word of the Lord.

The inner man can not grow without using the language of Inspiration. In Neh. 13:24, the Jews spoke the language of Ashdod and could no longer speak the pure speech of Israel. The language of Ashdod contributed to their carnality. They lost sight of God's purposes for Israel, and the blood line of the Saviour, and talked like the nations around about them. When we speak as the Bible speaks, when we call New Testament things by New Testament names, when we let the words of the Holy Spirit, as spoken by the Apostles represent divine truth, the inner man will grow. An impure speech results in dwarfed and mis-shapen soul. The inner man lives in a climate that spells disaster for his well being.

In this day when so many are concerned with the physical side of the kingdom we are losing sight of the growth of the inner man. We are more concerned with methods than with message. We are more concerned with numbers than with righteousness. We are more concerned with impressions than with indoctrination. I marvel that after almost two centuries we still want to, "walk as men."

THE AREA OF FORBEARANCE

(An Exposition of Romans 14)

ferry Belchick, Orlando, Florida

In a former article (April issue) we studied the fourteenth chapter of Romans under the title The Strong Must Respect the Rights of the Weak. In that study we learned that, in many cases, those who are "strong in the faith" must defer or forbear in favor of those who are "weak in the faith." This is surely the meaning of Paul's statement in I Cor. 8:13 — "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend (sin), I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." Paul (one "strong in the faith") would defer in the matter of eating meat rather than cause his brother (one "weak in the faith!') to offend or sin.

A question that would naturally and logically present itself in any consideration of Romans 14 would have to do with the "area of forbearance." Are we to conclude from our study thus far that the brother who is "strong in the faith" must give in on matters of truth and righteousness rather than offend that brother who is "weak in the faith?" Is the brother, for example, who is "stronger in the faith" to permit the use of instrumental music in the worship of the church simply because a brother, "weak in the faith," can see no harm in its use? Is this the teaching of Romans 14? A "babe in Christ" sees no harm in the denominational concept of the clergy. Are those who are "taught in the Word" to capitulate to this untaught brother's wishes and start calling the preacher Reverend? Surely every serious student of the Word will answer with a resounding no. What then is the "area of forbearance?" In what "area" is that brother who is "strong in the faith" to defer or forbear?

Let us state unequivocally and positively that a child of God can never compromise in matters of faith. We cannot

"give place, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel

might continue with (us)." In matters of truth and right

eousness the child of God can never "give in." In what area,

then, does the stronger brother defer in favor of the weaker?

It must be in the area of the inconsequential— in matters of

Opinion— in matters that do not, in truth, have reference to

principle or truth. While these matters may be very impor

tant to that brother who is "weak in the faith" and while

he may consider them matters of great importance— even

matters of faith, that brother who is "strong in the faith"

knows that they are, in truth, matters of no moment, that

they are not matters of faith.

This is clearly demonstrated in the illustration that the apostle Paul uses when he discusses this very point. In Romans 14 Paul speaks of the matter of eating meat. The matter of eating meat is not a matter of faith as it was back under the Mosaic economy. In the dispensation of Moses' law eating meat was a matter of Divine Law and, as such, could not be classified as a matter of no moment or in the realm of opinion or personal judgment. In the New Testament era, however, all restrictions on what kind of meat that a man can eat, whether he ate meat at all or where that meat came from was not a matter of Divine Law. This is clearly taught in such passages as I Cor. 8:8, "But meat commendeth us not to God; for neither, if we eat are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse." Again in Col. 2:16 we find this same truth stated, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat . . ." Paul's language in I Tim. 4:4 is clear and to the point, "For every creature of God is good and nothing is to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth." The eating of meat or the eating of herbs is a matter of personal choice and not a matter of Divine Law. This would be clearly understood by that brother who, having feasted on the strong meat of God's Word, has had his "senses exercised to discern both good and evil." This brother, "strong in the faith," realizes that ' the eating of meat or the abstaining from meat is a matter of personal choice and not a matter of faith. There is, however, "not in every man that knowledge." One new in the faith would, perhaps, not be able to distinguish between meat offered to an idol and meat purchased in the common market place and not associated with idols. Since this babe in Christ cannot make the proper distinction between meats he "believes" that all meat is connected with idolatry. (We must remember that when properly taught this weak brother will be able to make the proper distinction between meats offered to an idol and meat that is not connected with this heather practice.) If this brother, then, sees "thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to at those things which are offered to idols." (I Cor. 8:10) In this situation what is that brother who is "strong in the faith" to do? The answer is clear. We must "take heed lest by any means this liberty (our right to eat meat) of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak." Paul charts our course for us— "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend (or sin)." I Cor. 8:13 Paul again states the grounds of acceptable service when he admonishes the "strong," "But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died." (Rom. 14:15). Our attitude should be, "Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. For meat destroy not the work of God. . ." "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak." (Rom. 14:20-21)

(NOTE: This is the concluding article in a series ofthree on worldliness. Brother Needham has done a splendid job in studying with us these vital subjects. We highly commend these articles to the readers for study and re-study. — Editor.)

TRIPLETS OF WORLDLINESS

James P. Needham, St. Petersburg, Florida

PETTING NO. Ill

This is the final installment of our series of articles on "Triplets of Worldliness," and this is by no means the easiest of the three! But being hard makes it's study the more necessary.

Petting is another of those practices which people in general consider to be innocent and harmless, including many church members. By many it is accepted as the status quo; as that which is natural and inevitable. It is this kind of thinking on a subject that makes it difficult to study objectively and without prejudice. We should all learn that the fact that a thing is generally accepted and practiced does not argue the matter either pro or con, and he who thinks it does is in poor attitude for objective study.

In studying this subject I shall (as on all others) speak plainly so that when you have finished this article you will know what has been under consideration. Only then can you derive any profit from my efforts. The shortest distance between two given points is a straight line— I shall endeavor to draw that kind of line!

I. WHAT IS PETTING?

Our first task is to define our subject: What is petting? Webster's Collegiate Dictionary says: "To indulge in fondling or, esp. amorous caresses." Webster's New World Dictionary says, "To make love; kiss, embrace, fondle, etc." It is evident that such acts are questionable between UNMARRIED people ONLY. Many acts are proper between married people, but sinful between the unmarried; petting is such an act.

II. WHOSE PROBLEM?

It becomes evident, therefore, that petting is a problem of the unmarried. It is more especially the problem of youngunmarried people, which makes it the problem of every parent, preacher, elder, and every Christian. Youth does not learn by instinct the pitfalls and stumbling blocks of life. It is the duty of parents and spiritual brothers and sisters to teach and warn them of the dangers along life's way.

We live in a day when petting has become a real problem. Time was when a young man took a dangerous chance to lay a hand upon a young lady. She would slap his face and terminate his company, and he could consider himself exceedingly fortunate if he got by without a black eye from her brother, or a tongue lashing from her father. Now it is different. As stated above, petting is accepted as the statusquo. Many young people consider an evening together exceedingly dull and boring without it, and, in many instances, the young lady who possesses the purity of heart and

life to deny and refuse such advances has fewer "dates" and

is less popular with the men than those who indulge. They,

however, should not allow this to be discouraging— its not

the quantity of "friends" that counts, but rather the

QUALITY! A greater number of "dates" procured through

petting would be a bad bargain.

At this point it is necessary to state that there are many

young people who have been properly taught along this

line— not all fit in the above category by any means— and

the young lady whose morals will not allow her to accept

such mishandling can certainly find them.

III. WHO HAS THE GREATEST RESPONSIBILITY?

From my study of this problem I am convinced that the greatest responsibilities in this matter rests upon the youngladies. In reading the counsellors' columns in the daily newspapers I discover that it is always the young ladies who are troubled over this question. They are the ones who question the counsellors as to the advisability of petting. This indicates that they possess the power to determine whether or not petting shall be engaged in. The sex urge is strongest in the male, hence the young ladies have the responsibility to protect the young men; to keep their association in realms that are wholesome and chaste.

IV. WHAT IS WRONG WITH PETTING?

We are now ready to find out exactly what makes petting wrong, and as always, we must turn to the Bible for our answers. If it cannot be shown therefrom that petting issinful, then we are at a loss for a basis upon which to condemn it. Notice the following considerations:

(1) It is lasciviousness: Lasciviousness is one of the most common sins in the church, yet few really know what the word means. Of the modern usage of the word Webster's Collegiate Dictionary says, "Lewd, lustful, that which is tending to produce lewd emotions." (Emphasis mine JPN). Webster's New World Dictionary says, "Characterized by or expressing lust or lewdness; wanton. Tending to excite lustful desires." (Emphasis mine JPN). Of the New Testament usage of the word, Thayer's Greek Lexicon says, "Unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, lasciviousness, insolence . . .Wanton (acts or) manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females." (p. 80), (Emphasis mine JPN). This is the next thing to condemning petting BY NAME! Inspiration couldn't have chosen a more accurate description of the act of petting. Now, here is the consequence Paul says the practice of this sin will bring, ". . . they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." (Gal. 5:21). I know not how to make it plainer.

Petting is the surest way to excite passion and, once excited, it is no easy matter to curb it. In youth when the urge is strongest the grand battle of life is to teach it the limits of Divine Law. The urge itself is neither bad nor anything ofwhich to be ashamed; it is natural and implanted by God's design, but, like all other human passions, it must be governed by the perfect law. The urge is perverted from God's design for it when it is promiscuously and wilfully transformed into inordinate desire (Col. 3:5) and base lust between the unmarried by any act that unduly excites it.

(2) It destroys marital perspective. The cohabitive desire is a natural one, and is one of the most sacred in God's creation when understood and properly used. It is designed for the marital relationship exclusively, and its true basis is unfeigned love and fervent affection. But, when unmarried people trifle with this desire by wanton and unchaste fondling, it is difficult, if not impossible, for them to really discern between unbridled lust and genuine love. The unmarried who have trifled in petting cannot truly know whether their desire to marry is for love or lust; and will not likely find out until it is too late. Marriage based on true love is a union of souls; based on lust it is a union of) sense. The former can stand the bitterest storms life can offer, the latter cannot endure the first whirlwind! A marriage based upon lust terminates when the lust is satisfied; or else people harden themselves to living together in a life of contempt for each other. Reader, this is serious business— do not take it lightly!

CONCLUSION

Let us all give prayerful consideration to these most serious matters, and determine that our young people shall know the truth upon them. We cannot be sure that we can restrain all of them from engaging in this sin, but we can be certain that they don't do so in ignorance. Let every parent and every Christian resolve to teach the truth on this subject, and thus do our parts in trying to protect our young people from the terrible consequences of this deceitful practice. To this end may God help us.

QUESTION: If one becomes a child of God by faith,when did he become a child of the devil? And if he ceases to be a child of God, does he become a child of the devil again? — T. K.

ANSWER: That one becomes a child of God by faith is too plainly taught in the Scriptures to be denied. "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:26.) That this faith includes obedience— even baptism— is equally clear. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal. 3:27.) The preposition "For" is translated from the Greek "gar" which is defined by scholars to mean "the reason being." This makes baptism the grounds upon which the claim ismade that they are children of God by faith. Without this obedience one cannot give scriptural reason for claiming to be a child of God by faith. Hence, the faith by which one becomes a child of God involves obedience.

Sin separates from God. (Isa. 59:1.) Sin is a transgression of the law. (1 Jno. 3:4) Since God's judgment against man is based upon accountability (2 Cor. 5:10; Deut. 1:39), one does not become a sinner until he reaches the age of accountability and transgresses God's law. He is then separated from God. Thus, by disobedience he becomes a child of the devil and remains such until regenerated by obedient faith. Such faith appropriates to one's self the atoning benefits of the blood of Christ by which his sins areremitted. (Heb. 10:10, 17.) He is then delivered from the power of darkness and is translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son. (Col. 1:13.) In this relationship he differs from an alien. The alien is without the benefits of the atoning blood until he obeys the gospel. This obedience is pictured by Jesus under the figure of a birth. (Jno. 3:3, 5.) The child of God who sins has "an advocate with the Father" (1 Jno. 2:1) and may appropriate the benefits of the atoning blood to himself by meeting simple conditions of faith-repentance, confession, and prayer. (Acts 8:22; 1 Jno. 1:7-9.) [ He obtains forgiveness not through being "born again," but through the use of his "advocate with the Father." Thus,a child of God who sins is a child in error, or a disinherited child (Num. 14:12), nevertheless, a child.

From the viewpoint of family relationship he never ceases to be a child of God; he never becomes a child of the devil again. From the viewpoint of fidelity the Bible pictures him otherwise. The Jews were children of God under the law by virtue of their physical birth, but from the viewpoint of fidelity were pictured as children of the devil. (Jno. 8, 44.) That one can be both, depending upon the viewpoint under consideration, is evident from the example of the Jews in relation to Abraham. Jesus said, "If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham." (Jno.8:39) Yet, at the same time he recognized them as the children of Abraham: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad." (Jno. 8:56.) From the viewpoint of fidelity they were not children of Abraham. From the viewpoint of family relationship they were actually the children of Abraham. So it is with Christians. It depends upon the viewpoint under consideration. It should be remembered, however, that regardless of the viewpoint, the individual once saved from alien sins enjoys ever thereafteran "advocate with the Father." If and when he sins he obtains forgiveness through this advocate, and not by being born again.

RECKLESS REASONING

Irvin Himmel, St. Louis, Missouri

Brethren far and wide are using James 1:27 as Bible proof for church support of institutional orphanages. The argument generally runs like this: The Scriptures command us to "visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction," but we are not told HOW to do it; therefore, we have the liberty to do it in any way we choose; we choose to do it by putting orphan homes in the church budget for regular support.

Suppose we apply this same type of reasoning to some other passages. Maybe that would help someone to see the end of such reasoning.

The Bible tells us to bring up our children "in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." (Eph. 6:4.) It does not say HOW we are to do that. Since the "how" is not prescribed, we may do it as we choose. We choose to do it by establishing schools, placing our children in those institutions, and supporting them from the church treasury.

God's word teaches us to visit the sick. (Matt. 25:26.) It does not say HOW we are to do this good work. In the absence of a detailed pattern in the passage setting forth the responsibility, we are free to do it as we think best. Thus we shall establish hospitals and support them with church contributions. In this way the sick will be visited with medicine and care.

The Bible exhorts that we "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers." (Heb. 13:2.) HOW this is to be done is left to our judgment. We think an effective way to do it is to build hotels in the metropolitan areas and support them with church finances. In this way all of us can have some small part in the good work of lodging strangers.

We are told to "do good unto all men." (Gal. 6:10.) It is good that the mentally retarded and handicapped be helped. There are thousands of such persons in our land. The Bible does not specify HOW this "good" is to be done, so we are building institutions for the retarded and handicapped, and we shall support them through church contributions, giving the church the glory.

The great commission commands that we "preach the gospel to every creature." (Mk. 16:16.) There is not a word in the commission on HOW it is to be done. Since we are left to decide for ourselves, and since we need some systematic arrangement whereby churches may cooperate, we are making monthly contributions from the church treasury to support a missionary society. In this way congregations can join hands for greater effects in preaching the gospel to the lost.

Now, if James 1:27 is authority for church support of institutional homes for orphans, what prevents the other passages from authorizing church support of the organizations named? If the proof is lacking in the other passages, is it not equally lacking in James 1:27? If we must turn to verses not mentioned in this article to show why the church cannot support organizations like missionary societies, schools, hospitals, and hotels, then is it not proper to introduce other passages to show the same point in benevolence? If the contexts of Eph. 6:4; Matt. 25:36; etc. point to individual action rather than congregational, why does not the context of James 1:27 point to the same? If the reasoning so often expressed on James 1:27 is correct, why is it not just as correct on similar verses?

In the controversy over institutionalism there is no middle ground. If the church can support one human organization, it can support all the others that are designed for worthwhile purposes. If the church is sufficient in its God-given organization to perform one phase of its work, it is equally sufficient to perform all other phases of its work without contributing funds to human institutions.

BIBLICAL WORD STUDIES

By E. V. SRYGLEY, JR.

BIBLICAL WORD STUDIES

KOINONIA (FELLOWSHIP)

The Greek noun koinonia (fellowship, etc.) occurs nineteen times in the Greek Testament: Acts 2:42; Rom. 15:26; I Cor. 1:9; 10:16; II Cor. 6:14; 8:4; 9:13; 13:14, Gal. 2:9; Phil. 1:5; 2:1; 3:10; Philemon 6; Heb. 13:16; I Jno. 1:3, 6, 7. (The term is repeated in some of these passages.)

Koinonia and kindred words are basically opposed in meaning to idios, "one's own." The root of koinonia and kindred terms is koinos, "common." The Jews used this latter term in contrast with hagios, "holy." That which was hagios was set apart for God's use, whereas that which was koinos was common, or for men's use (provided it was not "unclean").

The word koinonia appears to convey at least three different meanings: first, "the share which one has in anything, partnership" (II Cor. 13:14, etc.); second, "intercourse, intimacy, fellowship" (Acts 2:42, but I am not at all sure that this passage so uses the term); third, "a benefaction jointly contributed" (Rom. 15:26, etc.).

FANNING UP A SIROCCO

Wm. E. Wallace, McAlester, Oklahoma

The great restoration movement is rolling forward again. The movement to return to the old paths began in early America with a throwing off of denominational centralized ecclesiasticism. The movement blazed with great success until lumbered with autocratic functional organizations in the mid 1800's. The movement bogged down under machinery until finally it broke from the entangling denominationalism which had beset it. Once again the fires of New Testament authority were lit; the movement rocked on into the 20th century.

Moving on with a deep respect for the independence and complete autonomy of the local congregation, the restoration of New Testament Christianity proceeded at a rapidclip while withstanding the efforts of sectarian doctrines to board the restoration schooner. (Premillennialism is a case in point).

Approaching mid-century, the movement rolled once again into the mudflats of centralized authority. The express to heaven became laden with institutionalism; its wheels struggled with great effort through the mire of centralized control.

Now, in the beginning of a new decade, the great restoration movement finds herself moving on dry land. Themud is falling from the spokes of the wheels; the skies are clearing.

Yes, brethren, we have every reason to be encouraged. Reports from across our great nation show the cause of Old Zion to be moving right along. The fact of her renewed success creates winds of opposition. She has indeed fanned up a sirocco. The winds come and the winds go, but we have arrived at a point where we can say, "Let them blow, we are covering ground."

The 195O's were a time of confusion, but the 196o's find the real restoration in good shape for future success. The very fact that the winds of opposition prevail so steadily shows the restoration is making tracks.

Let us move on singing the song of Moses and the Lamb; let the winds wail; we have a righteous cause which cannot be stopped.

Mark Twain said: It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things:freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either.

* * * Thomas J. Curran said: The moment our democracy ceases to respect God it will cease to respect your value as an individual. The moment it ceases to respect your value as an individual, it ceases to be democracy. * * * Robert R. Clouston relates how, at the end of a monastery tour, one man in the party who prided himself on being "an enlightened atheist," remarked to the monk guide:"If God does not exist, and I believe he does not, you will have wasted your whole life." The monk smiled. "If I am wrong," he replied, "I shall have wasted only 50 or 70 years. If you are wrong, you will waste an eternity." * * *

Someone has said: "The only facts we tolerate are those we already know. We read up on controversial issues, not to inform and guide a suspended judgment, but to confirm our present opinions and prejudices." Harsh words! But there is some disagreeable truth in them. Most of us boast of being open minded; actually few of us are. How else can we account for the fact that we are seldom interested in reading "the other side" of any question?

— The Scrap Book

(This timely article was written by brother F. W.Smith a little over two years before his death. It appeared in the Gospel Advocate, July 5, 1928, page 635. The truth here expressed is as much needed today as when written nearly 32 years ago. — Ed.)

My Brethren Have The Right To Know

by F. W. Smith

What my brethren have the right to know is, what I believe and teach on all matters pertaining to the religion of Jesus Christ, and I have no right to expect or claim their Christian fellowship so long as I refuse to let such be known. To content myself with the feeling and declaration that it is none of their business regarding such matters would be to manifest a rebellious spirit against the God-given right of others and advertise myself as possessed of a species of egotism disgusting to all right-thinking people.

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ELDERS This is most clearly set forth in the following passages: "Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood." (Acts 20:28.) "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit to them: for they watch in behalf of your souls, as they that shall give account; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief: for this were unprofitable for you." (Heb. 13:17.) There is most certainly implied in these passages the solemn duty of the elders in every church to know what is being taught, believed, and practiced among those over whom they have the oversight. Otherwise, how could they meet and discharge the grave responsibility "as they that shall give account" for the souls over whom they are to "watch?"

Let us turn the matter around and ask: "Have the members over whom the elders have the oversight the right to know what the elders believe, teach, and practice?" In other words, have the members the right to demand of the elders a "Thus saith the Lord" for their faith and practice? Who will dare say they have not? And who would presume to say that "it is none of their business" as to what the elders believe, teach, and practice in religion?

Now, does not this same right belong to every member of the body of Christ? And since I am a public teacher of religion, has not every member of the church the God-given right to know what I believe and teach on all subjects pertaining to the Bible? Frankly, I would be both ashamed and afraid to refuse such information to the poorest and most unlearned member of the church anywhere on the earth.

would be ashamed of such egotism, and afraid to withhold a right that belonged to another.

THE NAKED TRUTH It may be put down as the rule that when one refuses,no matter on what pretense, to openly and candidly express his position regarding matters that disturb and divide the children of God, he is either afraid that he will injure his popularity with the disturbers or else he is in sympathy with them. When one says, "I take no position on the organ and society questions," he either deceives himself or else is in sympathy with such things. There is not a member of the church anywhere but has the right to know how I stand on such matters, and, by the grace of God, if they do not know, all that is needed is to ask me and they shall know.

UNTAUGHT AND SPECULATIVE MATTERS

Have my brethren the right to know how I stand on questions of this nature? They most certainly do; and all they have to do is to ask me, and the information will be forthcoming in no uncertain sound. Will I feel that somebody is trying to dictate to me as to what I shall believe and teach? I would be ashamed to have such feelings, much more to express them. Have I the right to an opinion regarding untaught and speculative matters? Absolutely, yes. What, then ? Keep it to myself, and teach it neither publicly nor privately. (Rom. 14:22). Has any one the right to know what my opinion is? No, that is the business of no one but myself, and I am forbidden to tell it.

No, beloved, my brethren, rich or poor, learned or unlearned, shall not be deprived of the knowledge as to what I believe and practice in religion or as to how I stand on any and all questions that disturb and divide the children of God. They shall not wonder and guess as to where I should be placed religiously so long as I can command language sufficiently plain to make them understand.

ON-THE-FENCE PEOPLE

There are really and actually no "on-the-fence people," although there are some who pose as such. But when the popular side develops, you will have no trouble in locating this class, because while seemingly "on the fence" they were looking for that side on which to fall. Another evidence of no "on-the-fence people" is seen in those who make such claims criticizing others who are contending for the truth.

Jesus said: "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth." (Matt. 12:30.) Hence, when anything arises affecting the interests of Christ's kingdom, the peace and harmony of his disciples, naught but disloyalty and cowardice prompts one to try to evade the issue and bare his breast to the struggle for truth and right.

Imagine, if you can, the apostle Paul being silent on any subject that disturbed the peace and harmony of the church or regarding any false doctrine that was introduced among the saints.

Most certainly Paul's instructions to Timothy are applicable to every preacher for all time to come, and he said to Timothy: "And the things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." (2 Tim. 2:2) Again, Paul said: "The things which ye both learned andreceived and heard and saw in me, these things do: and the God of peace shall be with you." (Phil. 4:9.)

The Bible -- Its All Sufficiency

Thomas O'Neal, Butler, Ala.

Paul wrote Timothy, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim. 3:16-17. These words reveal three things:

(1) The Bible's origin, (2) the Bible's functions, and, (3) the end to which the Bible leads.

ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE The Bible is from God! Paul said, "All scripture is given by the inspiration of God . . ." This includes both the Old and New Testaments. Peter and the eleven other apostles spoke "as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2:4). Later, Peter said, I Pet. 1:12, that the gospel was preached "with the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven," and that "the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." (2 Pet. 1:21). The Bible being a product of God is therefore divine in its origin.

FUNCTIONS OF THE BIBLE

1. The Bible is "profitable for doctrine." One can learn nothing of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and Christ's church except the Bible reveals it! Everything that is to be taught religiously can be found in the Bible; to fail to find it in the Bible means it must not be taught. Peter said, "His divine power has given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness." (2 Pet. 1:3).
2. The Bible is "profitable for reproof." To reprove one is to convict, prick, or cause one to see his sins, to see himself as God sees him. If the Bible will not accomplish this in one's life, then that person is beyond the reach of reproof. The Bible is adapted to everyone's need! It is written for men in all walks of life.
3. The Bible is "profitable for correction." All sin. (I Jno. 1:8). These sins need to be corrected. The Bible is completely able to do this. Every sin and error has a remedy in the Bible! Before one can be corrected by the Bible, he must want to be corrected by the Bible when he goes astray.
4. The Bible is "profitable for instruction in righteousness." In the Bible is found heaven's plan for making men righteous. (Rom. 1:16-17). The Bible contains all the commands of God so that man might obey these commands and be made righteous. (Rom. 6:16-18).

END TO WHICH THE BIBLE LEADS Paul said, "That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." What more can be given when a thing is perfect? The Bible furnishes one completely, or thoroughly "unto all good works." What more could one want than to be guided perfectly and thoroughly in every work that God has authorized? The Bible contains all of this!

THE APPLICATION

1. Since the Bible contains the Word of God, man should respect it by obeying it completely.
2. The Bible being perfect and complete, man should accept the Bible as complete by rejecting all human manuals,

10

catechisms, disciplines, confessions of faith, and all other human creeds.

3. The Bible informs man of two places after death, telling him how to gain one and avoid the other. If you possess but one book, let it be the BIBLE. To be happy in this life and the one which is to come, read, study, believe, and obey the Bible!

Christians Versus Unbelievers

D. W. H. Shelton, Tampa, Florida

Man is incurably religious. Every race in every age and clime has sought to reach upward to some higher power. This inclination to worship is so universal that it must be regarded as an integral part of man's nature.

Man was created in the image and likeness of God, therefore we are created for the purpose and with the desire to worship. For this reason we as Christians believe that genuine atheists and infidels are almost if not altogether nonexistent today. In fact the Bible dismisses the entire problem of atheism and infidelity with a single sentence. The fool has said in his heart there is no God (Ps. 14:1.) This statement is repeated word for word in (Ps. 53:1.) Then we may safely say, that no one but a fool would make such a statement, especially in the face of the fact, that the Bible begins with "In the beginning God." Notice, the first character the very first being mentioned in the Bible is God Himself. This is conclusive evidence to us that it came from Him. Had man been the author, the sole instigator of the Bible, we all know that man would have been the dominant character throughout its pages.

If there were no God and the Bible was not the word of God, man would not and could not have known God's name, therefore it would have been impossible for His name to have been in the Book in the first place. Then too the acceptance of God as the corner stone, the central figure in religion by every one of the inspired writers of the Bible, is the basic essential to all intelligent religious thinking.

Christians should be the happiest people on earth. For although Christians and unbelievers are alike in this respect— both must bear the burdens and afflictions of this mortal life— they differ in that the Christian has help from above to bear the burdens of mortality and the unbeliever has none. The true Christian, however afflicted, reviled, or persecuted, has within himself a source of never failing comfort and joy, in the assurance of a bright and incorruptible inheritance beyond the grave; while the unbeliever, however successful he may be in this life, has no substantial happiness here and no hope of happiness hereafter.

Christians should be happy because the Christian is a justified person, one whose disposition is of universal benevolence, whose character is the image of God's beloved Son, his heart is the resident of God's gracious gift and his life is consecrated to the Lord.

There is no one more honorable than a Christian for

God is his Father, Jesus Christ is elder brother, the Holy

Spirit his constant guest, angels are his ministering spirits,

heaven is his inheritance and the mansions of God shall be

his home. Hence there are none on earth more noble, holy,

and pure and there will be none in heaven higher nor more

dignified that the Christian. For this definition of a Chris

tian I am indebted to the lamented, and much beloved Alex

ander Campbell.— D. W. H. S.)

COMMENTS TO THE EDITORS

"Receiving your paper each month is a source of encouragement to me and I thoroughly benefit from each issue. It is indeed gratifying to read articles written by those interested in proclaiming the truth in its simplicity and entirety."

Sylvia McQuaig Meridian, Miss. "You have a very fine paper; keep up the good work." Donald P. Ames Aurora, 111.

"I enjoy Searching The Scriptures very much; it is as good as the best. You are doing a wonderful work through it— keep the good work up."

D. W. H. Shelton Tampa, Fla. "I enjoy reading Searching The Scriptures; may it grow

in subscriptions." Donald G. Collins Green Forest, Ark.

"I have enjoyed the copies of the paper which I have

seen." Earl KimbroughWaycross, Ga.

"I deeply appreciate your readiness to print my short article and a corresponding reply by brother Srygley. This is a concrete example of a good editorial policy. As long as you remain this fair-minded I know that the paper will gain in circulation and respectability. The articles written thus far have been of an excellent spirit, and this, is the only way to really be effective in the presentation of truth."

Melvin Curry Oak lawn. 111.

"Congratulations on your gospel paper. We are receiving much good from it and wish you success in spreading the Word of God."

L. N. Clifford Donelson, Tenn. "I like Searching The Scriptures and I feel sure its thrust

will be felt for the good of the Cause ... " Wm. E. Wallace McAlester, Okla.

"Just a note to express my appreciation for and interest in the paper Searching The Scriptures. We have enjoyed reading it."

Robert K. Oliver Ypsilanti, Mich.

"I learned of the new paper through my brother-in-law, Doyle Banta. Please send Searching The Scriptures to the enclosed list .. . I bid you God speed in the new venture."

Dr. R. J. Hall Carrollton, Ga.

"I received the first two issues of Searching The Scriptures and express my appreciation for them. The appearance of the paper is excellent. We read each article with great interest finding all of them good and some outstanding."

James D. Judd Rumpi, Nyasaland, Africa

"Thank you for sending us the paper Searching The Scriptures. We find it very enriching and enjoy it very much. We want a year's subscription for ourselves, also for my mother and father. I'm sure they would enjoy this excellent paper also. Mr. and Mrs. Joe Stano

Cleveland, Ohio

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

NEWS AROUND THE COUNTRY

KEN LOOPER, a young preacher in the Air Force, is leaving MacDill Avenue where he has helped GLENN SHEUMAKER and is moving to New York............JAMES NEEDHAM preached two Lord's days for the Drew Park church in Tampa while HARRY PAYNE was in a meeting with the Ninth Avenue church in St. Petersburg, Florida ....... ARLIN CHAPMAN of Rome, Ga. preached for the church in Sulpher Springs, Fla. May 16-23 ...........TOMMY McCLURE worked with the Piney River church in Dickson County, Tenn. last month.............. The debate between HAROLD HAZELIP and BILLY SUNDAY MYERS of the "Church of God" in Louisville, Ky. was postponed because of the illness of Mr. Myers' wife. It will be conducted at some future date............REUEL LEMMONS, editor of the Firm Foundation, preached for the Taylor Blvd. church in Louisville, Ky. in a series of gospel meetings in May ........H. A. FINCHER did the preaching in a meeting at Smyrna, Ga.............C. L. McLEAN is doing a good work with the church at Romulus, Mich. They had 128 present in Bible study the last Sunday in April.........BOBBY THOMPSON who preaches for the North Miami church in Miami, Fla. preached in a meeting with the West Hollywood church and BILL SIMMONS preached on Lord's day at North Miami............The building in Bedford, Ohio where E. L. FLANNERY preaches is almost completed. The last brick was laid on April 26.

The first eight days of May found the following speaking on a lectureship at Berea, Ohio: RICHARD DEWHIRST, E. A. DICUS, E. C. KOLTENBAUGH, PAUL CASEBOLT, JAMES WILSFORD, EMERSON J. SCOTT, FRANKLIN T. PUCKETT, GEORGE LEMASTERS, L. J. NICKLAS and EMERSON L. FLANNERY.

FERRELL JENKINS preached in a meeting at Kirkwood, Mo ............ W. CURTIS PORTER was in a meeting with the Spring and Blaine church in St. Louis, May 8-15. ........ JAMES P. MILLER will be with the Poplar Street church in Florence, Ala. where CURTIS FLATT now preaches June 5-12. He then goes on to speak at Westvue church in Murfreesboro, Tenn. June 13, 14, 15, 16. RICHARD WEAVER is the preacher for this church.

ERNEST FINLEY of Oklahoma City, Okla. preached in a meeting at West End church in Bowling Green, Ky. May 1-11...........MARK RAULERSON of Harira, Ga. preached in a meeting at Newberry, Fla. May 8-14.............GARVIN TOMS began a gospel meeting at Riverview church in Jacksonville, Fla. May 1 ........... CECIL B. DOUTHITT of Park Hill church in Fort Smith, Ark. preached in a meeting at North Birmingham church May 1-8.................. ROBERT CRAWLEY of Belview Heights church recently preached in a meeting at Pleasant Grove, Ala............JAMES P. MILLER preached in a meeting with the church in Meridian, Miss. May 1-8. The meeting was well attended and resulted in 7 responses. Sellman Falls conducted the song service. R. A. GINN preaches for this church and will complete seven and one-half years work with the brethren here this summer. He has done an outstanding work with the Seventh Street church in Meridian, Miss.

HOLLIS WINDHAM preaches for the little band of Christians who meet at York, Ala. The work is hard in that section and the members of the Lord's body are few ............. TOM O'NEAL preaches for the small congregation at Butler, Ala. and speaks on a radio program every day ........... LEROY ENSEY preaches for the church at Forest, Ala This congregation has less than 25 members. All three of the above men are supported in part or in whole by churches who are accused of not believing in doing missionary work.

AL PAYNE preaches for the church in East Columbus, Miss. This congregation has made fine progress in the last three years. They have a new building on the main route to the south of Columbus and now have about two hundred in attendance on Sunday mornings.

FRANK INGRAM of the West Hill congregation in Pensacola, Fla. did the preaching in a meeting with the Seminole church in Tampa May 15-22. Different song leaders in the Tampa area led the singing. Brother Ingram will preach in a meeting at East Gate church in Pensacola May 23-31........... ROBERT PRESNELL will preach in a meeting at Academy Street church in Dickson, Tenn. beginning June 19 .............HAROLD HOWARD will begin a meeting at Rock church June 5.............JOHNNY EDWARD began a meeting at Colesburg May 29.

JOHN GERRARD will preach in a tent meeting in Wellston, Ohio June 20-29.............JAMES YOPP preached in a meeting at Westside church in Kennett, Mo. early in May. BOB OWEN of Tampa, Fla. preached in a meeting at Habana Avenue in Tampa which closed May 22.

The Jefferson Street church in Tallahassee, Fla., which had its beginning in January of this year, appointed elders and deacons last month. This is a good step toward greater progress. The elders are: BOB WAGNER, CARL JACOBSEN and A. H. SHERRILL. The deacons are: JIMMY CARR, ELSTON ROADY and LESTER FUQUA.

CLAUDE WILSFORD is the new evangelist with the East Hill church in Pensacola, Fla. SAM BINKLEY formerly preached for this church. He is now in Portsmouth, Ohio ............PHIL POWERS has moved to St. Louis, Mo. to labor with the Riverside church........... JOHN BRADFORD recently moved to Jordon Street in Pensacola, Fla. to work with them............DONALD P. AMES of Tampa, Fla. has moved to Aurora, 111. to labor with BRYAN VINSON, JR. for one of the churches there.

H. E. PHILLIPS has resigned as preacher with theUniversity Avenue church in Gainesville, Florida after nearly seven years. He will leave September 15. This church has shown steady progress during this period of time. Some of the most faithful in the kingdom of God are in the University Avenue church.

PEACE IN TRENTON, FLORIDA

The following report was received from brethren in Trenton, Florida:

"The church here on South Main Street and the church on Carlton and North Main Streets came together recently and the members of both congregations -were reconciled, at which time many tears were shed for great joy. Trouble and confusion had existed between the two congregations for about 3 years or longer. But the brethren have made things right with each other and the good Lord, and are at peace now. All were made to rejoice. The future for the church here is very bright, and may the Lord bless each of the brethren.

"The church is rather old in Trenton and is widely

known. Brethren elsewhere will rejoice to learn that peace

and unity prevails here again."

THE WORK IN DOCKING, ENGLAND

James L. Denison

(Editor's Note: The following information has been received from James L. Denison from Boling, Texas, regarding the work in Docking, England. Anyone interested in helping him can contact him at

P. O. Box 516, Boling, Texas.)

"I have been asked by the church in Docking, England, which is about 120 miles North of London, to come work with them. One of their leading members, Brother Jimmie Darnell, I helped convert, and have helped teach and strengthen through the past several years. There are ten members there, four are heads of families, all are Air Force personnel and their families.

"They have informed me that the Air Base Personnel

and the English people are 'wide-open' for evangelistic work

at this time. They estimate that within two to three years,

if they had a full-time evangelist to work with them, the

church there would be self-supporting. This is probably an

over-estimation of the possibility of growth. But it does give

you a good idea of the possibilities there.

"There are only about a half dozen churches of Christ

in England. Several of these are G. I. congregations, all of

which, I understand, have liberal tendencies, with the pos

sible exception of the one at Docking. Docking being an ex

ception is doubtlessly due to the influence of Brother Dar

nell, who is sound, and straight on the present day issues

facing the church. I gather that the others at Docking are

not too well informed on the issues, but are open-minded.

The English congregations seem to be drifting very fast into

the camp of "one cup communion,' 'no women speaking in

Bible Classes,' etc. In fact, one of the preachers of an English

congregation recently tried to instill the latter doctrine into

the Docking church. This caused confusion; but through

letters from myself and a couple of other State-side preachers,

who were requested by the Docking brethren to help them,

the confusion has now been virtually eliminated. The

brethren at Docking believe there is hope for saving some

of the other "few churches in England from apostasy, if a

sound preacher from the States could be put in the field at

once. At the present time, so far as I have been able to as

certain THERE IS NOT ONE completely sound Gospel

preacher in all of England; a country whose population even

in 1954 exceeded 41,000,000! They have requested that I

come, and I have accepted, providing I can obtain adequate

support and travel funds."

FLORIDA CHRISTIAN COLLEGE SUMMER CAMP For 1960

Paul Andrews, director

Camp time is almost here again. The first session begins June 26th this year. We are planning a bigger and better camp than ever before and, of course, we are counting on you to be here and enjoy it with us. You can look forward to good food, Bible classes, singing, ball games, track meets,shuffle board, table tennis, horse shoes, handicraft projects, relay games, amateur programs, Bible quizzes, prizes, fishing awards, best camper awards, and many other enjoyable things. There is never a dull moment. As in other years, Florida Christian College Summer Camp will be staffed by very competent people with years of experience, including a registered nurse. Only 100 applications can be accepted for each session, so rush your application card, with room reservation fee, to us at once. The complete fee is $15.00. Send $5.00 to reserve a room. First session — ages 7-9, June 26 - July 2. Second session

— ages 10-12, July 3 - 9-Third session — ages 13-16, July 10 - 16. Mail to: Summer Camp, Florida Christian College, Tampa 10, Florida.

WORTHY APPEAL

Fred Smith

The church in Umatilla, Florida is about 50 years old, yet small in number, made up mostly of women, children, and elderly people who have no income other than social security. Until about a year and a half ago they had no regular preacher. Since then I have been preaching for them. I do secular work to support my family. Since I have been here several have been baptized— eleven in one week, and a number restored.

The building in which we have been meeting is too small to accommodate the people. We did not have classrooms. Some of the young people had to sit in class with the adults. We decided something must be done, so we borrowed $8,000 to buy material to construct a new building. We thought that by doing the work ourselves we could just about complete our building. Since the cost of material is so high our funds have expired. Now we find it impossible to move into our building until we can raise more funds. We cannot borrow more money since we cannot meet higher payments. We have no other choice than to turn to our brethren for help.

The need here is urgent. I'm sure the congregation here

is worthy of any help you may offer. Please contact Fred

Smith, P. O. Box 732, Umatilla, Florida.

SUBSCRIPTION DRIVE

Help us add 5000 new subscribers to Searching The Scriptures

$2.00

per year in advance