WHAT IS THE ATTRACTION?
What is the attraction which God wants used in drawing people to serve him ? In John 6:44, 45 we are told that we are drawn to the Father and the Son by hearing and learning that which comes from God. In John 12:32 Jesus said: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will DRAW all men unto me." Christ draws through the gospel. "Whereunto heCALLED you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thessalonians2:14). When a church is seeking to win souls or to encourage Christians to greater service the only attracting power is the word of the Lord. When a Christian is seeking to win souls or to encourage others, the true appeal he has to make is the gospel appeal. If it is made on any other basis,disappointment lies ahead. Still churches and Chr istians in their efforts to win souls and encourage spiritual things frequently resort to attractions other than the gospel of Christ. These are some prominently used ones.
FOOD
Some churches have the idea that food is a good attraction to be used in drawing people to spiritual things. There is no question but that food has great drawing power. Our denominational friends havelong used it for such purposes. Many of them have carried it so far that it is difficult for them to have a sizeable night crowd without serving food to getthem together. But such is completely incompatiblewith spir itual things. Food is good for man. T he Bible stresses the importance of food, but the serving and eating of food is not a part of spiritual gatherings. Sometimes such is justified on theground that the church did not pay for the food out of her treasury. However, the source of the food has no bearing on whether it may or may not be used as an attraction by the church. Food belongs at home or in regular eating places. (I Corinthians 11:22).
Do we not know this is true? Yet, churches of Christ, in numbers of places, are being cumbered down with much serving. The first inkling that all was not well in this regard came, no doubt, whenbrethren began to promote special occasions with"dinner on the ground" appeals. This practice of"dinner on the ground" came out of something which was wholesome in its beginning. In the dayswhen automobile ownership was limited and evenbefore the automobile, people gathered from distant points and the very need of the hour demanded "bringing their dinners with them. Then with changing times, the actual need for such passed. Still promoters latched on to this old practice as agimmick to get people together. Very little protest was made for a time, and it should not have come as a surprise to see churches plan special services and announce "food-fun-frolic" as did one of the churches in this area a short time ago. In another church nearby, time after time a full meal was served before the teachers' training class and the announcement was unashamedly made that thepurpose was to encourage better attendance on the part of the teachers. What is the attraction?
ENTERTAINMENT
Entertainment is another way churches attempt to attract people to God and to spiritual things. Again, our denominational friends set the pattern. Various denominations have used nearly everything which they dared to use to entertain and thereby draw people. That always has been the basic reason for much of the use of the mechanical instrument in worship. It sounds good! And out of all thearguments made in defense of its use, that is about the most effective. Churches of Christ in some places use entertainment as an attraction also. One example of this is the practice of a church inviting a chorus from a school operated by brethren to come and sing for an hour before the regular church service. They call this "putting on aprogram." T his is done at special times such as aSunday when a gospel meeting is in progress or on a Sunday when a big drive is in progress. They make it plain that the purpose is to get a big crowd to come. Some will even say that such is good— that people will come because of the chorus and then stay for preaching, too. Hence, more teaching canbe done. But how naive can we get? T he peoplewho are gotten together with hamburgers will have to be kept with hamburgers and the people that are gotten together with entertainment will have to bekept with entertainment. If people are not attractedby the gospel, how can they be kept by the gospel ?
FAMOUS PEOPLE
Another gimmick which churches of Christ havebeen using is the practice of using famous people as a drawing card. The practice of advertising thepreacher as "doctor" which came into vogue a fewyears ago should have told us where we were going. The idea was that by so designating the preacher, the attraction would be stronger. Of course, there is nothing wrong with identifying the speaker of the occasion, but any advertising which puts accent on the speaker rather than the message is out of order. The practice of using a famous personality such asPat Boone is an example of a flagrant misuse of the proper attraction. He is used as a bait to get people to come. Churches announce special services saying that certain prominent athletes will be there
— stressing the fact that they are athletes. What is the purpose? Anyone knows the purpose is to attract greater crowds by advertising after that fashion.
How far astray will we go? Have we discovered a better attraction to win souls and interest people in spir itual things? T ime is past due for people totake a good look at many of the practices of the day. Brethren, does God approve them?
COMMENTARIES
GOSPEL OF JOHN by William Hendriksen _______ 6.50 EPISTLES OF PAUL by W. J. Conybear e _______ 2.50 ACTS MADE ACTUAL by Don DeWelt ________ 3.50 ROMANS REALIZED by Don DeWelt __________ 3.95 MORE THAN CONQUERORS (Revelation)
by William Hendriksen ___________________ 3.50
FIRST & SECOND THESSALONIANS
by William Hendriksen ___________________ 4.50
FIRST & SECOND TIMOTHY & TITUS
by William Hendriksen ____________________ 6.00 NEW TESTAMENT EPISTLES by Victor Hoven __ 3.50 COMMENTARY ON DANIEL (Jerome) ________ 3.95 MATTHEW HENRY & THOMAS SCOTT
(six volumes) commentar y on whole Bible ____ 23.95 ORPHAN HOME REFUSES BABY EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS by Larry W. Jonas3.95 COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW by He hel H.
The exponents of church supported institutional
Hobbs _________________________________ 2.50 BOOK OF ISAIAH by George L. Robinson _______ 2.50 TWELVE MINOR PROPHETS by George L.
Robinson ________________________________ 2.50 A HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS by A. T. Robertson ______________________________ 3.00
THE LIFE AND EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL
by Conybear e & Howson __________________ 5.00
THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE GALATIANS by J. B. Lightfoot ____________ 3.50 THE PEOPLE'S NEW TESTAMENT NOTES by B. W. Johnson (two volumes) ___________ 6.00 COMMENTARY ON THE WHOLE BIBLE
by Jameson, Fausset & Brown _______________ 7.95 IRWIN'S BIBLE COMMENTARY by C. H. Irwin ___ 4.00 MACKNIGHT ON THE GOSPELS (two volumes) __ 6.50 MACKNIGHT ON THE EPISTLES ____________ 8.50
REFERENCE BOOKS
HARMONY OF SAMUEL, KINGS AND CHRONICLES by William D. Cr ockett _____ 3.50 CRUDEN'S DICTIONARY OF BIBLE TERMS by Alexander Cr uden ______________________ 3.50 CRUDEN'S CONCORDANCE, HANDY
REFERENCE EDITION by Alexander Cruden 2.95 PELOUBET'S BIBLE DICTIONARY ___________ 4.00 COMPLETE CONCORDANCE TO THE
AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE __________ 9.00 STRONG'S EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCE OF
THE BIBLE by James Strong _____________ 13.75 NAVES TOPICAL BIBLE ____________________ 9.95 LIDDELL AND SCOTTS ABRIDGED
GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON _____________ 5.50
child care have made a loud cry for sympathy andpity by using such epithets as "Do Nothing Churches", "Cold Hearted Brethren," "Orphan Haters", etc. The charge is made that we would "let a little starving orphan child die without lifting a hand to help." T hey argue that a child "must have a home", and that we teach that Chr istians ought not to provide an orphan child with a "home". Pathetic cases are pictured where a little orphan boy or girl is hit by a passing automobile and thechild is brought to the steps of the meeting house, but these old "antis" will not permit a towel to bedampened with water from the drinking fountain towipe the blood from the child, because the drinking fountain was paid for out of the treasury of the church. I have heard these stories painted before audiences and in print, but I never heard of a case such as this really happening, nor do I expect it to happen. I know my brethren. These tales are fabricated to draw sympathy and promote their
cause before the unsuspecting and unlearned.
The reasoning of institutional brethren runs
about like this: An orphan child MUST have a home.
The church is not a home, but the church must
provide a home. Every home must be legalized, hence
a board of directors to provide a home is necessary.
The church is obligated to help the orphan child by
contributing to the board of directors which
provides the home.
Now, what if that board of directors "home" does not take the child after churches have provided the money, what will happen to the orphan child?These pathetic pictures of an "anti" church letting an orphan child starve is not a reality; I know of no
case that can be cited in proof of this. I do know
of many cases where Christians have taken care of
several orphans in a community, and without the
church contributing to a board of directors. The
children are taken care of regardless of age
I do have an actual case where an orphan home
refused a little baby found on the steps of the main
building. I received a clipping from the Park Cit
Daily News, Bowling Green, Kentucky, June 25
1963, which gives the story of a baby being refused
by Potter Orphan Home. A picture of the child as
published in that paper accompanied the clipping.
I here give the article in full that all the facts may
be known:
BABY ABANDONED OUTSIDE ORPHAN HOME
The Warren County Sheriff's Departmen
and the Department of Child Welfare are
searching for the parents of a six to eigh
weeks old girl who was left on the steps of
Potter Home last week.
Authorities explained that an attempt is
always made to contact parents in such cases to
determine if they are willing for the child to
be placed for adoption
If the parents are not located, the Chil
welfare Department will petition Warren
County Court for guardianship of the chil
and place it for adoption
The baby, apparently well cared for and well-
dressed, was discovered by Herman Taylor,
director of the children's home and school
operated by the Church of Christ, as he was
making his rounds at 6:15 a.m. Wednesday
The child was in an auto infant seat (a plastic
basket used as a bed for infants in
automobiles), covered with two blankets and
dressed in a pink diaper shirt, diaper, and
rubber pants, was lying on two new diapers.
All the clothing was new with the exception of
the rubber pants.
Described as a small-built, pretty baby," she
weighs 10 pounds and has medium brown hair
and blue eyes.
T aylor said he thought it was a doll left b
one of the children of the home when he first
saw the child. When he started to pick up th
"doll" it moved.
The baby was instantly adopted unofficially
by the personnel and children of the home who
were disappointed when Sheriff Hubert Phelps
had to a
ume custody of the child for the
Department of Child Welfare.
Taylor explained the home is not equipped to
care for children under three years old." T his is not a sob stor y to gain sympathy; it is
not a supposed account to try to establish a point. It is a bare fact! An Orphan Home which appeals to churches all over the nation to send support fromtheir treasuries to supply a "home" for homeless children, yet when one of the most helpless children one could imagine was "left on the steps" of this "orphan home", the director called the Sheriff totake the child because this home is not "equipped to care for children under three years old." What is to happen to these helpless orphan children? The church is NOT a Home and cannot care for them, according to the advocates of this theory. And the
Board of Directors cannot provide a home because it is not equipped. Try the story of a little orphan
hit by an automobile in front of the Orphan Home
They cannot take the child "under three years old."
Can you imagine someone calling another an
"orphan hater" when he himself is supposed to be in
the orphan home business and cannot take a child
under three years old ? Does James 1:27 apply only
to children over three years old?
If ever y child is to have a "home," and if th
church cannot be a "home" itself, but must provide
a "home" by contributing to these human societies,
how isthe church to care for orphan children "under three
years old"? Potter Orphan Home cannot do it
because they are not equipped. The truth is that the
church cannot support any human institution from
its treasury because it is not scripturally
"equipped"— there is no divine authority to do so.
I will a
ure you that there are dozens of Christians in Bowling Green, Kentucky who are equipped to care for this child, and will eagerly do so if permitted by the authorities. Let us hear no more crying about someone not taking in helpless orphan children.
THAT MANHATTAN PROJECT AGAIN!
Lowell Blasingame, Grenada, Miss.
Since 1955 the brethren in New York City havbeen trying to fleece the brotherhood out of a"Million For Manhattan" for a meeting house. While begging the brotherhood for a million dollars to build, she has also played the role of a sponsoring church and doled out hundreds of dollars to other places. It would seem that brethren unable to build for themselves would be in no position to help others. In her campaign to raise a "Million For Manhattan" she has employed appeals of super-salesmanship, pathetic begging and a plan for putting Manhattan church in the real estate busine
.
In April, 1961, "It is 'now or never' for Manhattan church of Christ! The church must start construction on the proposed new building during1961 or risk losing the right to build on part oftheir Madison Avenue building site." This was the "Defeat . . . Worse Than Dunkirk?" appeal inwhich we were told "no little mi
ion on the outskirts of the world could take the place of a demonstration where all nations could see it." Just think, brethren, if Paul had had the vision andforesight of these brethren and had shown the importance "of a demonstration where all nations could see it", rather than teaching in his own hir ed house in Rome, Acts 28:30, he might have started something that would have resulted in our beingthe proud owners of Vatican City today instead of the Catholics! We were told in this appeal from Manhattan that if the deadline was not met that it might be "Defeat .... Worse Than Dunkirk?", thatour whole mi
ion program everywhere might becompromised and that we might suffer a "psychological set-back that might last a generation". These were not the words of Caponetrying to convince some "speakeasy" on his product but Manhattan selling us on their need for a "Million For Manhattan".
Following the super-salesmanship came the
pathetic pleading. Brochures that followed said,
"This job does not belong to us alone. It is a task
which concerns every true Christian throughout the
country." According to her reports in 1961
Manhattan had an annual budget of $30,000 and in
1962 that it was nearly $50,000. In spite of this we
were told that Manhattan alone couldn't do it that
"three hundred people are not enough to do this
job." Just think about it, three hundred members,
an annual budget of nearly $50,000, and they can'
build themselves a meeting house! So in February, 1962 came the plan! Brochures
from Manhattan pictured a sixteen story, dual-purpose building, the upper twelve stories being converted into residence apartments and beingsold for an estimated $1,800,000. These apartments were to be deeded to the owners "thus removingthe church altogether from the real estate phase of this project." This was a tacit admi
ion that their proposed plan involved the church in the real estate business but, "It will save the church a half milliondollars to do it this way. The real miracle is that it can be done at all." Now, who could be so naive as to insist on the need for haying scriptural authority
for such as "bargain" as this??
But now comes the heart-breaker! In June, 196another brochure comes from Manhattan featuringa "Bright New Look On Madison Avenue" and "It's A Single-Purpose CHURCH For Manhattan!" After figur ing out how to save us half a million dollars these brethren have dropped the plan. They dropped it not because they decided that it was unscriptural for the church to go into the real estate business but because the real estate market dropped in Now York and it is no longer "economically feasible" to build this dual-purpose building. Instead of this dual-purpose building, they want a "single-purpose" building with a "fellowship room" under it that will seat five hundred. It seems that they have decidedto drop the housing venture on top in favor of feeding venture on the bottom! This size church restaurant ought to be "economically feasible", ifact they ought to be able to put every restaurant in a country mile of them out of business with it.
These brethren tell us that they would like t
have the building before the World's Fair next year,
however, "Manhattan Elders are not fighting an
deadlines", so I guess that it won't be "Defeat . . .
Worse Than Dunkirk?" if they don't get it by then
There is one part of this new appeal that remains
unchanged. That's the part about letting "our
wonderful brotherhood" comply with "Step One
which "is to raise another $250,000." It seems that
these Manhattan brethren haven't used any of the
money sent to them by the brotherhood for their
promotions and since they haven't promoted with
any of the brotherhood's building money that they
don't want to build with any of their promoting
money! They are willing to promote "step one" if
the "wonderful brotherhood" will take it, whichmeans send Manhattan another $250,000
As far as I can determine from Manhattan's brochures, they aren't destitute. They aren't having to meet in the open, or from house to house or even in rented facilities. It seems from what they have said in the brochures that the wholeidea behind this "Million for Manhattan" project is,
(1) to keep from losing sight of the restoration plea, (2) to keep our mi
ion efforts in the Northeast and
the whole world from being compromised, (3) and
to demonstrate a building before the people of other nations that come to New York so we won't have that "psychological setback that might last a generation"! Tommy-rot! What these brethren need more than that Million For Manhattan" is a good diet of sound doctrine for a while.
"JUDGE NOT THAT YE BE NOT JUDGED"
Earl Fly, Orlando, Florida
Jesus said, "Judge not, that ye be not judged.For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall bejudged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." (Matt. 7:1-2). This passage has often been misused by many for various reasons. When sin is exposed, reproved and r ebuked many say, "Judge not that ye be nojudged." This is a misapplication of the passage andindicates ignorance of God's word. Jesus also said,"Judge righteous judgment." (John 7:24). Since Jesus said "judge" and "judge not," obviously there is a difference in the meanings. One is righteous,the other unrighteous, one is permitted, the other forbidden. What is the true meaning of thepassage which forbids judging?
WHAT THE PASSAGE DOES NOT MEAN
(1) It does not mean we cannot test, recognizeand expose false teachers and false doctrines. When such is done the guilty say, "Judge not that ye bnot judged," in an effort to silence those who ex pose them, gain sympathy, soothe troubled minds and avoid the r eal issue. But in the same chapter Jesus said, "Beware of false prophets .. . ye shallknow them by their fruits." (Matt. 7:15-16). Bytheir fruits we can judge that they are false. The apostle John said to "try (which involves judging-EF) the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone into the world." (IJohn 4:1). Jesus commended the church at Ephesusfor trying some who said they wer e apostles andfound them liars. (Rev. 2:2). The apostle Paul judged that some were false apostles, ministers of Satan who appeared to be ministers, of righteous ness. (2 Cor. 11:13-15). The preacher is command ed to reprove and rebuke to counteract false teachers and departures from sound doctrine. (2Tim. 4:1-4). This necessarily involves some judging, which is commanded rather than forbidden. (2) It does not mean we cannot recognize, re prove and rebuke sin in an effort to correct an erring brother. The fact that we are to "restore such a one," "convert him" necessitates a "judging" or recognition of the sin. (Gal. 6:1; James 5:19).We can see (judge) that a brother is sinning. (IJohn 5:16). (3) It does not mean we cannot judge in with drawing ourselves from those who walk disorderlyin the church. On the contrary, we sin if we fail to judge in such cases, for we are commanded to do so. (I Cor. 5:1-13; 2 Thess. 3:6). (4) It does not mean we cannot judge betweenour brethren in the church regarding matters per taining to this life. (1 Cor. 6:1-5). (5) It does not prohibit the civil gover nment from passing judgment upon evil doers, or dueprocess of law, for this is approved throughout the entire Bible. (See Rom. 13:1-6).
WHAT THE PASSAGE DOES MEAN
The judgment forbidden by the Lord is that of a fault-finding, self-righteous spirit which causes one to harshly judge and severely condemn another for a lesser fault. This disposition is illustrated by the man with a beam in his eye who criticallyobserves and wants to cast out the mote (small splinter) in his brother's eye. (Matt. 7:3-5). This hypocrite should first remove the beam from his own eye, then it would be proper to help removehis brother's mote— with the right spirit, "in the spirit of meekness." (Gal. 6:1).
Neither can we judge the heart, question thesincer ity or impugn the motives of another, based on suspicions, evil surmisings, insufficient or circumstantial evidence, or by outward appearances. Jesus said, "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." (John 7:24). Righteous judgment demands and necessitates the proper spirit and indisputable evidence of wrongdoing. If wrongdoing is suspected because of outward appearance, we cannot judge; if thbrother denies the alleged sin and offers explanation, his word must be accepted untildisproved. To reject his word and deny his account without irrefutable evidence is to chargehim with insincerity, hypocrisy, lying and judges him unrighteously. "Therefore judge nothingbefore the time, until the Lord come, who botwill br ing to light the hidden things of darkne
,and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts ... " (I Cor. 4:5). "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spir it of man which is in him?" (I Cor. 2:11).
OTHER PERTINENT PASSAGES
"Love thinketh no evil." (Cor. 13:5). ("taketh not account of evil"— ASV). Love will not alloone to always be suspicious, surmise evil and putthe worst construction on the acts of others, norattribute evil motives to them. On the contrar y,love "believeth all things" (I Cor. 13:7). Itcompels us to believe all the good po
ible of a person until compelled by undeniable evidence tobelieve otherwise.
"Speak not evil one of another brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth thlaw: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of, the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver,who is able to save and destroy: who art thou that judgest another?" (James 4:11-12). The onewho unjustly judges another and speaks evil of him, denies and disobeys God's law, makehimself a judge of it, and makes himself equal witthe one lawgiver (God) by substituting his own lawor rule of conduct in this matter. Such is forbidden and condemned.
CONCLUSION
Unr ighteous judgment always does harm and never any good. It may be due to a misunderstanding of the true situation, envy,jealousy, bitterne
, hatred, a vain attempt toexalt self by harshly judging and spreadingdegrading reports about others, an inferiority complex, religious prejudice,hatred of the truth, et cetera. But regardless othe reason it is always sinful.
"But with me it is a very small thing that I bjudged of you, or of man's judgment . . . but hthat judgeth me is the Lord." (I Cor. 4:3-4).Realizing that the Lord knows all the true facts and that his judgment is really the only important one, like the apostle Paul, we personally should care very little that we are unrighteously judged andcondemned by men. Yet from another viewpoinwe should be greatly concerned because those whothus judge are guilty of sin and in danger of condemnation. Furthermore, unrighteous judgment and evil speaking may irreparably damageanother's good reputation, lessen his influence for good in the kingdom, and render less effective his future work for Christ.
While we should continue to correct the misapplications of the passage, "Judge not, thaye be not judged," We should not neglect temphasize its true meaning and importance in our lives. Let us never be so busy refuting theerrors that we forget to teach and practice thetruth. Let us always be careful to judger ighteously, knowing that "with what judgment yejudge, ye shall be judged." (Matt. 7:2).
WHEN DID OPPOSITION BEGIN?Ferrell Jenkins, Bowling Green, Kentucky
"Up until a few years ago there was no opposition
in the brotherhood, except in a few isolated places,
to cooperative evangelism and benevolence as is
practiced by most churches of Christ today."
"The first opposition that was registered to
cooperative evangelism in our day was that which
followed the efforts of the Broadway congregation
in Lubbock, Texas, to keep Brother Otis Gatewood
in Germany. Until that time, nothing was said in
opposition thereto; . . ." (This was in 1948, FJ).After discu
ing the beginning of the Herald of
Truth radio program (in 1952) the writer continues:
"But still not a word with reference to the orphanhomes or to the homes for the aged!"
The three quotes above are taken from the tract,
Cooperation in the Field of Benevolence and
Evangelism, by Guy N. Woods. In various parts of
the nation brethren have parroted these statements.
In our own area Raymond Hazelip, in teaching on the
current "i
ues" presented the first two quotes
almost verbatim. He worded the third point this way:
"Real apposition to the orphan home never started
until 1951 or later." Surely these brethren will have
honesty enough to correct these misrepresentations
after studying the evidence we intend to present.
Why Opposition Small
The first "orphan home" supported by churches
of Christ was in 1909. By 1940 there were only
"homes" in existence. By 1950 there were only 1
"homes" operating, but by 1960 there were 27.
Perhaps these figures will help to explain why there
was only an "exceptional" opposition to such. There
were not many examples of this unscriptural
practice, therefore not must opposition. The
opposition
has been in proportion to the practice. Between 1950 and 1960 there were 17 institutions begun. No
wonder the opposition is greater now.
Opposition "Long and Loud" in 1931
In the Gospel Advocate, March 19, 1931, bro. A.
N. Trice wrote an article on "Law and Expediency".Bro. Trice was in favor of the "homes", etc. Hisarticle was written in defence of such. Many of thearguments made are similar and some are identical to those made today (32 years later). When broTrice wrote there were only 5 "homes" in operation. Throughout the article bro. Trice spoke of those who "object". Notice what he said:
Cries long and loud have been made against
schools, homes, orphanages, etc., as being
institutions "unknown to the New Testament,"
and against "an enterprise" that is "bigger
than the work of a local congregation." (All
emphasis in all Advocate quotes is mine, FJ.)
This single statement is enough to show that
brethren Woods, Hazelip, et al. are misrepresenting
the situation. T hey say that RE AL OPPOSITION
never started until 1951 or later. Bro. Trice, in favor
of the "homes", said in 1931 that the "cries" against what he favored has been "LONG AND LOUD".
In the same article bro. Tr ice said: Another dogma held by some is that no
church may give from its treasury to the
support of any school, Bible school, orphan
school,
or other institution of learning, nor for helping
any one to obtain an education. Opposition to church support of human institutions
was already a DOGMA, according to bro. Trice, i
1931.
Bro. Trice said: Sometimes the claim is made that no two or
more churches may cooperate in any given
work, or that "the word of God does not
authorize any congregation to 'start an
enterprise' that is bigger than the work of a
local congregation." Special objection is also
urged against the planning by the churches of a
city or community for holding a series of
gospel meetings and against the selection of a
preacher to do the preaching. No. bro. Trice, you must be mistaken back in '31,
for no one opposed such until after 1948! In his conclusion bro. Trice said: "Finally,
Scripture authority has been demanded for teaching
the Bible in schools; for cooperation of churches; for
supporting schools from the treasury of the church;for activities other than through the treasury ofthe local congregation; for maintaining an orphanage or home for the aged; for arranging for
a series of gospel meetings; etc ......... It is not sufficient to cry, "Unscriptural," while failing to point out theScriptures violated.
These quotes from a proponent of the "orphanages" shows that there was opposition in
'31; that it had been long and loud; and that someone
was demanding the Scripture for such.
Advocate Heard "Both Sides"— Srygley AnswersWhen bro. Trice wrote, the Gospel Advocateallowed "both sides" to be heard. Otherwise his
article would not have been printed. Two weeks after
it appeared, in the April 2, 1931, i
ue, bro. F. B.
Srygley wrote an editorial using the same title bro.
Trice had used and replied to his article. Bro. Foy
E. Wallace, Jr. was the editor of the Advocate at
that time. Bro. Srygley admits that the article says "some
good things and others not so good." He points out
that the things bro. Trice said could be used in
defence of the missionary society. He emphasized a
point that we have been trying so feebly to get
acro
: the argument is not over HOW (means an
methods), but WHO (which organization). Bro.
Srygley puts it this way:
The question is not that certain things oughtto be done, nor is it the how they shall be done,
but it is the institution or organization through
which they are to be done. There is nothing i
the New Testament larger than a local church
and smaller than the entire body of Christ. I
am seeking to make no law, rule, or regulation
when I say this.Bro. Srygley pointed out that bro. Trice thought
that what he advocated should be chartered by the
state and be under a BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
while in the same i
ue of the Advocate another
brother suggested the "brotherhood" build an old
men's home, but that it should be under the elders of
a church. The Advocate and the Firm Foundation are
still fighting about this more than three decadeslater. Srygley said:
My idea is that these two brethren shouldget together and decide which is the proper way. There is no Scriptural way to organize athing that is not in the Scriptures. Unless theydo this, I think we had better go on and preach and practice what is in the New Testament.
With obvious reference to Gal. 6:10, bro. Srygley said: "I feel sure that most students of the Bible
understand that Christians have the right to d
good to all men in the name of a disciple without
going to the local church to do so." He quoted Mt.
10. 42, and closed with "Bible students should be
able to understand that is if one needs an
organization through which to do any religious
work, God has provided such an organization."
BARGAIN PACKAGE
- Voices In The Wilderness — J. R. Cope .... $ .75
- What Is The Church Of Christ —
- H. E. Phillips .......................................................... 25
- Review Of Every Good Work —
- H. E. Phillips .......................................................... 25
- What It The Herald Of Truth — A. C. Grider .1 5
- Division, Who Is Responsible? —
- J. P. Miller ............................................................... 20
- Benevolence And The Church — Harris J. Dark ...........................................................10
ALL FOR $1.00
This article is a continuation of the one which
appeared in this column in the September i
ue of
SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES on the rule of
elders.
I believe that truth on the issue of the rule of elders may be determined from I Pet. 5: 1-3. All other references will harmonize with whatever truth is established from these ver ses. I n determiningthe truth the key word is "oversight" (v. 2) and the key phrases are "Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."
(v.3) When we learn the meaning and applicatio
of this word and these phrases we will have resolved
the i
ue. The participle phrases are used adverbially telling
how elders are to exercise "oversight." Hence, the
i
ue involves two questions: (1) WHAT are elders
to oversee? and (2) HOW are elders to oversee?
Concerning the former our text says they are to take the "oversight" of the "flock." The word "flock" is a figure used to identify the church. Hence, elders are to oversee the church. (Note, "which is among you," hence, local congregation.) The words "flock" and "church" are general in relation to matters to be overseen. Therefore, unless an exception can be shown, we must conclude that elders oversee all the affairs of the local church. In a former article I exposed the error in efforts that have been made to show an exception. (See September issue of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES.) No exceptio
has been shown— there is none! The affairs of the local church divide themselves
into two realms: (1) things specifically authorized,
and (2) things generically authorized— sometimes
called "matters of faith" and "matters of opinion"
respectively. In this sense I use these terms and
expressions in this article. The "oversight" of elders
in these matter s must be in harmony with God's
will respecting each. In "matters of faith" there are no decisions to
be made. Such is not an affair of the church. All decisions in this realm have been made by Christ,the legislator. Nevertheless, there is "oversight" for elders here. God's will respecting "matters of faith" determines the scope and nature of the elders' oversight in such matters. Such things cannot bealtered in any measure. They can neither be added to nor diminished from, but must be contended for without compromise, regardless of the opinions andfeelings of men. The duty of elders in such matters is clearly set forth in these words: "Holding fast thefaithful word as he hath been taught, that he maybe able by sound doctrine both to exhort and toconvince the gainsayers." (Titus 1:9) Now,consider the meaning of the word "oversight" in the
light of the above instructions.
The word "oversight" is from the Greek "episkopeo": "To look upon, inspect, oversee, look after, care for." (Thayer) Thus, in "matters of faith" elders exercise "oversight" as they "look upon," "inspect," "oversee," "look after," and "care for" the flock to see that they walk in "sound doctrine." T hey oversee and the congregation is overseen. There is an over and under relationship.They "oversee" by warning, instructing, and
exhorting (T itus 1:9). While this ability and action
is required of elders it is not peculiar to elders.
However, in the light of the above and Heb. 13:17 it
seems evident that their responsibility is special. It
is the special phase of this responsibility tha
accounts for and maintains the over and under
relationship in "matters of faith."
This is further evidenced by the fact that the
church is called "the charge allotted to you." (v.3,
R.V.) The word "heritage" (K.J.) and "charge"
(R.V.) are from the Greek "kleros" which means
an assigned portion or lot. (Young, Vine and
Thayer) In the final analysis the church belongs to
God, but He has assigned to elders the primary
responsibility of caring for it according to His will—
hence, charge allotted to them.
In "matters of opinion" there are decisions to bemade. All such decisions are within the scope oGod's word. (1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23; 2 Cor. 5:7; Rom. 10:17; 2 Jno. 9) Since elders "oversee" the church,and it is "the charge allotted" to them, they bear the primary responsibility for every decision. For this r eason they have the final say in all such matters.
Concerning HOW elders are to oversee our text says, "Neither as being lords over God's heritage,but being ensamples to the flock." They are not to be lords in either matters of faith or opinion. Whilethe church is a "charge allotted" to them, theyshould not entertain the thought that it is theirs to do with as they please. They must remember that the assignment was made by the Lord, and,therefore, the responsibility is to be discharged according to His will. T his also means that theyare not to use coercion, physical force, or anything akin to the tyranny which rulers of theworld often employ in accomplishing their objectives. (Cf. 2 Cor. 10: 3-5; Matt. 20:25-28). Some, in an effort to protect the flock against what they judge to be error, will erect an "iron curtain"around the flock forbidding them to hear any side of any i
ue except their side. In whatever way this may be done, it is wrong! Such are "lording it over God's heritage." God gave every accountable manintelligence enough to decide every issue involvinhis soul's salvation for himself. Elders are to "oversee" in such matters according to Titus 1:9. If this fails, the individual alone is responsible
Perhaps in "matters of opinion" the injunctio
not to be "lords" is most urgently needed. In the
matter of making "judgment decisions" the
temptation to act arbitrarily is perhaps stronger
than anywhere else. Even though the church is a
"charge allotted" to them, they are not to "care for"
it arbitrarily. "Judgment decisions" are to be made
after determining the sentiment, feelings, and
opinions of those in the flock. Having determined
the pulse of the congregation, this knowledge should
be put with their superior wisdom (at least above
average— by virtue of their qualifications) and then a decisionshould be made for the good of the whole. This does not demand submi
ion on the part of the elders to the majority. It does demand that due consideration be given to both the majority and the minority. In the final analysis the wisdom of the elders prevails. They, by virtue of their qualifications, will take far more into account than others in the congregation when it comes to making such decisions. Well qualified elders will not act arbitrarily. Neither wilthey act in submission to the major ity for thmajority's sake. The truth lies between the twoextremes. It is the wisdom of the elders acting ithe light of all that should be duly considered that
makes for the proper "care" of the flock.
It is in the area of "judgment decisions" that the qualifications of elders (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-11)show themselves to be so essential. Others in the congregation, lacking in the qualifications of elders but who have knowledge of and ability to teach the Scriptures, can carry out effectively the duty oTitus 1:9 as it relates to "matters of faith." But in "caring for" the "charge allotted" to them in "matters of opinion" the qualifications of elders are most urgently needed. In case of divided sentiment the elders from experience in "ruling well their own house" will seek to unite the flock by taking time topoint out the wiser course and explain why. He willdeal with the flock in such matters as he has dealt with his own house. A careful study of the othequalifications of elders show that such a person is well qualified to properly act in such matters. Yetthese qualifications ar e often over looked orminimized.
The phrase "but being ensamples to the flock" has been greatly overworked. It does not refer to the whole of godly living. While elders, like everyoneelse in the flock, are to be examples of righteousness in all things before all men, this is not the verse to prove it. Here, elders are to be examples to the flock in one matter particularly. We cannot get more out of this verse than the Lord put in it. The adversative conjunction "but" identifies that in which they are to be examples. They are to beexamples in the very antithesis of "being lords." The congregation needs this example in both matters of faith and opinion. Some members become "strikers" and "brawlers" in a discu
ion of "matters of faith." In "matters of opinion" some members are inconsiderate of the sentiments, feelings, anopinions of others, and sometimes make a scenewhen they cannot get their own way. A gooexample, set before them by the elders, in dealinwith such matters would overcome a multitude of trouble. They need to see in demonstration kindne
, sympathy, due consideration, and wisdom in handling such matters. No wonder those bearing the responsibility of "overseeing" the "charge allotted" to them are told "Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."
DANGERS CONFRONTING THE CHURCH NO. 5 Thomas G. O'Neal, Jasper, Alabama
The problem that we want to notice in this article that confronts the church is the problem of inherited
membership. In one respect this is as it should be;
it can also be the cause of many problems in thechurch. The New Testament teaches that parents should
train their children in the way of the Lord.
"Children, obey your parents in the Lord; for this
is right. Honour thy father and mother; which i
the first commandment with promise; That it may be
well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the
earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to
wrath; but bring them up in the nurture and
admonition of the Lord." Eph. 6:1-4. "Children,
obey your parents in all things; for this is well
pleasing unto the Lord." Col. 3:20. "I will therefore
that the younger women marry, bear children, guide
the house, give none occasion to the adversary to
speak reproachfully." I Tim. 5:14. These passage
and others teach that parents are to teach their
children right from wrong and to rear them to be
God fearing men and women. Every time that a
child grows into manhood, obeys the gospel o
Christ, and is an asset to the Lord's Church and to
the community in which he lives, mother and
father can be given credit for doing a good job, ifact, a job well done.
When a child was born into a family in Israel, he
became one of God's chosen people. When he became
old enough to learn the law, his parents were
responsible for his being instructed therein. Deut.
31: 9-13 is one of the passages from the Old
Testament that can be cited to show the provisions
that were to be made for the children to hear and
be taught the law. Jeremiah 31:31-34 shows what
was done in Israel and tells of what was to be done
in teaching God's law when the New Testament came
into force. In Hebrews 8:8 the Hebrew writer says, ".
. . Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when
will make a new covenant with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah: Not according to the
covenant that I made with their fathers in the day
when I took them by the hand to lead them out o
the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my
covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
For this is the covenant that I will make with the
house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I
will put my laws into their mind, and wr ite them
in their hearts; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. And they shall not teach ever y
man his neighbor, and every man his brother,
saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from
the least to the greatest." The order from under the
law of Moses has changed. Under Moses, they first
became children then they were taught the law
Under Christ, teaching comes first and then comes
the act of becoming a child of God.
One cannot become that which he does not know
how to enter into a specific relationship. One cannot
become a child of God without having first been
taught the gospel, which is the seed of the kingdom,
Lk. 8:11, which will make one a child of the King
and a citizen in the kingdom. One who has not been
taught the gospel cannot scripturally be inducte
into the kingdom.
We have in the church today many who are
members of the Lord's church just because their
parents before them were members. Had their
parents been members of some human church, the
would be members of that denomination. In man
instances, the only reason many members could give
for their being members of the Body would bebecause mother and father were members of the Body of Christ. Because of this condition, many are prone to want to do things for which there is not one passage of divine authority in the Book ofGod. Being a member of the church is just like being a member of some denomination as far as they are concerned. In fact, they probably do not know thedifference between the Lord's Church and a
denomination.
Children should be taught what to believe. They
should believe the Word of God. They should be
taught why they believe. T hey should believe the
Word of God because it is the will of God.
Chrematizo, "were called," Acts 11:26 No. 2
SEPTUAGINT USES CONTINUED
In the first article on chrematizo, Septuagint uses of the word were studied. In the present article,
remaining Old T estament uses of the word will be
briefly noticed; then several New Testament uses
will be investigated.
In Jer. 37:2 God commands the prophet to write
all his words in a book (Bible). The Greek hous
echremitisa pros se may be rendered "which I
spoke to thee." Here the oracular element is
apparent. In Jer. 43:2 the same phrase occurs with
the same meaning. In Jer. 43:4 we have the account of Baruch's
writing from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words
which the Lord had spoken to him (hous echre
matisen auton).
It may be seen at once that the LXX never uses
the verb chrematizo in any sense other than that
implying an oracular utterance. The unusual use of
the verb in III Kings 18:27, "perhaps he is busy
(chrematizei)" is perhaps to be thought of in the
sense of "busy about his divine work." Could the
passage be r ender ed "per haps he is deliver ing oracles" ? I would surely not dogmatically deny the "business" aspect in the verb chrematizo, but in
my judgment neither the Old Testament nor the New
Testament employs the verb in that sense. To the
contrary, the ten occurrences of the ver b in the
LXX involve the oracular element of a divine
communication.
NEW TESTAMENT USES OF CHREMATIZO The verb chrematizo occurs nine times in the New
Testament. The passages in which the verb occurs
are the following: Matt. 2:12, 22; Luke 2:26; Acts
10:22; 11:26; Rom. 7:3; Heb. 8:5; 11:7; 12:25. A
brief exegesis of the passages cited will assist one
in determining the Bible use of chrematizo.
MATT. 2:12
I n the AV Matt. 2:12 r eads as follows: "And
being warned of God in a dream (kai chrematis
thentes kat ' onar) that they should not return to
Herod, they departed into their own country another
way." It will be remembered that this divine
communication was given to the magi who had
visited the infant Jesus. It will hardly be denied
that this use of chrematizo involves a divine
warning. In the ICC the words are rendered, "And
having been divinely warned in a dream . . . ."
(Matthew, p. 13.) The Interpreter's Bible gives this
note on the verb, "The Greek word means instructed
by an oracle." (Vol. 7, p. 259.) Lenski makes the
interesting comment, "The verb chrematizo is used
with regard to any divine communication." (The
Interpretation of St. Matthew's Gospel, p. 72.)
It is to be distinctly observed that the word "God" does not occur in the Greek text of Matt. 2:12. The word is inherent in the meaning of chrematizo in the passage.
Matthew Henry & Thomas Scott COMMENTARY ON THE HOLY BIBLE
This is a standard work; it is complete, understandable and comprehensive. It was prepared for "use of per sons of ever y station, rank and denomination."
While its author s wer e denominational, the comments on most ver ses will help enlighten the reader to significant points of interest. It will help to a better under standing of the inspired word of God.
Six handsome volumes; 3,232 pages; completeand compreh ensive comments; bound in sturdy, high-quality bindings for lasting service; brown tone, with over-stamping in blackand gold; good r eadable print; volumes wr apped inattractive, two-color dust jackets. The Scripture text is written in full. It has marginal notes and cross references. An introduction is given to each book of the Bible. It makes use of many useful tables and charts.
6 volume set — $23.95
Order from-PHILLIPS PUBLICATIONS P.O. Box 17244 Tampa 12 Fla.
". . . THEY REHEARSED ALL THAT GOD HAD DONE WITH THEM . . ."— Acts 14:27
GOSPEL MEETING
S. Leonard Tyler of Pine Bluff, Ark. willpreach in a gospel meeting with the Seminolchurch in Tampa, Fla., from September 30through Oct. 6. He will then go to Lutz, Fla. on Monday night for a second meeting of thsame length. Brother Tyler's many friends in Florida are urged to hear him in these efforts.
GOSPEL MEETING
H. E. Phillips of Tampa, Fla. will be in agospel meeting at the Par Avenue church inOrlando, Fla., Oct. 20-27. M. E. Patton is the local preacher. All in this area of Florida are invited to attend this meeting.
A NEW CONGREGATION Olin Kern, Charlotte, Tenn.
By request of the co-editor, brother James P.
Miller, I am writing this article. Should it encourage
any to preach "The Whole Gospel," then, its design
will be fulfilled.
Without question the darkest hour in anyone's life is when it is necessar y to turn your back onsome of your dearest friends and do only whatAlmighty God would have His children do— live faithful in words, deeds, and actions. I know of noone who desires or is pleased to see a congregation disintegrate beneath his teaching. Thus, when thold congregation divided and this new congregation became a reality in May, 1962, wewere filled with mixed emotions. We were happto stand for TRUTH and TRUTH alone, but deeplysaddened by the failure of some to give themselves
wholly over to God.Like most all other congregations of our day antime who are forced to make a decision between
truth and error, we were marked and labeled a"GENUINE ORPHAN HATERS" and other thingsthat can not be printed upon the pages of this or any other paper. While it is certainly true that theORPHAN HOME question was a side i
ue of this difficulty, it is by no means the main reason behind the division. The principal reasons were as follows: (1) the liberal view— in this group are those whocondone and engage in (a) the social gospel (b) social drinking (c) worldliness (d) institutionalism,and such like. Also in a business meeting on Jan. 22,1962, the elders formed this decree: "We (theelders) will write each preacher that is to hold aGospel meeting at this place and instruct them topreach sermons to the sinners ( ???) but not to preach any doctrinal i
ues." In view of the various positions held in the congregation there is little wonder as to why they only wanted sermons to the alien sinner. Sermons to the congregation would not be in agreement with their thinking. While it is true that all in this group would not accept all of
the above mentioned, certainly these four groups
cover a very good cross section of the afore
mentioned difficulty. (2) The conservative view— in
this group the brethren wanted nothing but the
"WORD." It is this group with which I am proud to
be a small part. On May 20th 1962, we had our first meeting i
the high school auditorium. There were 55 present that meeting. Certainly all were anxious, noknowing what lay beyond. We had no money, nplace to meet for any length of time, and no supportfor a preacher. A few days later we had a business meeting in order to raise some money so that wemight erect a place of worship. Little did we know at that time of the coming opposition; the builders andall concerned were to be badgered by the liberal brethren or friends of the liberal brethren. However, we were able to raise two or three thousand dollars among our own group. The Riverside Drive church in Nashville, Tenn., gave us eight hundred dollars toward a down payment for a building. By this time we were well on our way— we thought. We had our lot paid for and a sufficient amount (wthough) for a down payment on a building. We hadbeen informed to this end: should we raise 20% of the total cost of the building, we would be able tosecure a loan. We raised that amount but the loan was not to be, at least not at this time. We were now told that we must raise 50% of the total cost in order to get the loan. All were discouraged by this,but God always has a way of rewarding those whoremain faithful to His cause. A few days after wewere turned down on our first try for a loan, one ofthe brethren mortgaged his house for four thousand dollars ($4,000.00), and we were able to secure the loan and begin construction on the meeting house. On the last Sunday in November, we met in thbuilding for the first time. The total cost of ourbuilding, seats, and all, was $12,775.00. The buildingshown above has four class rooms plus an auditorium and a study. By having folding doors on the back cla
-rooms we can seat almost two hundred. Incidentally, we had a high of 217 in a recent Gospel meeting. Our attendance for Sunday morning worship during the month of May was on
hundred and one. After the meeting house funds were made
available, the brethren talked about building a home
for the preacher. This was a must because there
was no place to rent in this rural area and it
hardly seemed logical to move to a near-by city
and there find a dwelling place. Funds for this
endeavor were not difficult to obtain because the
bank could lend us the money to construct the
home against the lot, and the note payment would
remain the same. In about four months all of our.
needs were well taken care of; we had a meetin
place, we had a house for the preacher, and supporthad been raised for the preacher.
The brethren were told of my needs as a Gospel preacher and support was soon coming from many
parts of the country within a month. Last winter I was in need of a small amount of support and three
congregations came to my a
istance. Two were
informed that my need had been taken care of and
that they should not continue their support. The
other congregation is supporting us at the present.
The following congregations are having a part of
this good work and without their help I certainly
would not be able to preach full time in this area:
Riverside Drive church of Christ, Nashville, Tenn.;
Franklin Road church of Christ, Nashville, Tenn.;
Rock church of Christ, Dickson County, Tenn.;
Thayer St. church of Christ, Akron, Ohio; Park
Blvd. church of Christ, Louisville, Ky.; West End
church of Christ, Franklin, Tenn.; Locust church of
Christ, Mt. Pleasant, Tenn.; and Academy St. church
of Christ, Dickson, Tenn.
For all of these congregations and the manindividuals who have taken an interest in the work here at this place we are thankful to God. Because of God's help and their assistance we are where weare today. Our greatest dreams have been fulfilled ten times over. Perhaps we lacked in faith when wefirst began, but without question there are still manyin Israel who are satisfied with "JUST THE TRUTH." It is my hope that our strength and faith have been increased by whatever success we have attained.
Should all the men be able to work eighteen (end of 1964) months, the congregation here will be able
to support its own work. By this I mean, they ca
employ a preacher full time, pay on the note, have
a couple of meetings a year, and be able to pay al
the bills. Two and one-half years after the birth of
this congregation it should be totally upon its own
— and I hope and pray to God that it will still be
preaching the truth— the word of God, so that
division will never be necessary again
As long as there is a chance to preach the truth
in any congregation that may have liberal
tendencies, I pray that brethren will keep th
"Sword of the Spirit" hot, letting it fall where it
will.
We are not glad to report a division, but we are
glad to report that there are some in this corner of
the vineyard planting the word in a simple fashion and that God is giving the incr ease.
Though some of our liberal friends would denthe truthfulness of this article, I still stand before
God and man ready to defend all that is said.
GODLINESS IS GREAT GAINDonald R. Givens, Coalinga, California
The majority of individuals in this present agelook for wealth, happine
, and security in the wrong
places. Mankind strives for prosperity in material
ways but not in spiritual ways. One simply has to
take a look at the wor ld around him and he sees
man looking for happiness in the fleshly and earthly
things which are to pass away
Some individuals try to find happiness in money.
The more money and material goods they can store
up, the happier they think they are. These persons
should read I Timothy 6:9, 10 and reconsider their
aim in life. In verse six of the same book and chapter
we read the words, "But Godliness with
contentment is great gain." Here is where true
happiness and gain ar e found. T hey ar e found in
living a Godly life.
Still other people think that they can find happiness
or security in the bottom of a bottle. The more they
drink, the happier they believe they will be. They
delude themselves and send their own soul and
others to eternal ruin. Other individuals think
happiness is found in just having a "good job an
income" and having a "lot of fun and pleasure."
These also delude themselves and will pay for their
neglect of spiritual things at the great reckoning
day. Feeding the soul is far more important than
pleasing the desires of the body
While most of mankind is "striving after wind" in
their vain attempt to find happiness and security, they
overlook the greatest thing of all, Godline
. In their
frantic search for joy in this life they completely
overlook spiritual things and they ignore the life to
come. In living a Godly life one will find more
happiness and joy than in all the material and fleshly
things of this world.
Every individual should realize the fact that this earth is not our permanent home. Some persons act as if they were going to be here forever and forever. Theylive and act like the rich man of Luke the 12th chapter who sought after material possessions and told his soul to "take thine ease, eat, drink and be merry." Does not this remind one of so many people today who are repeating the very same words? But remember whatGod said to this man — 'T hou foolish one, thinight is thy soul required of thee; and the things which thou hast prepared, whose shall they be ? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." (Luke 12:20,21). God said he was a fool. The person who looks to this world and to fleshly desires for happiness is a fool. These material things will pass away. True happiness and wealth are found in living a Godly life and storing up treasures in heaven (Matthew 6:19-21).
We all have problems and troubles in this life. No
one is free from trials and temptations. But the Godly
person knows how to face them and overcome them
while the ungodly individual succumbs and falls prey
to the devices of the devil. Godliness enables one to
face life's sorrows. Jesus helps one to bear them. Even
if no one else in the whole world cared about you
Jesus will be with you if you live a Godly life
Godliness truly enables one to sing and hold on andpress forward.
Godliness helps one to approach inevitable deathwith great courage. The Godly person realizes that death shall come to all, and he prepares for it instead of trying to ignore it and believe that somehow he mayescape it. Only the Godly can face death courageously as Paul did in Philippians 1:19-24; and II Timothy 4:6
8. Paul knew that because of the Godly life he had
lived he would depart to be with Christ and receive the
crown of righteousness. The apostle Paul gave the true
emphasis to this life. He recognized that his life is
but preparation for the next life. May we too realize
that this life is but preparation and a pathway to th
one beyond.
The Godly person knows that the only "crown" to
be sought after is not material wealth or worldly fame
or an exalted place among mankind; not simply praise
from men or popularity; but a "crown of
r ighteousness." How true it is that mankind in
general fails to place the proper emphasis on this fleeing life.
Godliness enables one to go with God as did Elijah of old. One remembers how in I Kings 17:3-6 that God told Elijah to go to the brook Cherith and there
he would be fed by the r avens. E lijah did no
mumble and complain and inquire if the ravens were
"respectable, reliable and trustworthy" or any such
thing— but he knew that God was with him and he
would certainly be taken care of. Today you nee
worry about only one thing: Is God with you? When
God is with an individual the world cannot overcome him.
Yes, it is true, the Godly person has the happiest and the richest life because he has the most to look forward to. He has the sure promise of eternal life. Treasures are laid up in heaven for him and a crown of righteousness awaits him.
"Godliness is profitable for all things, havingpromise of the life which now is, and of that whichis to come." (I Timothy 4:8b).
"But Godliness with contentment is great gain." (I Timothy 6:6).
"EXCUSE PLEASE" By J. T. Smith, Tampa, Fla. I received a bulletin or booklet called, THE BIBLE CHAIR JOURNAL, in which all the news of Bible
Chairs is reported. Now, in case you have never
heard of a Bible Chair, I will try to explain what itis as I understand it.
On the front cover of this magazine, the
announcement is being made that the North
Boulevard Church of Christ in Baton Rouge, La. is
heading a drive to build a Christian "student center"
on the campus of Louisiana State University. The
plans are as follow:
"A three unit building with a five point program is being planned. The central unit of the structure will be a 200 seat chapel for worship services, Biblelectures, leadership training classes and devotionals. A second unit will contain offices, cla
rooms, anlibrary. A fellowship hall is designed as a third unit. A courtyard connects the three units. The five chief points in a program which the facilities willmake po
ible are worship, Bible instruction,fellowship, counseling and mi
ion activities." (emphasis mine JTS
Now I want you to notice their "three unit building." It includes, first of all, a "200 seat chapelfor worship services." Now, WHY DON'T THEY CALL IT A CHURCH? Why? Because they can't afford to. For according to the third paragraph, thElders of the North. Boulevard church will oversee the work; and elders are supposed to be active in ONE congregation, not TWO congregations. (Act20:28) So, they camouflaged it by calling it "chapel for worship."
The second unit in this building will contain "of
fices, cla
rooms, and library." Now here are rooms
in which Bible classes are going to be conducted
They will be conducted in cla
rooms built on a
University campus for University students. Now, i
I" didn't know better I would think this was a
"school" that these brethren were building, but it wouldn't
be Scriptural for Elders to be "overseers" over a
school, (or would it) ? So, I don't guess we could
call it a school.
The third part of this "concoction" is a "fellowship" room. The word "fellowship" as used here has nothing to do with any part of what Bible'fellowship" means. John said in 1 Jno. 1:7 "If we walk in the light as he is in the light we havfellowship one with another . . ." Hence, Bibl"fellowship" has to do with "walking" and that inthe light. Now, since this is not Scriptural"fellowship", then we conclude that it is UNSCRIPTURAL "fellowship". We could, I suppose, safely say that they will have a "kitchen," "pingpong tables," "shuffle board" and other kinds of entertainment for these students in their "fellowship" room. But I would hate to think that these Elders of North Boulevard congregation were going to "oversee" a RESTAURANT and GYMNASIUM. Now, since Peter said in 1 Pet. 5:2 "oversee the flock WHICH IS AMONG YOU," (emphasis mine JTS) that they couldn't Scripturally oversee any of these things.
I seem to have made a statement in the very
beginning of this article that I am going to have to
retract. I said I was going to explain what this thing
was. But, we have a CHURCH that is NOT A
CHURCH. It is a CHAPEL for WORSHIP. Then
we have a SCHOOL which is NOT A SCHOOL, fo
elders don't have SCRIPTURAL AUTHORITY in
their official capacity as elders to "oversee" a
SCHOOL. And then we have a RESTAURANT and
GYMNASIUM, which is not a restaurant and gymnasium but a FELLOWSHIP ROOM.
Now, in all this "muddle" of confusion, (not achurch, not a school, not a restaurant and gymnasium) WHAT SHALL WE CALL IT?
Oh! excuse please. It's-a BIBLE CHAIR.
REFERENCE BOOKS
HARMONY OF SAMUEL, KINGS AND CHRONICLES by William D. Crockett 3.50 CRUDEN'S DICTIONARY OF BIBLE TERMS by Alexander Cr uden _____________________ 3.50 CRUDEN'S CONCORDANCE, HANDY REFERENCE EDITION by Alexander Cruden 2.95 BIBLE STUDENT'S ENGLISH-GREEK
CONCORDANCE by James Gall ___________ 4.95 PELOUBETS BIBLE DICTIONARY COMPLETE 4.00 CONCORDANCE T O T HE
AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE __________ 9.00 STRONG'S EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCE OF
THE BIBLE by James Strong _____________ 13.75 NAVE'S TOPICAL BIBLE __________________ 9.95 LIDDELL AND SCOTTS ABRIDGED
GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON ________ 5.50
YOUNG'S ANALYTICAL CONCORDANCE
T O T HE BI BLE __________________________ 11.7
Thumb indexed _________ 5 12.5