Two occurrences of the preposition eis in Mattheware used by Baptist debaters in their effort to evade the force of this preposition in Acts 2:38, "for theremission of sins." A former article dealt with the first of these, Matt. 3:11, "I indeed baptize you inwater eis repentance," by giving a quotation fromthe commentary on Matthew of the eminent former day Baptist scholar John A. Broadus, who has correctly explained that sentence. (See "Searching theScriptures," Volume VI, Number 11, November,1965 issue.) Now let us look at Matt. 12:41.

"The men of Nineveh," says Jesus, "repented at(eis) the preaching of Jonah." The Baptists claimthat here eis certainly has a retrospective significance and means "on account of." They declare withgreat assurance that certainly the men did not repent in order to get Jonah to preach, but rather, he preached first, and they repented on account of hispreaching. So, we are further instructed, Acts 2:38means that baptism is on account of a remission ofsins already possessed.I will have to disappoint them. They are wrongagain. The key to the meaning of the eis phrase in Matt. 12:41 lies in the word "preaching," which isa noun, not a verb, and does not refer to the act ofpreaching, but to the message, the substance of thepreaching. Proof of this point will be forthcoming,but first let us examine the explanation of Broadus who did so well on the former passage but did notproperly understand this one. The following is hiscomplete comment on the phrase in question. At the preaching, or proclamation, the word beingderived from the verb kerusso, explained on 4:17.The preposition rendered 'at' is eis, usually rendered 'into' or 'unto,' and often denoting design or aim. It cannot possibly have that sense here, for certainly the Ninevites did not repent in order that Jonah might preach. It clearly introduces the occasion or ground of the repenting (Winer, p. 397 [495]) ; and so it may possiblyhave the same force in 3:11 and Acts 2:38.

The following points are noteworthy:

(1) Broadus recognizes "in order to," "into" an"unto" — involving the thought of "design or aim"

— as the most usual and the primary meaning ofthis preposition both here and in the note on 3:11.For the latter see the former article.

(2) Further, he recognizes that, according to acommon sense rule, eis should be translated according to its primary significance where possible. "Butit is best to adhere if possible to the common and themost natural sense 'in order to'" (Broadus in noteat 3:11). (3) He only assigns it a different meaning herebecause he thinks it "cannot possibly" have its usual meaning here. I contend that our learned writer Mr.Broadus has simply failed to understand the presentpassage. I can show that eis can have its primarymeaning here. Therefore, according to his principles,stated above, which are correct, the prepositionshould be given its primary significance here.

As stated, the key to the right view of this phraseis the word "preaching" which is the translation ofthe Greek noun kerugma.

Kerugma, "a proclamation by a herald, denotes amessage, a preaching (the substance of what ispreached as distinct from the act of preaching)" (W.

E. Vine, Exp. Dict.).

As Thayer defines it, the word refers to "thatwhich is promulgated by a herald or public crier, aproclamation by herald; in the N. T. the message orproclamation by the heralds of God or Christ." Inour passage, the reference is to "the proclamation ofthe necessity of repentance and reformation madeby the prophet Jonah" (Grk-Eng Lex, page 346).

That these authorities are correct in the position that the reference is to the message, the substanceof the preaching, rather than the act of preachingis clear from the usage of our word. Look at I Cor.1:21, "... it was God's good pleasure through thefoolishness of the preaching to save them that believe." The ASV has "the preaching" in the text,but in the margin puts, "Greek thing preached."Note verse 23: "... we preach Christ crucified ...unto Gentiles foolishness." What was the foolishness? Verse 21 says "the preaching"; verse 23 says"Christ crucified." It is clear that the word refers to the message, not to the act of preaching.

What is more remarkable yet is somethingpointed out by Thayer at the same place referred

Page 2

to above. The Septuagint has this same Greek nounat Jonah 3:2 where God instructed Jonah, "Arise,go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach untoit the preaching that I bid thee." Jonah was to preach (verb: the act of preaching) the preaching(noun: the message or thing preached). There canbe no question but that the preaching refers to the message God would give Jonah — the substance or contents of his preaching.

Due reference to this point unlocks the meaningof Matt. 12:41 so that it comes perfectly clear. Jonahpreached a certain kind of life. This life was his preaching — his message. The men of Nineveh gotinto this life. What brought them into it was repentance. Thus, they repented into the preaching ofJonah. The primary and most usual signification ofeis is also the one that best fits in our passage.

Tapes of the

HALE-SPEARS DEBATE

IN OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA

MARCH 28, 29, 31, APRIL!

Propositions Discussed

FIRST TWO NIGHTS

Proposition:

"The Scriptures teach that there is an exclusive and binding pattern of cooperation among churches for evangelism which is violated by the Herald of Truth type cooperation."

Dudley R. Spears affirms — Lewis G. Hale denies

LAST TWO NIGHTS Proposition:

"It is in harmony with the Scriptures for churches of Christ to build, maintain and regularly contribute money to such benevolent organizations at Tipton Home, Boles Home and other orphan homes and homes for the aged that are among us."

Lewis G. Hale affirms — Dudley R. Spears denies

Each Night's Discussion On One Tape

One tape (night)..................... $ 3.00

Entire debate............................. $12.00

Recorded on new Mylar 1 V£ Mil tape. Any defective tape will be replaced free of charge.

order from:

PHILLIPS PUBLICATIONS

P. O. Box 17244 Tampa, Florida 33612

WHAT IS THE CHURCH?

H. E. Phillips

The English word "church" is translated from aNew Testament Greek word "ekklesia"— "ek", outof, and "klesis", a calling. W. E. Vine says, "It hastwo applications to companies of Christians, (a) tothe whole company of the redeemed throughout thepresent era, the company of which Christ said, 'Iwill build My Church,' Matt. 16:18, and which isfurther described as 'the Church which is His Body,'Eph. 1:22; 5:23, (b) in the singular number (e.g.,Matt. 18:17, R.V. marg., 'congregation'), to a company consisting of professed believers ..." The word"church" is always applied to people in the NewTestament, never to some material building or someabstract idea of an invisible organization, unless youcan conceive of people being "invisible."

The various figures by which the church is described to us in the New Testament are often perverted to teach doctrines nowhere found in the Book. It is called the "house of God" (I Tim. 3:15), but itis people (Heb. 3:6). It is called a "body" (Col. 1:24),but it is people (Rom. 12:4,5). It is called a "kingdom" (Col. 1:13), but it is people (Heb. 12:28). Itis called a "temple" (I Cor. 3:16,17). It is called a"building" (I Pet. 2:5), but always it refers topeople.

One of the figures by which the church is picturedto us is that of a bride. Before me is the December 7, 1963 issue of The Baptist Examiner in which Bob

L. Ross has an article on the front page entitled:"What Is The Bride Of Christ?" From II Corinthians

11:2 he draws some conclusions which are opposedto the doctrine of Christ.

He begins the article by saying: "Many peoplebelieve that all the saved compose the 'bride of Christ.' This is the common teaching of those whobelieve the universal, invisible church teaching." Ifall the saved do not compose the bride of Christ, theneither bride is not all the church or the church is not all the saved.

"Contrary to this, we understand the Bible toteach that a limited number of the saved compose the bride of Christ." If the bride of Christ is the church, and the bride is composed of only a "limitednumber of the saved," it must follow that there aresome saved who are not in the church. That is the point we shall dwell on for the moment.

"Some people have their thinking confused on thissubject of the bride. They identify the bride ofChrist as being all the saved . . ."

ARE ALL THE SAVED IN THE CHURCH?

Since the church means "the called out," if wefind who the called out are, we will know who all are in the church. Let us see who are called, how theyare called, and where they are after they are called.

To the "church of God which is at Corinth" Paul wrote: "For ye see your calling, brethren, how thatnot many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called" (I Cor. 1:26). To the Ephesians : "I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseechyou that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewithye are called" (Eph. 4:1). The word "vocation" inthe K.J.V. is rendered "calling" in the A.S.V. We are called with a calling. "I press toward the mark forthe prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus"(Phil. 3:14). God calls in Christ. "Wherefore therather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure" (II Pet. 1:10).

These passages identify those called as Christians,members of the church, brethren. Not one personcalled (in the sense used in these passages) is out ofthe church! All are saved: have been forgiven oftheir sins.

But how are they called? ".. . but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to thepower of God; who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which wasgiven us in Christ Jesus before the world began"(II Tim. 1:8,9). It is an holy calling. "Wherefore, holybrethren, partakers of the heavenly calling . . ." (Heb. 3:1). It is a calling from heaven. "Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ" (II Thess. 2:14).

All in the church are "called out"; all those calledout are called with a holy, heavenly calling by thegospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. That is very plain!

Now where are those so called? "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whomhe called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified" (Rom. 8:30). "I marvelthat ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the Grace of Christ unto another gospel"(Gal. 1:6). "But we are a chosen generation, a royalpriesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that yeshould shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light" (I Pet. 2:9). "That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory" (I Thess. 2: 12). "And let the peace of God rule in your hearts,to the which also ye are called in one body ..." (Col.

3:15). The "called out" are in the "light, kingdom,grace of Christ, the one body. All the saved are in the church!!!

"NOT A DROP OF WATER"

It is amusing to observe the various twists denominational preachers place on certain scriptures.For example, the old Landmark Baptist people willfreely admit that baptism mentioned in the greatcommission is "water" baptism. Free Will Baptistare not so generous. In my first encounter with aFree Will Baptist I quoted freely from Mark 16:1516, to prove that baptism was essential to salvation.In his reply the Baptist preacher said, "Hoglandhas quoted Mark sixteen to prove that baptism isessential, and to his surprise I am going to agreewith him; but I want to know that there isn't a dropof WATER in the text! The baptism under consideration here is Holy Ghost baptism and that is whatis essential."

In my opinion, this makes a Free Will Baptistmore difficult to meet in debate than the old Landmark Missionary Baptist. It forces one to prove that"water" is in such passages as Mk. 16:15-16; Acts2:28, etc. It must be admitted that many scriptureswhich mention baptism do not mention the WATER.However, there is a very simple procedure which willteach any honest mind that baptism in these passages is "water" baptism. In my debate with Mr.Earl Jenson of Turlock, California, I used the following chart to illustrate the point. Notice on oneside "Holy Ghost Baptism" and on the other "Water Baptism!"

It might be observed that two major points standout. One is that baptism in the name of the Lord hasto be Water baptism. In Acts 10:47,48, Peter said, "Can any man forbid WATER, that these should notbe baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost aswell as we? And he commanded them to be baptizedin the name of the Lord." These Gentiles had alreadyreceived Holy Ghost baptism. He then commandedthem to be baptized in WATER which was baptism in the NAME OF THE LORD. Since there is onlyONE baptism now (see Eph. 4:5) it has to beWATER baptism because it is the only one IN THENAME OF THE LORD!

MIRACULOUS DIVINE HEALING (No. 7)

Connie W. Adams, Akron, Ohio

It is amazing how gullible some can be when itcomes to the modern so-called faith healers. Not only are their practices contrary to what the Bibleteaches about miracles, but their attempt to relievethe unsuspecting of their money should be obvious to anyone who would think for a moment.

Oral Roberts began in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 1947with $25. He is now the king of the faith healersand a very wealthy man. Much of his wealth hascome from the people who are themselves extremelypoor. Many have poured money into his organization in the hope of being healed. Many of them are deadnow of the very diseases which he claimed to cure.

At this writing a federal suit is pending involvingCharles Jessup, well known traveling "healer." Heis indicted for using donations contributed for religious work to buy property, big cars, boats, seaplanes and to dabble in illegal cock fighting, This"great man of God" has been married four times,and has obtained two divorces by false statements,and married a 15 year old girl while still married to his third wife.

A. A. Allen, another well known and now wealthyhealer, made the news spotlight several years agowhen he was arrested for drunken driving in Tennessee while his associates made excuses for his absence from the healing services. Newspaper reporters were attacked and one had his glassesbroken by "ushers" at the services.

Jack Coe, now dead of polio, was sued in Floridaa few years ago by the parents of a small boy whohad polio and who was told by Coe to remove his leg braces. His legs began to swell and the doctors ordered the braces put on again for fear of permanentdamage to the child's legs.

Leroy Jenkins, of note in Florida, was arrestedand jailed in Ft. Pierce. He came very near incitinga race riot. A note of warning was sent the OrlandoBetter Business Bureau from the office in Ft. Pierce warning of Jenkins and his business obligations.Jenkins has a police record and some of his sidemen, as of two years ago, do also, and have beenunder police surveillance. His offices, real estate holdings and financial transactions in the city of Tampashow the evidences of a man of means.

Jenkins was declared an "undesirable alien" in Nassau in 1963. Before the papers could be served on him, he chartered a plane and returned to Florida,But a later issue of his healing magazine "Revival"carried many pictures from his Nassau campaignof various ones he claims to have healed. I have before me now a photostat of an editorial from theNassau Daily Tribune, Thursday, February 13, 1964, in which the editor exposed the whole matter of the great commotion caused by Jenkins while there and gave the evidence of his being classed as an undesirable alien to the effect that he is prohibitedfrom returning to the island. Jenkins claimed inthat issue of "Revival" to have healed a Greek man who had been paralyzed for 23 years. The story in"Revival" said:

"The Greek gentleman lying on the stretcher in this picture was paralyzed for 23 years. Ithappened on the last night of the meeting.After Bro. Jenkins prayed for him he immediately witnessed the healing power of God in his body. The Greek businessmen of Nassau were so moved by this spectacle that they declared a holiday and closed their businesses for three daysto commemorate the event." Then the Tribune editor commented:

"I saw this unfortunate young man a few weeksago. He is still a cripple, confined to his bed.What is more .. . we never heard of the Greek community taking a holiday to celebrate his'cure'. . . because he was never cured. "But people like Mr. Jenkins get away with this kind of outrageous conduct in the name of religion . . .there are also other ministers wherever he goeswho are prepared to jump on the money bandwagon . . . and, of course, there are also a lot ofgullible people everywhere who are alwayslooking for a 'sign' from heaven. These peopleare easily plucked by 'ministers' who prostitutereligion to make easy money." The money raising schemes and appeals are boldfaced. I have seen asmany as four separate collections taken in oneservice. I have seen half-bushel baskets used. The plea is for "folding" money. Sometimes the plea isfor "everyone who loves the Lord $20 worth" toplease stand up. Then $10 worth, $5, $1 and so on. Not only is this true of the tent campaigns, but isespecially true of the magazines sent out by thesemen. Here are some samples:

(1) Gene Ewing, in his magazine "Revival Crusades" tells of his plans, with pictures to illustrate,for purchasing a hugh complex as a revival headquarters between Dallas and Ft. Worth, Texas. Naturally, this is going to take a lot of money. So onpage 7 of March, 1966 issue he says:"God laid it on my heart to put this Prayer Request Sheet at the bottom of this page for your personal prayer requests. Fill it out and RUSH it back to me. 7 is God's perfect number. Would you give $7.00 to God's work? Think of all you'll be doing, helping me reach the unreached. You will be rewarded. Will you take this step with me? If you can't send it all, send what you can, then send the rest next payday." Then at the bottom of the page is ablank "prayer request" with a place for thesender to designate how much he is sending, orwill send later. In the same issue he appeals for the readers to send money for pews and says if they will send money, they will

get their names put on a pew. Listen to his appeal:"I am asking everyone that can send $10.00 ormore on their pew, but if you can't send $10.00or more, send $5.00, or no matter if it is justeven a dollar. Do it in love and faith and do it today. I need your prayers and your supportimmediately. The payments, utilities, etc., runsover $2,000.00 every month, but God said forme to take this step and as he opened the RedSea for Moses, He would be just as real to meand you that help me in this great step of faith.This is a Miracle of God."

Another clip out follows for name, address and amount.

(2) One of the most brazen appeals I haveseen for money is in a paper sent out called "APersonal Letter From the Heart of Dan Goodin." He said that on Nov. 7, 1964 at 7 a.m., he would hold the sender's special prayer request in one hand and a"Golden Tinted Key to Prosperity" in the other. The sender was to pray at the same time and to hold inhis right hand the key he would receive fromGoodin. This was supposed to assure prosperity.Now notice this:

"Now God told me for you to send the first $5that you get and he would bless you for provinghim . . . Now God will give you the $5 within 12 days. As soon as you get it, put it in an envelopeand send it to me as quick as possible."

Goodin said that he had prayed over those keys andthat they "have been anointed with the Spirit ofGod." On another page in this paper he advertised abottle of oil and said:

"This is a special anointing oil, of which Brother Goodin has placed his left hand in.There is a special anointing in his left handwhich God gave him. The SUPER-NATURAL OIL HAS APPEARED IN BROTHER GOODcrIN'S LEFT HAND MANY TIMES."

It is hard to imagine how intelligent people can betaken in by such bare-faced attempts to deceive. Yetthese men are getting rich on the desperation of thedowntrodden.

My friends, God does not use as his healing agentsmen who are deceitful and who do not even know the fundamental truths of the gospel. None of thesemen preach what the apostles did on what to do tobe saved. They have no concept of the New Testament church. They do have a clear concept of howto get money. They cannot do what the Lord and the apostles did. They disregard what the New Testament teaches about the purpose and duration ofmiracles. They are deceitful workers, dabbling inlying wonders, many of them known to be mostungodly in their lives.

I sincerely hope that these articles will serve to open the eyes of some good, honest soul who hasbeen deceived by the false claims of the so-called healer, and that they will instruct the honest truthseeker in the Bible teaching on miracles.

— 303 Selden Ave.

THE NATURE OF THE ELDER'S RULE

In a previous article it was shown that the NewTestament teaches the idea of the eldership or the"office of a bishop." Every office has some work todo. So it is with each .officer in the church; each elderhas a work to do.

The Scriptures teach that elders are to rule the church of God. Consider these passages from HolyWrit. "Remember them which have the rule over you (Heb. 13:7). "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch foryour souls, as they must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief for that is unprofitable for you" (Heb. 13:17). "Salute all them thathave the rule over you" (Heb. 13:24). "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour" (I Tim. 5:17). "One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with allgravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church ofGod?)" (I Tim. 3:4-5).

All, I believe, will admit that elders rule in the church of God; however, some either do not understand the nature of their rule or do not want to submit to their rule. It has been contended that elders rule by (1) teaching and (2) example, only. Justone thing is wrong with this idea— -it is not so. If this idea were true, how would an eldership withdraw from such an one mentioned in I Cor. 5?

Words have meanings. One is not at liberty togive a word an arbitrary meaning. To learn how anEnglish word is used today, one consults Webster.For a Bible student to learn the use of a word in the Scriptures, the student must consult a standardwork such as Thayer, Vine, or others of recognizedscholarship. Gospel preachers have done this withsuch words as "baptize," "for" as used in Acts 2:38,and others. Certainly this is in order for us to dowith the word "rule."

Two different Greek words, hegeomai and proistemi, are used in the passages cited above. They aredefined thusly— Hegeomai— "1. to lead, i.e. a. togo before; b. to be a leader; to rule, command; tohave authority over . . . with gen. of the pers. overwhom one rules, so of the overseers or leaders ofChristian churches; Heb. xiii:7,17,24 . . . 2. to consider, deem, account, think..." — Thayer. "to lead,is translated to rule in Heb. 13:7, 17, 24 (AV marg., in the first two, 'are the guides' and 'guide.'"— W.

E. Vine. Then, Proistemi— "1. to set or place before ; to set over ... 2. a. to be over, to superintend,preside over, (A.V. rule), I Tim. 5:17 ... b. to be a protector or guardian; to give aid, Rom. xii:8 . . . c. to care for, give attention to." — Thayer. "lit., 'tostand before,' hence, to lead, attend to (indicatingcare and diligence), is translated to rule (Middle Voice), with reference to a local church, in Rom.12:8; perfect Active in I Tim. 5:17; with reference to a family, I Tim. 3:4 and 12 (Middle Voice) ; . . ."

— W. E. Vine.

The Greek term translated overseer or bishop,episkopos, is defined by Thayer as, "an overseer, aman charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, an curator, guardian, or superintendent; hence in the N. T. guardianof souls, one who watches over their welfare; I Pet.2:25; spec, the superintendent, head or overseer ofany Christian church; Acts 20:28; Phil. 1:1; I Tim.3:2; Titus 1:7."

From the above one learns that those men who are the bishops, pastors, elders, or overseers of achurch are charged with being guardians, protectors,superintendents over the flock of God. With due love,care, and consideration for the desires of the congregation, elders should weigh the sentiments expressedto them and then with their mature knowledge andwisdom make such decisions as would be for the good of the entire congregation. They should directand oversee the activities of the congregation so as to edify the saints, cause growth on the part of thechurch and preach the gospel to the lost. Whenelders recognize New Testament teaching and areseeking to do the will of the Lord, they will not disregard the feelings of the congregation and makearbitrary decisions. This will not create a good spiritbetween the elders and the congregation. In time,where arbitrary decisions are made, trouble willresult.

From time to time things may need to be donethat the elders will not do personally. It is their duty to see that these matters are attended and direct those acting in such a manner so as to accomplishtheir goal, to have a fine spirit of cooperation manifest among those working, realizing that they areencouraging growth upon the part of those workingwhich will one day result in their being qualified toserve as elders, all other things being equal.

Also from the above definitions of "rule" it is seen elders are over other sheep within the "flock ofGod among" them. Since elders are over, then therelationship of the sheep is that of being under the overseers. There is an over and under relationship.To deny this is to deny not only the teachings of theScriptures but to deny the scholarship of men likeVine and Thayer. Sheep are to be under the shepherds. For one to say he will not be ruled or be underelders is to show his rebellion toward the word of God.

While God intended for elders to rule over the flock, Peter said they were not to be "lords," I Pet.

5:3. The word translated "lords" according to Young is used only in this passage. MacKnight says, "Thisis a strong word, denoting that tyranny which themen of this world often exercise, when they haveobtained offices of power." Thus, elders have oversight but they are not to be tyrannical lords over the congregation. If and when they do, they cease to beScriptural elders.

Over what are elders? Unless there is some specific New Testament teaching to deny that elders arenot over certain aspects of the flock, then elders are over the entire congregation and its activity is theconclusion of Acts 20:28. There is no passage that suggest elders are over only a part of a congregation's program and another part of the program isnot under their oversight. Therefore, I conclude elders are over all the activities of the church. Elders are over the souls of the members, over the preaching and teaching, over the benevolent work of thechurch, over the worship, over the discipline, andwhatever other Scriptural activity in which thechurch may engage. From the way some talk, onewould get the idea that all elders ever decide is whatcolor to paint the building and when to put a newcarpet on the floor. Since elders are over the worshipof the church, whatever is necessary to facilitate the worship is also under their oversight. But their oversight is not limited to just this. When elders go outat night seeking to bring back the sheep who havestrayed from the fold, they are exercising theiroversight. When elders go to teach some memberthey are discharging their oversight. When elderssee that all facilities are ready so the saints mayworship God, or so men may hear the sweet storyof Jesus, they are exercising their oversight. Whensaints are in need and elders oversee the ministration to them, they are fulfilling their office. Whenfalse teachers are reproved and their doctrine exposed, elders are discharging their oversight to protect the flock.

However, while elders are over all the flock, thereare certain things that do not come under the oversight of elders — things the sheep may do. Only asmatters of this kind affect the soul's salvation do elders have oversight of their lives. What color shirta man wears, after what pattern his wife makes herdress whether number 1025 or 1463, what brand ofsoup his wife buys, what model and make of car hedrives, all of these do not come under the oversightof elders. When elders oversee the administration of the needs of sheep, this does not give them theright to say to the individuals how much is to bespent for bacon and how much is to be spent formilk. God never intended that elders or anyone elseshould take over a man's family and run it for him.When elders see that the sheep have the resources,it is then up to the sheep to decide what items theyneed and how much of that they need.

Why have elders? I believe that when we see thereason for elders we can then see why God said theyshould rule over the flock. In every relationship oflife the older should know more about the problems, more about the solutions, more aboutwhere the pit falls are and how to avoid them. Thisis true in any business. Age gives experience andwisdom that youth does not have. One 50 years oldhas had more time to observe life than one 20. One 20 may have more formal education but the additional 30 years provides more in experience than isgained in formal training. The Lord knew this andmade provisions for the elders of Israel to direct her affairs. Likewise, in the church. The elders have hadtime to mature, to season, to observe, to gain Bibleknowledge through long years of study, to see thepit falls of life and to know the passages in God'sBook that will direct one away from the traps ofSatan. They are in position to see the first evidence of departure in one's life and can go to that one andteach, admonish and encourage them to return tothe fold of safety. This a novice will not do because he is not qualified by experience to do. For this reason, God said a novice could not serve as an elder.

What a privilege it is for one to be a member ofa flock that has good elders. They will so rule that you can grow in Christ. They will rule so as to maintain peace within the congregation.

Sheep are charged with obeying, submitting, andremembering those that rule over them. It is for the good of the sheep that they obey, submit and remember their rulers.

I close this article with this warning. Just as mencan become corrupt in any relationship of life, theLord knew this would be so within the eldership(Acts 20:28-32). When elders fail to rule accordingto God's Word, then sheep are not to obey themin error.

FOR UNMARRIED ONLY

This message is not to suggest divorce for Christians who are married to unbelievers. The inspiredteacher taught that if the unbeliever be content todwell with the Christian let the Christian remain (ICorinthians 7:10-16). He did not, of course, suggestthat the member of the body of Christ forsake thelaw of God to appease the unbeliever. If the churchmember acts like a non-member in such case, therewould be no conflict in the home, but there would beno peace with God. We must obey God rather thanman (Acts 5:29). The believer is to give diligenceto win the unbeliever by chaste conduct, reverence,and the meek and quiet spirit (I Peter 3:1-6).

To those who are not married we warn confidentlythat the marriage tie can be broken only by deathand grievous sin (Romans 7:2,3 ; I Corinthians 7:39 ;Matthew 5:31,32). We must just as confidently affirm that the tie is to be very close. The two should be one in many ways (Ephesians 5:31). If two arenot one in the faith, there may be some very unhappy conflicts. If one has love for the church andthe other hates the church, they cannot walk together in this important aspect of life. Any who investigate a little before marriage can learn fromneighbors that this problem can be big, and it canbring unhappy situations week after week, monthafter month, and year after year for a whole lifetime. The dreadful results even continue over into the next generation. How blind can people be in failing to see this until they have walked headlong intothe same difficult situation from which they cannotthen escape?

Marriages between members of the church andpeople who hate the church are made, generally, with no consideration for the church. The member was not seeking first the kingdom of God at this time.Often such marriages are entered into by the very,very young who have not been taught and who havenot observed the seriousness of the problems. Some of these ties may be suggested more by impulse,lust, and excitement than by judgment and forethought. Very little thought may have been giveneven to the problem of finance and responsibilitiesthat force themselves upon homemakers. Marriage is not for excitement seekers. It is for adults who are ready to take adult responsibilities. How sad itis to see youths skip this great and important periodof training and plunge headlong into the responsibilities of adults (homemakers) when they are unprepared mentally, socially, physically or spiritually.

Parents should tell their children early about thegreat principles the Lord has given concerning marriage. Rushing children into "dating" and situations where instinct works against wisdom is a seriousblunder which may bring about unwise and unhappymarriages. Teaching by older people is so important,and yet it is obviously neglected by many (Titus 2:3-5). Parents who failed to teach their little peoplethe sacredness and significance of marriage need not be surprised at impulsive marriages. They have littleroom to be bitter toward these children if they dothe unwise thing through lack of teaching.

Sometimes a member of the church will marry onewho has the liquor habit and then complain aboutbeing married to an alcoholic. What right has oneto murmur so loudly when that one walked willfullyinto the situation? Those Christians who find it very,very difficult to worship according to the New Testament pattern because they married companions whohate the church deserve help and encouragement.They also deserve to face the difficulty patiently andwithout whining. Their bed is one of their ownmaking.

When homes are divided, interest in religion isoften killed. The two whose beliefs conflict discourage each other until neither has interest to go. Thisis especially true since there is usually a lack ofinterest in religion when such contracts are enteredinto. People who attend at eleven o'clock only andgo along with the world in the dance, immodestdress, etc., are often the ones who form these intimate ties with no regard for the will of God. It iseasy to kill interest in religion when there is littlereligion to kill. Parents who fail to teach on marriagegenerally fail to teach on worship, the church, andon other things relating to eternity.

Children in divided homes are to be pitied. Theyneed to be given whatever teaching and encouragement friends and neighbors can in spiritual matters.In divided homes what one teaches the other maydeny with harsh bitterness. The Bible truths maybecome forbidden topics for discussion. Childrennaturally hesitate to line up with one against another parent. Service to God may be of such a nature that to the child it seems more like taking sides in a family feud. The truly Christian parent in a dividedhome will feel a double responsibility to teach theright things in the proper attitude. Let childrenlearn from some source that the Bible is right andmust be obeyed.

Compromise is not the solution. This does notplease God. A lack of conviction which would allowone to ignore the Lord's supper, the name of Christ,and His kingdom leads to no eternal treasures. Theunbeliever is much more likely to glorify God if hesees good works in his companion (Matthew 5:16; I Peter 2:11,12). Patience, kindness, meekness andmany other good traits are always good. Revile notagain. Overcome evil with good. Compromise on matters on which God has spoken is not commended bymen or God. It is no marvel that some- unbelievers are not converted. They see very little evidence ofreal conviction and interest on the "believer's" part.

In the divided home little effort for unity of beliefis made, ordinarily. There is a standard in religionby which differences in belief could be settled. TheBible is right, but it tends to be ignored. After a fewfiery discussions it almost becomes a law that therecan be no further study. Even a pleasant "agreementto disagree" does not settle the problem. Children from such homes do well to have enough religion toattend some at eleven on Sunday. Such husbands andwives may not have angry hours of discussion, butthey miss the happy hours of pleasant and profitablediscussion and mutual edification. Oh, for moreblessed homes where Christian unity prevails andwhere the Word is studied, loved, and discussed bythe family.

"I like the paper a lot." — Alonzo Morris, Nashville, Tenn.

"We (my wife and I) enjoy the fine editorials, thenews and the many wonderful articles pertaining tothe work of the church and our lives as Christians. Keep up the good work. Our prayers are that Godwill bless you both with many years of health andstrength, that you may be able to continue to buildup all that will hear in the most holy faith." — Brother McCants, Tampa, Fla.

"I enjoy the paper and profit much from the excellent articles by the brethren." — Robert Jackson,Nashville, Tenn.

"May God richly bless you in your efforts topreach the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ and inyour unwavering stand for the truth." — James F. Vickery, Jacksonville, Fla.

"We enjoy your paper very much." — W. M. Mc-Junkins, Saratoga, Ark.

"You are doing a splendid job setting forth thetruth through Searching The Scriptures. Keep upthis good work." — Sam W. Garrison, Nashville,Tenn.

"I heard of your publication 'Searching The Scriptures' through brother Ferrell Jenkins, so am sending enclosed amount for a year's subscription." —

C. B. Coffin, Indianapolis, Ind.

"Just this past weekend I was handed one of your magazines 'Searching The Scriptures' by a friend. Ienjoyed it very much and am enclosing a check forone year's subscription." — Mrs. E. L. Bunch, Forrest City, Ark.

"Enclosed is money for my renewal. Keep up thegood work." — J. D. Tant, Decatur, Ga.

"Brother Phillips, I hope you and yours are enjoying the best of health. You keep on your goodwork with this paper. It is a joy to read of so manywho are not afraid to defend the truth." — Ellen Caldwell, Manchester, Tenn.

"Searching The Scriptures is a good paper," — John A. Humphries, Harrisburg, Pa."I enjoy the paper very much." — Mrs. A. A. Cook,, Fort Smith, Ark.

"Please write me up for a year's subscription asit is the best religious magazine mainly because ofthe vast religious subjects that it covers. Seems tome that although we do have problems with suchthings as 'Human Institutions,' i.e. Orphan Homes,Christian Colleges, Herald of Truth, etc., some Christians seem to forget that there are around 400 socalled bodies of God's followers."— David L. Odom,Los Angeles, Calif.

"The articles are timely and thought provoking, and we enjoy the news from the eastern section ofour nation." — Floyd Thompson, Santa Ana, Calif.

"I continue to enjoy reading your paper. The articles are well written and will serve to edify thosewho read them with an open mind. Keep up the goodwork.''— Billy W. Moore, Butler, Mo.

"It is a fine and helpful paper in learning how tolive a Christian's life. We enjoy it so much." — C.

P. Lindsey, Bell, Fla.

"I enjoy the articles and find they keep me incontact with development." — A. P. Joubert, Republic of South Africa.

"Looks like 1966-1967 will be better than ever if the same type of articles continue to be written." — Carter Stinson, Macon, Ga.

"I really enjoy the magazine." — Lloyd Knight,Livingston, Tenn."We enjoy Searching The Scriptures. Keep up thegood work." — Earl Morris, St. Cloud, Fla.

"Your article on the Lord's Church is worth the whole year's subscription." — Roy B. Cain, Wauchula, Fla.

"I enjoy reading Searching The Scriptures; it istruly a wonderful paper." — Birdie Cook, Orlando,Fla.

"I enjoy reading the publication of Searching TheScriptures very much. May you ever continue toteach in this manner so that our faith might continue steadfast in the revealed word of God." — Kermit Puckett, Clintwood, Va.

"I continue to enjoy Searching the Scriptures. Ilike the improvement as far as looks is concerned,and the recent articles by the editors on 'The Lord'sChurch' and 'The Herald of Truth' have been excellent. May the Lord bless you in his vineyard." — Tom Wheeler, DeLand, Fla.

"I appreciate your work with the paper." — L. A. Mott, Jr., Wayne, Mich.

"I continue to enjoy and appreciate Searching TheScriptures. I appreciate the fact that you do not shunto call names, yet without engaging in repulsive'name calling.' I just finished reading your excellentarticle on 'The Lord's Church' in the February issueof the paper. It ought to be widely distributed. I wishyou could see fit to put it in tract form." — Edward

O. Bragwell, Charlotte, Tenn.

"I enjoy receiving and reading Searching TheScriptures as it contains some very good Bible teaching. I especially want to commend your article, 'TheLord's Church' (Vol. VII, No. 2), and the excellentway in which you met Hall's (and Holt's) false ideas and teachings about the Lord's Church. Such falsedoctrine and teachers need exposing just as you havedone. I am glad to see that it is the policy of Searching The Scriptures to quickly deal with damnabledoctrines which appear in print as has been appearing in the Sentinel of Truth. Keep up the good work."

— T. B. Smotherman, Groves, Texas.

"Appreciate the paper more with each issue, andthe work you and brother Miller are doing. Doubtswere raised in our minds when brother Holt became editor of Sentinel Of Truth. Sorry to hear about hissubject matter at Florida College. Your article 'TheLord's Church' in February's issue was excellent inthat it answered well the theory; also in that evenbabes in Christ will not become confused about what the issue is when they read the article." — J. B.

Grinstead, Columbus, Ohio."Some of your articles have been very enlightening. I like the way you study and think things out."

— Mrs. Virgil Wartick, Amberg, Wisc.

NO PRESSURE???

J. T. Smith, Oklahoma City, Okla.

I heard in the Miller-Wallace debate, the Grider-Woods debate, and a number of other debates thatNO PRESSURE is inflicted by those who "promote"such endeavors as the Herald of Truth, OrphanHomes, etc. Let me say in all kindness that this is a FALSEHOOD from the word GO! ! !

When I was living in Chattanooga, Tennessee in1962 and preaching for the East Brainard Church ofChrist; I made the mistake of "asking the wrong kindof questions." I had been asking questions of some of the preachers in town about the Herald of Truth,Youth Camps, etc. Obviously, I was disturbed aboutthe Scripturalness of these things and began to try tofind such authority from the Bible. However, when Ilooked to the Word of God, all I could find in evangelism where one church sent to a preacher (Phil. 4:1617), or where several churches sent to a preacher(II Cor. 11:8). Also, when a church sent to anotherchurch, funds were sent so that there might be equality (a freedom from want of necessities) (II Cor.8:14). Neither could I find in God's Word where anycongregation ever became BOTH a SENDING and aRECEIVING church. They were either sending orreceiving. Of course in the "sponsoring church"arrangement, a church becomes both a sending and a receiving church.

In January of 1962 (about the time I was seekinginformation about the Scripturalness of the abovementioned projects), two other brethren and I wentto the Panama Canal Zone for two weeks of gospelmeetings. When I returned, I had a very unusualhomecoming. I learned that while I was away, someof the preachers and elders in town had called someof our members at East Brainard, and told them of thequestions I had been asking; and urged them to "beon guard regarding old Smith, he may be going "anti." This reminded me of what a Baptist preacher saidwhen one of his perspective members couldn't "getsaved." The man said, "I am going home and read myBible, and do what it says." The Baptist preachermade the remark, "He'll wind up in the church ofChrist."

So, the brethren at East Brainard decided to "investigate" me while I was away in Panama. A fewweeks after I returned, several of the preachers andelders in Chattanooga called our members and"threatened" to quit announcing their meetings, etc., because they thought I might be an "anti." What theyactually meant, of course, I was opposed to their "petprojects," because I was beginning to learn they wereun-Scriptural.

Do you have any idea what happened to me??? I was "fired" because the PRESSURE WAS PUT ON by the promoters of these projects; and until I couldfind another job (and the only immediate job to be hadwas at a lumber company) I was without support formy wife and three children.

So, don't talk to me about NO PRESSURE! ! !I am the voice of experience!

". . . THEY REHEARSED ALL THAT GOD HAD DONE WITH THEM . . ."— Acts 14:27

Tom Wheeler, St. Cloud, Fla. — The work in De-Land at the present is very encouraging. Since thefirst of the year three have been baptized and threerestored. A series of gospel meetings is planned forApril 18th through 24th with Henry Gilbert fromSeventh Avenue in Miami doing the preaching.Brother Gilbert did an excellent job proclaiming theword of God in such an effort last year, and much good was accomplished. If we do our part we knowthat the same excellent meeting will be enjoyedagain this year.

Larry Bunch, Palmetto, Fla. — I have moved to Palmetto, Florida, to work with the church there.My address is: 1613 Fifth St., Palmetto, Fla. 33561. Please note this change of address and send bulletinsto this address.

Earl Morris, St. Cloud, Fla. — After working withthe church at Dundee, Florida, for four years, wehave moved to St. Cloud, Florida, and are now working with the good church here. We would like toreceive bulletins from any one who mails them out.

ALONG THE FAR WESTERN U.S.-MEXICO BORDER

Charles F. House, P.O. Box 641San Luis, Arizona USA 85349

Baptisms — Tijuana, B.C. Mexico:

Word from Bro. Jim Middleton of the Tijuanacongregation states that one was recently added tothe church by the Lord when a precious soul rendered obedience to the Gospel of Christ. Baptisms —Tecate, B.C. Mexico:

Word from Bro. Santos Gomez states that the wife of one of the brethren there was also recently baptized at Tecate. Bro. Gomez says that they have tenregular, faithful members now. San Luis Rio Colorado, Sonora, Mexico:

Since the arrival of Bro. Luis Trevino and his wife January 16, 1966, formerly of Reynosa, Tamps., tohelp in the local work here at this place, the work has started to move at a rapid pace. Bro. Trevino isa young man of 20 years. The shortage of willing,qualified, spirit filled men of God here in Mexico, aswell as in other parts of the world, holds back thework in all places as a result of this. The local church here, in addition to a hard hitting personal workprogram, has an equally vigorous public, teachingand preaching program, going on.

Mexico is a VERY difficult and SLOW field, butthe members and their families we do have, areQUALITY, having been firmly indoctrinated in thetruth of God's Word. The denominations and the liberals who pass out food and clothing, medicineand vitamins, have more "members" (the majorityof whom have never been baptized), but the TRUE CHURCH has the TRUTH and is preaching it to thelimit of her ability. One precious soul was restored here at San Luis this month. Pray for us that theWonderful Word of God may find lodging in goodand honest hearts, and that it might bring forthstill more fruit in the future than in the past.Attention Preachers With Offset Printing Presses:In this border town where we live, there is nomimeograph or printing service available, makingit necessary to have to send the reports to either SanDiego, California, to be mimeographed or to Yuma,Ariz., to be printed. From several standpoints thishas not worked out too well. If you would print andsend me 250 copies of my report, which I would sendyou first each month, for distribution and re-mailing from here, this would be a great service. May I hear from you in this regard? Thank you very much.

H. E. Phillips, Tampa, Florida — I was in a gospelmeeting with Bobby K. Thompson and the NorthMiami Avenue church in Miami, Florida, April 10-17. Brother Thompson is doing a good work in theMiami area.

Robert P. Nichols, Osaka, Japan — Central Post Office Box 921, Osaka, Japan, August 2, 1965.

"I needed to recharge my battery" is the way afriend responded when, more than 10 years ago, Iasked why he had returned from preaching abroad.That to me was a sign of weakness. He had not undergone physical persecution. He still believed the Bible.The whole world certainly wasn't converted. Then,why come home? He said he simply needed to "recharge his battery."

Now I think I know a little of what he meant. Soon my span of experience in Japan will cover 15years and of the last nine years only one will havebeen spent in America. I too need to recharge mybatteries because I am loosing contact with thethinking of the brethren in America. I need to associate with mature Christians. (Most of our teachinghere is pioneer work and the teaching is very fundamental). My children also need the association ofchildren their own age and interest. Only two ofour five children have ever regularly attended aSunday Bible study in their own language and thatfar less than one year of their lives. Furthermore,I find that I'm beginning to understand too well theproblems of Japanese brethren, that is, I accept theirexcuses. Therefore for my own and my family'sspiritual growth and for more effectiveness amongthe Japanese we need to recharge our batteries byliving and working among our American brethrenfor a brief period.

Although they are not as culturally, and spiritually, isolated from Americans as we are, both theAmerican armed forces and the business world provide much more frequent and longer periods at home.They do this to insure the most effective work.

The church here not only survived but grew whenwe spent one year away from them in 1961. Nowthey are much more mature and are conductingtheir own gospel meetings, preaching regularly in Fukuoka, and publishing a weekly teaching mediumwhich is mailed to a list of prospects five time greaterthan the membership. All of this they pay for fromtheir own contribution. Therefore I think they areable to continue for a longer period without a "resident missionary."

Please do not misunderstand. I do not want to come home this month but a year from this month,in 1966. Then why write a year ahead of time?EXPERIENCE.

Once we had to fly because we failed to requestfinancial assistance in time. Another time we had to travel 3rd class in the cargo hole of a freighterfor the same reason. The cost was nearly as great but the accommodations were indescribably inferior.This time I would like to take a middle course, notso expensive as flying but with a little more creaturecomforts than a cargo hole. However, this necessitates making an early request for funds. In order to reserve space on a passenger-carrying freighter(best facilities at the lowest cost) a 25% deposit isrequired. As these ships carry only 12 passengersand there are 7 members of my family I must applyone year ahead if possible.

How much will it cost? When I left Louisville,Kentucky in 1957 with two adults and two children,I was supplied with $2200. Now there are four adultsand three children's tickets to be bought. This timea minimum of $3200 is necessary. Last time webrought back just a few clothes. In fact, brethrenin Berea, Ohio, where I preached in 1961, wereamazed to find a preacher with less than a dozenbooks. This time I need to bring my books, clothesand other personal effects. Therefore $3200 is theminimum I need. Of this $3200, 25% or $800 isneeded to make the reservation. I'm already in contact with steamship lines and could use this moneyimmediately. However, I hope to raise this $800 byNovember and the remainder by March, 1966.

You can help by bringing this need to the attention to the elders where you worship. If everyonewho is interested would send $2.00 and every congregation which has helped us would send $2.00 permember, we would have more than enough to return. Won't you do what you can today? Brethren,pray for us!

Robert P. Nichols

INTELLECTUALISM, OR DIVINE WISDOM?

People of America — there's a God somewhere. We

may not see Him, but He's still up there.He's the same God whose home is above — Whose works we enjoy, whose blessings we love.

But if you're one of the "intellectual" few

You'll say that the "myth" of God isn't true.Now, Mr. "Intellectual", on this we'll agree — That something has caused the things we now see.

I saw it was God, you say it was chanceThat caused the earth and heaven's wide spanse.

Well, Mr. Scientist, do a favor for me — (Jet out your test tube and create a tree.

If you can't make a tree, then a small leaf will do.But if you can't make a leaf, then I pity you.

And you — Mr. Chemist — make your lifeworthwhile. Bring our your beakerand create a child.

And you — Mr. Historian — you know history well.

Trace me back to my "father" — the cell.

And you — Mr. Professor — I'll give you the nod,Then you scorn, ridicule, and laugh at my God.If you can do just one thing I ask,

Then you will have accomplished an impossible task.

If you want to create with your human hands,Then find you a power greater than man's.And — oh, yes — while you're looking, maybe

you'll find The Good God of Heaven with aninfinite mind.

— Donald M. Alexander

A Unique, Astounding, Appalling, and Often Entertaining Analysis of Basic Catholic Belief on Questions 'of ItsAuthority — on Papal, Sacramental, Biblical (Really Anti-Biblical), and Sacerdotal (Priestly) Authority and Practices

— Analyzed Almost Entirely through a Study of OfficialCurrent Catholic Literature (Really the Only Way To Handlea Religion Which Gives Itself the Right of EvolutionaryChange in Its Doctrinal Positions) — A Monumental Job of Research — But for All That as Fascinating Reading asYou Are Likely to Come Across — Full of Alternately Naiveand Cynical Self-Contradictions, Breathtaking Absurdities,and Chilling Liberalism and Modernism — A Veritable Encyclopedia of Up-to-date, Authoritative Information Unavailable Elsewhere — A Companion Volume to CATHOLICISM AGAINST ITSELF. Volume I, a Similarly DocumentedGeneral Survey of Catholicism, an Enormously PopularBook, which has gone through eight editions.

Volume I — $4.50 Volume II — $4.50 Both Volumes — $8.00

Order from:

PHILLIPS PUBLICATIONS

P. O. Box 17244 Tampa, Florida 33612

A knowledge of the value of the coins mentionedin the Gospels gives a more accurate understandingof many events in the life of Jesus and of the lessonin several parables. The problem of determining thevalue of the coins is made unnecessarily complex bythe fact that most Bible footnotes and dictionaries give the value of an equal amount of silver or coppertoday. When the KJV was produced in 1611 most ofthe coins mentioned in the New Testament were correctly translated into the equivalent coins in Britainat that time, but during the last 4 1/2 centuries thepurchasing value of these coins has decreased drastically. In the U.S. today the purchasing value of agiven amount of silver is about 1/50 of what it wasin New Testament times. For instance, the silver ina denarius (the coin mentioned most frequentlyin the Gospels) is worth about 20 cents, but this isbased on the value of that amount of silver today.That same amount of silver in the time of Christ would purchase about what $10 purchases today. Adenarius was the regular amount paid to a laborerfor a day's work, so we can figure that a denariushad a purchasing power equal to about $10 today(making some allowance for the difference in living standards, etc.). Using this rather rough estimateas our standard let us see what light it throws ona few passages in the Gospels.

In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard(Matt. 20:1-16), the penny in KJV (the Greek has"denarius") which was given to the men who workedall day, 3/4 day, 1/2 day, and 1/4 day was a good day'swages and worth the equivalent of $10 today. Wemiss the point of the parable, if we think the masterwas paying the men a ridiculously low wage.

The poor widow's mite (Luke 21:2) was two smallcopper coins (Greek "lepta", a little smaller than abus token) worth the equivalent of 15c today. Thiswas indeed a small amount to be dropped into a vesselplaced in a conspicuous place so as to encourage largegifts from those who gave to be seen of men.

The coin which Peter found in the mouth of the fish (Matt. 17:27) was of sufficient value to pay thetemple tax for Peter and Jesus which was set at 1/2shekel per person. That means the coin was worththe equivalent of $40 today so the request for thetax was not a trivial matter. The coin itself was about 3/4 the size of a silver dollar, and few fishwould find it convenient to carry one.

In Matthew 5:26 Jesus says one will not get outof prison until he has paid the last farthing (Greek "quadrans" worth 15c). The entire debt must bepaid.

The good Samaritan (Luke 1:35) gave the innkeeper two pence (Greek "two denarii"). The generosity of the Samaritan is put in its proper place whenwe realize that he gave the innkeeper the equivalent of $20.

The two sparrows in Matthew 10:29 are worth the equivalent of 63c (one assarion). In Luke 12:6 fivesparrows (a small kind of pigeon good for food) wereworth $1.25 (two assarion). The price was reducedif one bought in quantity.

In Mark 6:37 one of the apostles suggested thatthey buy 200 pennyworth (Greek "200 denarii") ofbread to feed the multitude of 5000. The amount of money suggested was equal to about $2,000, a reasonable estimate of the money and bread required tofeed 5,000. We may reasonably assume that theapostles were not carrying that much money andthat the suggestion is made facetiously.

The contrasts between the debt of the two debtors is emphasized when we realize the amount of thedebts (Matt. 18:24). One man owed 10,000 talents. A talent of silver (6,000 denarii) would be equal to$60,000 today. The debt of this man was equal to$600,000,000 today. He failed to forgive the man whoowed him a hundred pence (Greek "100 denarii") orthe equivalent of $1,000 and had him cast into prison because he could not pay the debt quickly.

Judas betrayed the Lord for 30 pieces of silver.Two types of coins could be referred to by this term.Thirty pieces of the smaller one would be equal to$300 today and 30 pieces of the larger one worth the equivalent of $1,200 today. This lets us know thatthe chief priests were very anxious to get their handson Jesus. Later Judas repented and threw the moneyat the feet of the chief priests; it emphasized thegenuineness of his repentance for him to toss awaysuch a sum of money. The money was sufficient tobuy a lot and make it into a cemetery (Matt. 27:7).In Exodus 21:32 "thirty shekels" was the ransompaid for a dead slave. In Zechariah 11:12 "30 piecesof silver" would most likely refer to the Jewish shekel in use at that period (worth 4 denarii each).These facts indicate the larger amount as the correct one.

In the parable of the pounds (Greek "mina") inLuke 19:13-25, the man who hid his pound in a napkin hid a pile of silver weighing about a pound andworth the equivalent of $1,000 today. The servantwho received ten pounds (equal to $10,000) and handled it so wisely as to double it would demonstratethe ability to rule ten cities with wisdom.

In the parable of the talents (Matt. 25:14-30) the man who buried his talent in the ground put away asum of money equal to about 6,000 days' wages orabout $60,000. If the cheap Syrian talent is intendedthe value was about 1/6 this amount. In any casethe amount hidden was very large and the servantwho let it lay idle was deserving of punishment.

In John 12:5 the value of the ointment which Maryput on Jesus is said by Judas Iscariot to be worth300 pence (Greek "denarii"). It was worth theastounding sum of about $3,000 today. The strongprotest of Judas may be indicative of the attitudewhich led him to betray the Lord only a few dayslater.

The woman who lost the coin in Luke 15:8-10 lost a drachma which was worth almost as much as a denarius or a little less than $10. So she was seekingthat which was worthy of a diligent search and rejoicing when it was found. The behavior of thewoman is reasonable when we realize the amount that was lost.

The value of the coins in the other passages in

the New Testament can be figured from the chart

In one of my articles, recently published in Search

ing The Scriptures on the subject of adultery, I set

forth what I believe the Lord taught on the subject

of marriage, divorce, and remarriage, in a study of

Matt. 19:9. I believe that what the Lord taught in

Matt. 19:9 applies to us today who live under the

gospel of Christ. All of my brethren do not believe

this.

I received two rather lengthy articles by two ofmy brethren who take the position that there are nogrounds on which a person today can get a divorce, and marry again. I am sure that these brethren arejust as honest and sincere in what they believe onthis subject as am I. However, I believe that they arehonestly mistaken and sincerely wrong.

One position occupied by some of my brethren on this subject is: "JESUS WAS TALKING ONLY TOTHE PHARISEES in Matt. 19:3-9, and that suchteaching is not binding on us today." Let us see aboutthat.

(1) Just because Jesus was "talking only to thePharisees" in Matt. 19:3-9, does not prove that what Jesus taught in that passage is not binding upon ustoday. On another occasion Jesus spoke "only to aPharisee," but, what he said to that "Pharisee" certainly is binding on us today. Jesus was talking toa Pharisee, when he said that a man must be bornagain to go to heaven when he dies (John 3:1)."There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:" (verse 5) "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a manbe born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enterinto the kingdom of God." Are we ready to say that the New Birth is not binding on us today "just because Jesus was talking to a Pharisee" in John 3:1-5? Where did Jesus ever say to anyone "ye must be born again" except in John 3? Just "because Jesus was talking to a Pharisee" in John 3:1-5, does that

mean that the New Birth is NOT binding upon us

today?

Too, just because "Jesus was talking to a Pharisee" in Matt. 19:3-9, or, to a group of Pharisees, does NOT mean that such is NOT binding upon us today!

(2) If the "one exception" of Matt. 19:9, is not binding today, WHEN WAS IT TO HAVE BEENOBSERVED? Under what dispensation was that lawobserved by God's children? It was NOT observedunder the "law of Moses." The Pharisees were al ready under that law. They knew what Moses said on this subject before Jesus talked to them as recorded in Matt. 9. In Matt. 19:3-9, Jesus set forth a contrast between what HE taught and what MOSEStaught on this matter. Jesus and Moses did NOTteach the same thing on this matter. Matt. 19:7, teaches what Moses said on the subject. Verse 8, tellsus WHY Moses taught such. Verse 9, sets forth whatChrist taught on the subject, and it was NOT whatMoses taught. What Jesus taught was either underthe law of Moses, or, it was under the gospel of Christ. If this is not true, under what law did the people live during the personal ministry of Christ? Bothlaws could not be in effect at the same time. As the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ were the onlytwo covenants that God made with his people from Sinai to this good day, what Jesus said in Matt. 19:3-9, must be applied to those who live under the gospel dispensation. (See Rom. 7:1-4; Heb. 7:12, 8:13.) (3) We today, will be judged by the words oChrist (John 12:48). There was a time when God spoke to man through Moses, but, that day had aboutpassed when Jesus was here on earth. Today, Godspeaks to us through His Son (Heb. 1:1,2). We areto hear Christ in all matters religious (Matt. 17:5).If one does not hear Christ today he will be destroyed from among the people (Acts 3:22,23). This is whyI say that Matt. 19:9 does apply to us today who liveunder the dispensation of grace.

Another argument advanced by my respondentsis: "WE HAVE NO BIBLE RECORD OF ANY MEMBER OF THE LORD'S CHURCH, APOSTLES, OR OTHERS, TEACHING ON THIS SIDE OF THECROSS, THAT MATT. 19:9 IS LAW TO THECHURCH."

Answer:

(1) Where did anyone "on this side of the cross"ever teach that people are to be baptized "in the nameof the Father, and of the Son, and of the HolyGhost?" (Matt. 28:19) (2) Where did anyone "on this side of the cross"ever set forth the procedure of dealing with a brotherwho sins against us, other than in Matt. 18:15-18? (3) Does Matt. 28:19, and Matt. 18:15-18, apply to us today? If so, WHERE is it taught on "this sideof the cross?" (4) If anyone refuses to teach what Jesus taughtin Matt. 19:9, they will be destroyed from amongthe people (Heb. 1:1,2; Matt. 17:5; Acts 3:22,23;John 12:48).

Another argument presented was "DO YOU BELIEVE THAT EVERY TRUTH WHICH CHRIST SPOKE WHILE HE LIVED HERE UPON THE EARTH, APPLIES AS LAW TO THE LORD'SCHURCH AFTER PENTECOST? .. . DO YOU TEACH THAT FOOT WASHING IN THE ASSEMBLY WAS COMMANDED BY CHRIST?"

Answer:

(1) No, I do not believe that every truth whichChrist spoke while he lived here upon the earth,applies as law to the Lord's church after Pentecost.But, I would not try to array the teaching of Christagainst the apostles, for they taught the same thing(Gal. 1:11,12). (2) As to foot washing "in the assembly," or "out of the assembly" AS A RELIGIOUS RITE, SUCHWAS NOT TAUGHT BEFORE THE CROSS, ORAFTER THE CROSS! "Foot washing" as a religiousrite was not taught by the Lord AT ANY TIME!Jesus said, with regard to "foot washing," "I havegiven you an example." He did not say: "I have given you a church ordinance." Jesus, in John 13, wasteaching a lesson of humility, and was not teachingsuch was to be done as a religious rite. Nowhere inthe New Testament do we read where the earlyChristians met "on the first day of the week," or, on any other day "to wash feet."

Again, it is said: "PAUL DID NOT MENTIONTHE ONE EXCEPTION IN ROM. 7:1-4." Answer:

(1) The context of Paul's teaching in Romans 7:1-4, deals with the relationship of the Law of Moses, and the Gospel of Christ. Paul used the subject of"marriage" to teach this lesson. Paul said: you can'tbe married to Moses and to Christ at the same time. If you are, you are guilty of "spiritual adultery."That is the sum and substance of Paul's argument in Romans 7. There was no use for the "one exception"of Matt. 19:9 in what Paul was teaching in Rom. 7:1-4. If there had been a use for it, I'm sure that Paul would not have used it! Paul did not teach one thingon this subject and Christ teach another. Paul gave"the rules" — not the "exception" in Rom. 7:1-4. What PURPOSE could the "one exception" of Matt.

19:9 serve in Paul's, teaching with regard to the relationship of the Law of Moses and the Gospel ofChrist? There was none. But, let us not draw the conclusion that what Paul taught in Rom. 7:1-4, in any way, contradicted what Jesus taught in Matt. 19:9.

Another argument: "THE ONLY PLACE THATFORNICATION AND REMARRIAGE IS MENTIONED IN EITHER IS IN MATT. 19:9, AND ASI HAVE ALREADY SHOWN, THIS WAS SPOKEN TO THE PHARISEES WHO WERE TEMPTING HIM CONCERNING THEIR LAW . . ."

Answer:

I have heard the same argument made by denominational preachers on the subject of "baptism notbeing essential to salvation from past sins." I havehad them quote to me passages that predicates salvation on faith, and then they would say: "NO BAPTISM THERE." (See John 3:16; Rom. 5:1.) I pointedout that these verses do not mention "repentance."Does that mean that repentance is not essential tosalvation? Certainly not. Just because some scriptures do not mention the "one exception" of Matt.19:9, does that mean that Matt. 19:9 is NOT bindingon us today? Certainly not.

The only place we are told to baptize "in the nameof the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,"is Matt. 28:19. I have had "Jesus Only" preacherspoint this out to me. But, does that mean that weare not to thus baptize people today, just because we"do not find such a command this side of the cross?"

The "Jesus Only" people say that baptizing people in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of theHoly Ghost, "IS FOUND ONLY IN ONE VERSE."HOW MANY TIMES DOES THE LORD HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING BEFORE HE MEANS IT? I believe that ONCE is enough. The same is true withregard to Matt. 19:9. How many times did the Lordhave to give the "one exception?" I believe thatONCE was enough.

DEATH on the part of one of the parties concerned is another thing that will dissolve the marriage relationship (Rom. 7:1-4). Christ did not mention"death" in Matt. 19:9. DOES THAT MEAN THAT JUST BECAUSE JESUS DIDN'T MENTION "DEATH" IN MATT. 19:9, THAT "DEATH" DOESNOT DISSOLVE THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP? Who will take this position? We had just aswell say that "death" does not dissolve a marriageBECAUSE CHRIST DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT "DEATH" IN MATT. 19:9, as to say that"fornication" is not the "one exception" of Matt.19:9, just because Paul didn't mention it in Rom. 7: 1

4. If not, why not?

The above facetious title is being applied to theverbal antics of the "liberal" young preacher forthe church in Rolla, Mo., in his vain efforts to establish scriptural (?) authority or proof for his teaching or practice.

Although he stoutly refuses to affix his signature to propositions for either oral or written discussion, so that one can be sure as to just what he does believe, he offered to engage in a private exchange with me, if I would get the elders and deacons oftwo sound congregations in this area, to meet with a few men of the church for which he, Jerry Jones,preaches. But no specific, definite subject would have been dealt with, since he just won't sign any firmproposition. Therefore, under such haphazardconditions, I have refused to meet with him.

The latest pet exegesis that brother Jones hasespoused, is in a vain effort to teach that the churchis to engage in "general benevolence," i.e., thatneedy sinners are to be supported or aided from thechurch treasury. He uses (misuses) II Cor. 9:13 forthis purpose. This passage relates to the contribution that Corinth was making up, for the needysaints at Jerusalem. Verse 13 reads: "Because of the proof given by this ministry they will glorifyGod for your obedience to your confession of thegospel of Christ, and for the liberality of your contribution to them and to all . . ." "To them" no doubt refers to the needy saints at Jerusalem, while "toall" in accord with the context, refers to needysaints in other places.

II Cor. 9:12 uses the expression . . . "the needsof the saints" II Cor. 9:1 says . . . "this ministry to the saints"

II Cor. 8:4 says . . . "in the support of the saints"

I Cor. 16:1 says . . . "the collection for the saints"

Romans 15:26 says .. . "a contribution for the

poor among the saints"

The foregoing passages from the Scripture shouldbe sufficient to establish that the New Testament church aided needy saints exclusively. And, although the following quotations do not constituteany authority, they do serve to show that the usebrother Jones attempts to make of II Cor. 9:13, is quite new and modern . . . being hastily done in avain effort to underwrite an unscriptural practicethat has crept into some congregations and whichappeals to the emotions of socially-minded churchmembers.

Lard's Quarterly — Oct. 1964, page 66 — "What does the apostle mean . . . speaking of the samething in the thirteenth verse, as above, he styles it'their contribution for them (the poor saints in Jerusalem), 'and for all' other poor saints."

David Lipscomb — Commentary on II Corinthians, page 125 — "Seeing their obedience and fidelityto the gospel of Christ, and their liberality to thepoor saints in Jerusalem in the offering they made,prompted them to glorify God for their professedsubjection to the gospel of Christ, and their beneficence to all men, for their liberality showed thatthey excluded no Christian from their fellowship."(Underscoring mine. L.W.M.)

McGarvey-Pendleton — Commentary on II Corinthians, page 219 — "... Now the apostle felt confident that a liberal gift from his Gentile churcheswould bring about a better understanding, andwould work wonderful changes in the thoughts ofJewish Christians. .. . If the attitude of the unchristian Jewish mind (Emphasis mine. L.W.M.)toward him was still relentlessly bitter, it must beborne in mind that he took no collection for them,and that they were in no manner in his thought inthis connection." (Emphasis mine. L.W.M.)

CONCLUSION

We again stress that the views of Lipscomb, Lard,McGarvey and Pendleton, carry no authority whatsoever. But we have demonstrated that the latter-day efforts of "liberals" to distort and mis-use Scripture passages to bolster their own pet projects, is a "Johnny-come-lately" thing, and was notshared by brethren a few decades ago.

of the

LECTURE PROGRAM OF FLORIDA COLLEGE

January 24-27, 1966

SPECIAL ON ONE TAPE

Of special interest and importance — three lectures on Evolution, very ably delivered by Paul Foutz Everyone should hear these lectures on this vital subject

Only $3.00

An outstanding lecture on "Perversion of Justice" by Roy Cogdill Due to the length and wealth of this lecture both sides of the tape were required to record it. A vital subject well delivered

Only $3.00

ANY TWO LECTURES ON ONE TAPE

Make Your Choice

The World in Revolt— An Overview Claude WorleyThe Revolt Against the Bible Yater Tant Proper Use of Science Art Dowell "They Made Lies Their Refuge" Jimmy TutenThe New Morality Barney Keith License, Responsibility

and Intelligence Freedom Revolt Against Doctrine as Basis of

FellowshipRevolt Against Morality— Love Without Law The Christian in the Midst of Revolt Standing on the Other Side Individual Conscience and Group ActionSpiritual Health and Recreation Revolt Against Governmental AuthorityII Tim. 2:2 "Commit Thou" "Rather Reprove"

C. D. Hamilton

Bryan VinsonFrank Puckett Lloyd MoyerChoice BryantSewell Hall Cecil Willis Ferrell Jenkins

H. S. Owen Charles Holt

Making God in Man's Image James P. Miller

Recorded on new strong 1 1/2 mil. Mylar tape ofgood quality. This is new weather resistant tape,recorded on both sides at 3 3/4 speed and can beplayed on any recorder using a 7" reel.

Each tape (two speeches) — $3.00

Entire Program (10 tapes) — $27.00

Order from-

PHILLIPS PUBLICATIONS

P. O. Box 1 7244 Tampa, Florida 33612

FOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR $7.50

Renew your subscription free with three other subscriptions. Send them today with $7.50.

CRUDEN'S COMPLETE CONCORDANCE 4.00

CRUDEN'S CONCORDANCE — HANDY REFERENCE

EDITION 2.95 DAVIS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE, J. D. DAVIS 5.95 HITCHCOCK'S TOPICAL BIBLE AND CONCORDANCE 9.95 AN EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF NEW TESTAMENT

WORDS, W. E. Vine 11 95 HALLEY'S BIBLE HANDBOOK 3.95 BAKER'S BIBLE ATLAS 7.95 A GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON, Arndt & Gingrich 14.00 CRUDEN'S DICTIONARY OF BIBLE TERMS 3.50 YOUNG'S ANALYTICAL CONCORDANCE 12.75 COMMUNISM, IT'S FAITH AND FALLACIES, James

D. BALES THE LIFE AND WORKS OF FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS, Milton S. Terry HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION, Farrar WHY WE BELIEVE THE BIBLE, DeHoff A HARMONY OF THE LIFE OF ST. PAUL, Goodwin LARIMORE AND HIS BOYS, Srygley ALLEGED BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS EXPLAINED,

DeHoff NOTES ON THE PARABLES OF OUR LORD,

R. C. Trench NOTES ON THE MIRACLES OF OUR LORD,

R. C. Trench FIFTY YEARS IN THE CHURCH OF ROME, Chiniquy INFALLIBILITY OF THE CHURCH, Salmon THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS, REVISED, Pfeiffer FOX'S BOOK OF MARTYRS THE BIBLE ON THE LIFE HEREAFTER, Hendriksen THE GENESIS FLOOD, Morris & Whitcomb

3.95

6.95

7.50

6.95

2.50

3.00

3.50

3.95

2.50

2.50

3.75

3.95

2.50

3.00

3.95

6.95

IF BROTHER PAUL WERE THERE, Edd Holt 3.00 THE GOSPEL X-RAY, J. D. Tant 2.50 SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM RENOUNCED, Canright 3.50 WALKING BY FAITH, Cogdill 2.50 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH, Srygley 3.25 THE FIRST BAPTIST (by Baptist) S. E. Anderson 1.00 FAITH IS THE VICTORY (by Baptist) Kazee 1.00 A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BAPTISTS (by Baptist)

Overby 1.00 SPEAKER'S BOOK OF ILLUSTRATIONS, Prochnow 2.95 MORMONISM EXPOSED, Hancock 2.25 HOW WE GOT THE BIBLE, Lightfoot 2.50 RESTORATION READINGS, Swinney (special) 2.00 WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE SO-CALLED CHURCH

OF GOD? (Debate notes) Miller 1.50 JESUS AND JONAH, J. W. McGarvey 1.50 INTO THE LIGHT OF CHRISTIANITY (Jehovah's

Witnesses) Wm. Schnell 2.95 CHURCHES OF TODAY, Tomlinson 2.50 THE GREATEST WORK IN THE WORLD, White 3.95 SURVEY COURSE IN CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, Crawford 3.95 HOW TO PREPARE A SERMON, Knott 1.75 HOW O PREPARE AN EXPOSITORY SERMON, Knott 1.75 KINGDOM OF PROMISE AND PROPHECY, Whiteside 2.50 DOCTRINAL DISCOURSES, Whiteside 2.50 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH, Cogdill 1.25 LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN JESUS' TIME, Gift 2.50 AN OUTLINE OF BIBLE HISTORY, Dean 3.50 CHRISTIAN MINISTER'S MANUAL 2.50 WHAT'S WRONG WITH MODERN MARRIAGE?

Phillips .75 A HARMONY OF SAMUEL, KINGS, AND

CHRONICLES, Crockett 3.50 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL, Conybeare 2.50 MACKNIGHT ON THE APOSTOLIC EPISTLES 8.50 THE BOOK OF ACTS, Ralph G. Turnbull 2.75 THE BOOK OF REVELATION, Merrill C. Tenney 2.75 THE EPISTLES TO THE GALATIANS AND THE

EPHESIANS, Andrew W. Blackwood 3.50 COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF LUKE,

F. L. Godet 9.95 COMMENTARY OF MATTHEW, H. Leo Boles 3.75 COMMENTARY ON MARK — C. E. W. Dorris 3.75 COMMENTARY ON LUKE, H. LEO BOLES 3.75 COMMENTARY ON JOHN, C. E. W. Dorris 3.75 COMMENTARY ON ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, H. Leo

Boles 3.75 COMMENTARY ON ROMANS, Lipscomb & Shepherd 3.75 COMMENTARY ON FIRST CORINTHIANS, Lipscomb

& Shepherd 3.75 COMMENTARY ON SECOND CORINTHIANS, GALATIANS, Lipscomb & Shepherd 3.75 COMMENTARY ON EPHESIANS, PHILIPPIANS, COLOSSIANS, Lipscomb & Shepherd 3.75 COMMENTARY ON JAMES, Woods 3.75 COMMENTARY ON PETER, JOHN, JUDE, Woods 3.75 COMMENTARY ON REVELATION, Hinds 3.75 COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN,

Hendricksen 6.95 COMMENTARY ON I & II TIMOTHY & TITUS, Hendricksen 6.00 MORE THAN CONQUERORS (Revelation), Hendriksen 3.50