JUMPING AT CONCLUSIONS
My "Potent Point" for this month has to do with "Jumping at Conclusions." "Jumping at Conclusions" doesn't really sound like anything verybad. I suspect this is because we are nearly all guiltyof it, and most of the time we have a tendency tothink what we are doing is perfectly right. But, youmay be sure, if it is wrong before God and if it hurtsothers, it is certainly not right. Surprisingly, "Jumping at Conclusions," is sometime practicedby members of the church who are otherwise considered strong in the faith. But, of course, this doesn't make it right.
Perhaps you are wondering what I mean by theexpression, "Jumping at Conclusion." Is it physicalexercise? If it were, I must admit that it would beabout all the exercise some people ever get, but, ofcourse, I am not talking about bodily exercise. Letme tell you a little story I heard one time and I thinkit will help to illustrate my point.
As the story goes, a man and his wife had justfinished breakfast and she was doing the dishes. Hehad gone into the living room and was looking outthe picture window toward the street. As he lookedout the window he simply remarked; "there goesthat woman that Mr. Jones is in love with." Crash,went the dish in her hand. She sprang out of thekitchen through the dining room, where she almosttoppled a chair, and into the living room where shebrushed a lamp. Finally, standing before the picturewindow and gazing out, she dejectedly replied; "you dope, that's nobody but Mrs. Jones." His replywas, "who did you expect?" Why did she say whatshe did? She "jumped at this conclusion" because her frame of mind allowed her to "think that which was evil," even in the absence of any concrete evidence.
What is wrong with us when, like a flash of lightning, we put an evil construction on what wehear without a consideration of the facts? Would it surprise you if I told you that we are LACKING INLOVE? Well, surprise or not, that's the truth. In giving the qualities of love, Paul says, in I Corinthians 13:5, that love "thinketh no evil." This means that love puts the best possible constructionon the motives and conduct of others that it possiblycan. It simply means that under the influence of lovea person is not malicious, he is not censorious, andhe is not given to constant faultfinding nor the imputing of improper motives to others. You see,one of the beautiful things about love is that it is notcareful to retain the memory of evil and never doeskeep a record of evil for the purpose of returning it toothers.
Another bad thing about "jumping at conclusions" is that it often causes us to "judge"others. James wrote; "Speak not evil one of another,brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, andjudgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, andjudgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou artnot a doer of the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who artthou that judgest another?" (James 4:11-12) Thejudging under consideration is not mere correctionof error in another, but goes beyond this and aimsonly at tearing down the good name of a brother byimputing to him false motives and intents. It is a conclusion that has been reached on the basis of personal feelings and not on the basis of facts. Thereis nothing which is condemned more strongly in theScripture than the habit of pronouncing a judgmenton the motives and conduct of others without the facts. And I add, I can think of nothing in which weare more likely to err, or to indulge in wrong feelingsthan in judging. Conclusions which involve us in "judging" cause us to set aside the law of God as "unworthy," and in turn we set up our own law and judgment.
There are not many things that I know of that canstir up more unnecessary trouble, arouse more suspicion, and deal out more hurt than "jumping atconclusions." We are told to "judge righteous judgment," true enough, but no judgment is righteous which does not include the facts. My brethren, love" will not permit it, therefore let us refrain from it.
By now most of our readers will have learned thesad news of the death of Franklin T. Puckett. He passed from this life in the early morning hours of January 16 and was laid to rest at Florence,Alabama on January 17. A large crowd of more than500, including nearly 100 gospel preachers, gatheredto mourn this great loss. The service was conductedin the College View building with congregational singing and with appropriate words being spoken byPaul Keller and Eugene Britnell, two men who wereespecially close to the Pucketts. Graveside services were conducted by Harold Comer, one of the preachers with whom Brother Puckett had workedat College View.
Many others have already written their own sentiments regarding this beloved brother, but I amsure our readers will indulge me a few lines of myown. It is remarkable how many gospel preachers,as well as other Christians, felt especially close tothis man. My own acquaintance goes back to 1949when he came to speak at Florida College on the annual lecture program. For several years duringthe turbulent 1950's it was his assignment to conduct the "open forum" at the college lecture programs. No man ever handled a difficult task withgreater dignity, fairness and ability. I can hear him even now saying "I shall not hesitate to call downanybody who gets out of order." And he meant every word of it. Though I heard him preach manytimes, I never heard an address he made that I didnot feel was outstanding.
He did not like to write, yet people sought him outto study difficult questions and to seek advice. I wasamong that number on several occasions. When helived in Dyersburg, Tennessee we were working withthe church at Newbern, eight miles away. How many times I called to see if it would be all right todrop by and discuss some Bible subject, I do notnow recall. He always had time for me and neither Inor my family ever felt unwanted or in the way atthe home of the Pucketts. We made a trip toJackson, Tennessee together once during which thesubject of worship came up. He methodicallydetailed the various words in scripture translated"worship", what each meant and unfolded more knowledge on the subject than I ever heard before.
There was another side to this man which many never saw. He was an old-time Arkansas fiddler and a good one. Friends of this writer know that he playsthe guitar. On several occasions the two of us, whileon other occasions joined by friends of like interest,would saw off a few good ones. We often teased himabout the incongruity of a man of such dignified bearing, patting his foot to the strains of "The Arkansas Traveler" or some other hoedown. He would grin, pat that big foot, and never miss a note.He loved life and people. People loved him in return.
He left us sooner than we had planned. At the ageof 66 he was apparently in strong condition until near the time of his heart attack. In 1974 he preached in more than 25 meetings and had aboutthat much work promised for this year. He had planned and announced a special class through thewinter months on Calvinism. Nobody was better equipped to deal with this reviving error than he. Hedied as he had lived - full of useful plans for the goodof others.
His death marks the passing of an era. He was a connecting link between two generations. I have heard him tell of events he witnessed involving suchworthies as J. D. Tant, Joe S. Warlick, Joe Blue andothers. He made the spirit of their day live in ours ashe talked of these events. Yet he knew what was going on with the younger set of preachers. He tookgreat delight in his correspondence with a number ofyoung men who sought his help on a variety of questions. Among the unfinished jobs he hadplanned was a study with this writer on the subjectof the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I was lookingforward to it and expecting to gain much from it.
Now he is gone. The older generation of preachersis passing from us and those of us who have considered ourselves among the "young" preachersmust face the fact that we are quickly becoming the"older" generation of preachers. There is much workyet to do and so few to do it. Those yet in the land ofthe living will have to close ranks, take up the slackand press the battle for the Lord. We shall not see the likes of a Franklin T. Puckett soon again. Our deepest sympathy is expressed to his good wife, Evelyn and to their only daughter, Editha Kern.
MIRACLES—NO. 3
It has been aptly stated that "miracles are theswaddling clothes of the infant churches and not thegarments of the full grown." Miracles were prevalent in the infancy of the church to (1) confirmthe divine origin of Christianity, (2) to transmit God's revelation to man and (3) to enable the earlyChristians to serve the Lord in the absence of a written law. The New Testament was not completeduntil several years after the establishment of thechurch.
The purpose of this segment of our study onmiracles is to show that miracles were temporaryand, therefore, have ceased.
No Need For Miracles
First of all, miracles were temporary because of thecessation of their need. In the unfolding of God'sgreat scheme of redemption, miracles were necessary to bring it all about. James Orr wrote, "Itmust be affirmed that miracle ... is worthy and necessary in a great scheme of redemptiverevelation. . . . As a Divine remedy for human sin,worthy of God and adequate to the needs of man, itnecessitates the interposition of God in human history in a supernatural way" (The Faith of A Modern Christian, pp. 72-73). Hence, the incarnation of Jesus, his resurrection, his exaltation,the inspiration of biblical writers, etc., requireddivine intervention.
But these things were provisional with no need of being permanent. Do we need continuous incarnations, resurrections and revelations? No! Thesethings were done at one time or period in historywith no reason whatsoever to repeat them. The kingdom was ushered in by miraculous power (Mk. 9:1; Acts 1:8; 2:1-4), but God does not perpetuatethe kingdom by a miracle. He perpetuates it by thelaw of spiritual procreation (1 Pet. 1:23; Jn. 3:3-5).
Furthermore, the fact that miracles were used forconfirmatory purposes also shows we no longer needthem. Mark writes that the apostles "went forth,and preached everywhere, the Lord working withthem, and confirming the word with signsfollowing" (Mk. 16:20). The writer of Hebrews tells usthat the word of the Lord was confirmed bymiracles (Heb. 2:3-4).
The word "confirm" means "to make firm, establish, make secure" (Vine). Do we need the wordof God to be continually made secure or established?Is it to be questioned or doubted unless there issome kind of constant miraculous demonstration to confirm its genuineness? Certainly not! Its initialconfirmation is enough. The same thing could besaid of Jesus. He worked miracles to prove hisdivinity (Jn. 5:36; 10:25). Does this have to be reaffirmed every week or two? Of course not! Thebiblical miracles are adequate.
Now then, if miracles were to confirm, and we nolonger have anything to confirm, why do we needmiracles? We conclude that miracles have ceased.
No Way To Obtain Miraculous Power
Miracles were temporary because of the cessation of the means of obtaining miraculous power. In the New Testament miraculous powerwas imparted either by the direct outpouring of theHoly Spirit or indirectly by the laying on of the apostles' hands.
The apostles on Pentecost were empowered by theHoly Spirit directly without any human agency(Acts 2:1-4). The same was true of the apostle Paul(2 Cor. 12:11). In like manner the household of Cornelius received the Holy Spirit in a direct fashion(Acts 10:44-46). The Spirit not only outwardly manifested on Pentecost that the apostles wereGod's spokesmen, but also endued them with powerto speak in tongues (Acts 2:4), reveal the mind of God(Jn. 14:26; 16:13), bear witness (Jn. 15:26), andshow things to come (Jn. 16:13). In the case ofCornelius and household the Spirit showed Peter and his six Jewish brethren that the Gentiles had the same rights of citizenship in the kingdom as theJews, and enabled them to speak in tongues andmagnify God (Acts 10:46-48; 11:12-18).
Where is the man today who has received such adirect outpouring of the Holy Spirit as the apostlesand Cornelius did? If there is one who exists, then heis most unusual in that no others in the first century church received directly the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit. All the others obtained the miraculouspower by the laying on of the apostles' hands.
The imposition of the hands of apostles on firstcentury Christians in order to impart miraculousgifts is clearly set forth in the Scriptures. After the conversion of the Samaritans by the preaching of Philip, the apostles at Jerusalem sent to Samaria Peter and John to impart the Holy Spirit unto them. "Then laid they their hands on them, and theyreceived the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw thatthrough the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money"(Acts 8:17-18). Philip could work miracles (Acts 8:6,7, 13), but he could not pass on the power.
At Ephesus the twelve disciples received the HolySpirit by the laying on of Paul's hands (Acts 19:6).Timothy had the gift of God in him by the puttingon of Paul's hands (2 Tim. 1:6). The nine miraculousgifts listed in 1 Cor. 12:8-10 were received by the
early Christians through the laying on of the apostles' hands. Paul wrote the Romans, "For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you somespiritual gift, to the end you may be established"(Rom. 1:11).
Since the direct outpouring of the Spirit was special and limited to just the apostles and Cornelius, and the means for Christians in general toreceive miraculous gifts, e.g., through the laying onof the apostles' hands, is not available because the apostles died, we cannot now have miracles. There isno way to obtain the miraculous power.
Miracles Ceased
The Scriptures teach that miracles have ceased.
We read, "Charity never faileth: but whether therebe prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall bedone away" (1 Cor. 13:8-10).
Here we have a contrast between partial and complete revelation. Knowing "in part" and prophesying "in part" (v. 9) denotes the transmission of divine truth. Before the New Testament was completed, revelation was fragmentary. One man did not know it all . . . just a part. The Spirit guided into all truth (Jn. 16:13) or truth in all its parts. But when the perfect (complete; full)revelation came, that which was in part was done away. Therefore, the miraculous gifts, nine in number, of 1 Cor. 12:8-10 have ceased. Paul uses three of the nine in 1 Cor. 13:8 as representative ofall of them. They have failed; ceased; vanished away.
But someone says, "Don't we still have knowledge, tongues and teaching?" No, not in the way Paul used the words. He was referring to knowledge without study, speaking in tongueswithout learning the language and prophesying bydirect guidance of the Holy Spirit. These things ceased when the perfect came.
But another says, "The perfect has reference tothe second coming of Christ." Since when is Jesus a"that?" Paul said, "when that which is perfect is come." If he had meant Jesus, he would have said, "when he who is perfect is come." "Oh, but he is called a 'thing' in Luke 1:35." Better read your revised versions as "thing" is not in the original language. The context of 1 Cor. 13:10 shows that Paul is not contrasting the second coming of Christwith our earthly life, but rather is contrasting partial revelation with complete or perfect revelation. The complete revelation came when the New Testament was written.
The impossible situation of those who make "perfect" mean something yet in the future is to demonstrate that the "in part" is still here. The "inpart" would not be done away until the "perfect" came. Where is the person who has the gift of miraculous knowledge? I would like to see just one.If one cannot be produced, then those who claim the"perfect" is yet future have neither the "part" nor the "perfect."
Nothing could be any clearer than the teaching of1 Cor. 13:8-10 on the cessation of miracles. If you are one of those who is maintaining that miracles arebeing worked today, then you are denying what theBible teaches, and you are placing what you think above what the word of God says. All religiousissues are properly settled by the Bible. Let the Bible settle the issue of whether miracles are beingworked today.
I have received recently several remarks from myfellow younger preachers about the difficulties whichthey have encountered in their efforts of preachingthe gospel. There are complaints about salary, deadand indifferent members, hardships on the wife, andbad attitudes among the brethren, just to mention afew. Some have asked the question either directly orindirectly, "Is it really worth it all?"
I do not question the reality or the seriousness ofthe above problems. I know they exist, and some ofthe older preachers could elaborate much more fullyon them than I. These things are not new. But the question that I want to ask is, are these thingsadequate reason for the sour attitude displayed by afew of us toward the work of preaching?
Have any of us suffered greater than the apostlePaul? Read and meditate upon 2 Cor. 11:23-28. When was the last time you received forty stripessave one? What was the last prison you were castinto? Yet Paul said, "For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity islaid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not thegospel!" (1 Cor. 9:16). Oh, how great our "hardships" be!
Why did you begin to preach? I hope it was because of lost souls and your desire to preach thegospel to them; if not, then maybe you are in thewrong line of work. The need is still here, now whatare we going to do about it?
Fellows, let us toughen up a bit, and instead offighting and complaining against the good fight offaith, let us "fight the good fight of faith, lay holdon eternal life." (1 Tim. 6:12). Then the next time wesit down together we can rejoice over the good thatis being accomplished instead of crying on eachother's shoulder.
320 Oak St.
Lebanon, Ky. 40033
MORMONS ARE DIFFERENT OK
The January 12 issue of grit quoted the leader of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as saying
the Mormons won't join the World Council of Churches
because "other religions don't share their puritanical
stand on sex."
Spencer W. Kimball, church president, said the
Mormon faith is "very extreme on morality." He noted
that his church preaches against "liquor, tobacco,
coffee, and tea," and said its views "on abortion,
divorce, sexuality, birth control, and pornography make
Mormons different than all the others."
We rather doubt too that the World Council of
Churches and the Mormons would find a lot in
common. One of the best things we can say about
either group is they both disagree with the other.
And in view of the history and doctrines of
Mormons we find their claims to "puritanical sex
standards" and "extreme morality" absolutely
ludicrous. We're not trying to be the least bit funny
when we ask; "Which extreme do they take on
morality?"
One of the books held dear by the Latter-Day
Saints is "The Book of Mormon." This volume is
allegedly a history of the early inhabitants of North and
South America. It contains an account of Christ
appearing to the "Nephites" after His resurrection and
it claims to present an early history of the Lord's
church on this continent.
Possibly the best review ever written on the Book of
Mormon appeared one week after the first copies went
on sale. It said:
BLASPHEMY —BOOK OF MORMON, ALIAS THE GOLDEN BIBLE
The Book of Mormon has been placed in our
hands. A viler imposition was never practiced. It is an
evidence of fraud, blasphemy, and credulity, shocking
both to Christians and moralists. The author and
proprietor is Joseph Smith, Jr., a fellow who by some
hocus pocus acquired such influence over a wealthy
farmer of Wayne county that the latter mortgaged his
farm for $3,000, which he paid for printing and binding
five thousand copies of the blasphemous work.—Rochester (N.Y.) Daily Advertiser April 2,1830
Another book which is accepted as inspired by the
Mormons is "Doctrines and Covenants." Despite all theymay say about no longer practicing polygamy, this"inspired" volume STILL states:
"And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood -if any man espouse a virgin, and desire toespouse another, and the first give her consent, and ifhe espouse the second, and they are virgins, and havevowed to no other man, then he is justified; hecannot commit adultery for they are given unto him;for he cannot commit adultery with that (which) belongeth unto him and to no one else.
"And if he have ten virgins given unto him by thislaw, he cannot commit adultery, for they are givenunto him; therefore is he justified" (Sec. 132:61, 62,1968 edition).
Regarding this law, the same chapter declares:
". .. for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same . . . and if ye abide not thatcovenant, then are ye damned; for no one can rejectthis covenant and be permitted to enter into myglory" (vv. 3, 4).
The time would fail me to tell of the many changesmade in the early editions of these "inspired" works, even the tampering with the testimony of "the three witnesses" and "the eight witnesses", the murderous doctrine of "blood atonement", and the Mormon slaying of 120 innocent emigrants which has been historically tagged "the Mountain Meadow Massacre."
This writer doesn't believe he would turn around for the difference between the morality of the WCC andthat of the LDS. Rather, let us take up the sword ofthe Spirit in the matter of morality: "For this, Thoushalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thoushalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (Rom. 13:9).
--------------- o ---------------
WORTH PASSING ON
From the magazine "A.D." comes the note: "In thisday when some people are suggesting that it's inconceivable to think of spending one's whole life with one person, and wedding vows are being changed to "as long as we both shall love", an event weheard about recently seems heartwarming.
"A couple who had eloped 50 years ago decided to renew their marriage vows in a church ceremony. Their whole family assembled: children, grandchildren, brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews. Inthe presence of these and many friends the husbandand wife once again pledged their commitment to each other.
"Perhaps it is because the 50 years had been filled with great tragedy and heartache as well as love,happiness, and fulfillment that the husband's resounding response seemed so moving to many of theonlookers. When the minister posed the question "Do you take this woman . . ." he replied with an enthusiastic 'Indeed I do!'"
Somehow we wish we had been there as the bride and groom came back down the aisle. ---------------o ---------------
DID THEY REALLY SWALLOW CAMELS?
A Missouri brother writes: "Dear Brother Green:
"In the current issue of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES which I received this morning, I was tosee in your column that you are inviting clippingsfrom readers. I have been wanting to pass this alongfor three or four days.
"In the December 30 issue of TIME there appearedthe cover story "How True Is The Bible?" In the January13 issue, the Forum section contained letters to the Editors about this story. Some predictable commentsfrom liberal theologians were present, but a shocker (tome) appeared. I copy it below:
"'How true is the Bible?' was a well balanced treatment of an important theme. I wish you had given some space to the query 'How true is the New Testament picture of the Pharisees?' The holy season would have been a good time to set the record straight on the Pharisees, whose vilification inChristian holy writ constitutes one of the most heinouslibels in history, as many Christian scholars are now attesting.
Rabbi Samuel M. Silver Stamford, Conn.
"There's one for you to mull over—the New Testament a libel. I had heard of 'The Passover Plot' but I think this is a new one."
Well, as Paul and James P. say, "I marvel."
The Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature by McClintock and Strongserves well as a reply to this one who loves to becalled of men, "Rabbi, Rabbi."
'The language which the Pharisees themselves employed to denounce the proud, the formalists, theself-righteous, and the hypocrites in their own sect,is, to say the least, quite as strong as that which ourSavior used. In confirmation of this, we need only givethe poignant Talmudic classification of the Pharisees.
" There are seven kinds of Pharisees,' says the Talmud: '1. The Shechemite Pharisee, who simplykeeps the law for what he can profit thereby, just asShechem submitted to the rite of circumcision that he might thereby obtain Dinah, the daughter of Jacob(Gen. xxxiv, 19); 2. The Tumbling Pharisee, who,in order to appear humble before men, always hangsdown his head, and scarcely lifts up his feet when hewalks, so that he constantly tumbles; 3. The Bleeding Pharisee, who, in order not to look at a woman, walks about with his eyes closed, and hence injures his head frequently, so that he has bleeding wounds; 4.The Mortar Pharisee, who wears a cap in the form ofa mortar to cover his eyes, that he may not see anyimpurities and indecencies; 5. The What-Am-I-Yet-To-Do Pharisee, who, not knowing much about thelaw, as soon as he has done one thing, asks, 'What is my duty now? and I will do it'; 6. The Pharisee From Fear, who keeps the law because he is afraid ofa future judgment; and 7. The Pharisee From Love,who obeys the Lord because he loves him with allhis heart.' "
The fact that Jesus rebuked the externalism and formalism of the Pharisees and others of His day was no more an indictment against all Jews, or even allPharisees than one's rebuke of hypocrisy in our day would be an indictment against all Christians.
Surely the good "Rabbi" is aware of the fact thatIsaiah, Jeremiah and other O.T. prophets came out justas strong as Jesus. If he is not, we would suggestIsaiah, chapter one, for a starter.
THE ATTITUDE OF CORNELIUS
What is the most important factor in the life of aChristian? After the truth of the gospel, the answer must be one's attitude. Actually, the two things arebound together in such a way as to make separationimpossible. Everything depends upon one's attitude. The dictionary defines attitude as: "position or bearingas indicating action, feeling or mood. A manner of action, feeling or thinking that shows one's disposition or opinion, etc." Disposition is said to be "an inclination or tendency."
Strangely the word "attitude" is not in the Bible. Yet, its working and the idea of it is ever present. The most comprehensive expression of the thought is found in Philippians 2:5, "Let this mind be in you,which was also in Christ Jesus." The "mind in you" most aptly defines and places in scriptural perspective the matter of attitude.
In this article I want to rely on one of the most common New Testament accounts to emphasizesome lessons on attitude. The record of the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10 and 11), is familiar from a number of standpoints. We have studied this impressive man of Gentile nationality from various angles, all profitable, but one is often overlooked. It is a matterupon which all depended for Cornelius and for you and me. The feature or quality is his attitude.
Our introduction to this man strikes a note of appreciation when we read of his being devout,compassionate, God-fearing and prayerful. Yet, this
good man is instructed by God to send for Peter whois to tell him words whereby he is to be saved.Readily responding to these instructions two household servants and a devout soldier are selected and sent to Joppa.
The scene changes to a housetop in that citywhere at about the sixth hour Peter has gone up topray. While awaiting his noon meal he fell into atrance. In this state he sees and hears that which changes his own attitude. You remember the vessellet down by the four corners, as it had been a great sheet, in which were all manner of unclean things forthe Jew. A voice spoke to Peter instructing him torise, kill and eat. Peter refused and is told, "whatGod hath cleansed, that call not thou common." Thedesign in this is to prepare Peter in heart and mindfor the task that is his. His Jewish prejudice towardthe Gentile had to be overcome sufficiently for himto enter into Cornelius' house where the blessings ofthe gospel were to be imparted on the same terms asthey were enjoyed by the Jew. Taking leave of Joppa, in company with the messengers from Cornelius and certain Jewish brethren, Peter cameto Caesarea. At this point we impress the attitude ofCornelius which enjoys admirable expression.
First, consider the attitude of Cornelius towardPeter, the apostle of the Lord. "And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at hisfeet, and worshipped him" (Acts 10:25-26). Anattitude which is respectful and appreciative is hereevident. Obviously he went too far and was thusreproved as Peter said, "Stand up; I myself also ama man." This should always be the case when onegoes beyond scriptural limits. But aside from going too far, the basic attitude toward Peter was rightand proper. Here was one of the Lord's appointed,commissioned to bear witness of the resurrected Lord and to preach the gospel of salvation to all men. He had come to tell Cornelius "words" whereby he might be saved. One cannot respect theLord without respecting His word or him who isdevoted to the word for that matter, either in teaching or practice.
It seems to me many problems arise among the people of God today due to a lack of respect for thosewho preach the word. Preachers, and I admit tobeing partial to them, are rarely what they ought tobe in the eyes of most. They are either short on thisor long on that, too hard or too soft. Would it nothelp to recognize that the preacher is just a man andthat he is almost human? Yet, he is a man who haschosen to be a teacher of God's word and if he is faithful to that trust he is worthy of respect. Acultivation of the right attitude on the part of all inthis direction will improve relations in most congregations. Quite possibly some of the discouragement which often overcomes young preachers and sometimes old too, causing them to"retire," could thus be eliminated.
Secondly, take note of the attitude of Corneliustoward the word of God. "Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that arecommanded thee of God" (Acts 10:33). As he declares himself to be ready for "all things commanded" he reflects an attitude of dependency,submission and determination to do as required. Thesentiment is reminiscent of Jesus' words, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word thatproceedeth out of the mouth of God" (Matt. 4:4).This man realized truth would make him free from the shackles of sin and he wanted release. What a beautiful condition of heart, receptive, as had beenthe hearts of the penitent on Pentecost. "Then theythat gladly received his word were baptized" (Acts2:41). Significantly, Cornelius was concerned notwith that part of God's word which pleased him,which made him feel comfortable and secure, but allof it. This must be the attitude of every person who pleases God.
Thirdly, this man had the right attitude towardhis friends and relatives. Verse 24 of Acts 10 says, "and had called together his kinsmen and near friends." The anxiousness that is prevalent here istoo obvious to ignore. The anticipation of Corneliusas he waited for Peter is reflected in all the rest. His realization that these were lost, his love for theirsouls and concern for them caused him to bring themin so they could hear the gospel. There is an urgencyin this part of the account that needs to be stirredwithin most of us today. This man of Caesarea realized his relatives and friends were lost in sin and he was touched by it. The indictment of sin is no lessapplicable today, even to yours and mine. Paul climaxes the first three chapters of Romans in 3:23with these words. "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Does the failure to see allmen as sinners, lost, damned, explain our inactivity,our failures to seek and save? How urgent the needof all. Let us awake!
Finally, Cornelius had the right attitude towardhis own soul. He realized he too was lost and made proper application of the gospel. All his alms deeds,his high standard of morality, working in the interest of others, was not enough to save his soul. He, like all others, would have to obey the gospeland he acted without delay.
These are matters of continuing application andthe measure in which they are evident will have agreat deal, if not all, to do with the kind of Christianwe are. What of our attitude toward the preacher,the word of God, our relatives and friends and ourown soul? If it is not what it should be, let us workon it. Heaven depends on it.
CALVINISM —NO. 3
In two previous articles we have discussed the Calvinistic concept of predestination and election and limited atonement. The doctrine of hereditarytotal depravity (that we are born in sin) is another ofthe five major points of Calvinism which we will notice in this article.
Total Depravity
Read as we define this concept: "Our first parentsby this sin fell from their original righteousness andcommunion with God, and we in them, whereby death came upon all, all becoming dead in sin, andwholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body . . . the guilt of the sin was imputed (and corrupt nature conveyed) to all their posteritydescending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death andall other miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free. From the original corruption—whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all goodand wholly inclined to all evil — do proceed allactual transgressions" (Article 6 of the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, The Hiscox Guide For Baptist Churches, page 165). "We believe the Scripturesteach that man was created in holiness . . . but by voluntary transgression fell . . .; in consequence ofwhich all mankind are now sinners, . . . being bynature utterly void of that holiness required by thelaw of God, positively inclined to evil ..." (New Hampshire Confession of Faith, Ibid., page 195196).
Thus, the doctrine teaches that God charges the sin of Adam upon all men today and men are born"defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul andbody." However, the Scriptures do not so teach.
(1) Ezek. 18:19-20. Ezekiel said, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Further he says, "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father." Again, theprophet says, "The wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." The prophet did not teach the son would inherit or have imputed to him the sins of hisfather for he said, "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father." (2) 2 Tim. 3:13. Paul told Timothy "evil men andseducers shall wax worse and worse." How could one become worse than "defiled ... in all parts ofsoul and body," "wholly inclined to all evil" and"opposite to all good"?
(3) I Pet. 1:18-19. Peter says men are "re deemed" or bought back by "the precious bloodof Christ." How could this be if men were never in the favor of God. One can not redeem that which he never had. If men were born in sin, redemption would be impossible. (4) Titus 3:5. Paul says God "saved us, by thewashing of regeneration." Men could not be regenerated if they had never been in the favor ofGod. (5) Zech. 12:1 and Heb. 12:9. The prophet said,the Lord "formeth the spirit of man within him" and one reads of "the father of spirits." Since God formed man's spirit, did God give man a depraved one? (6) Rom. 14:12 and 2 Cor. 5:10. Paul says "everyone of us shall give account of himself to God" andthis will be "according to that he hath done, whetherit be good or bad." If some were of the non-elect,they would be depraved and "opposite to all good"and could not do any good for which to give account.Proof Texts
There are several passages those advocating Calvinism use to try to prove their doctrine. We will note a few of the passages.
(1) Isa. 64:6. This passage says, "we are all an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as filthyrags." Man's righteousness before God is "as filthy rags" but this does not teach man is born in sin. (2) Eph. 2:3. An effort is made to show from the statement "by nature the children of wrath" in this verse that men are born in sin. However, the word "nature" in this passage is not what is natural but as Thayer and other Greek authorities observe means by long time practice. Thayer says, "action which by long habit has become nature" (page 660).They by the long time practice of sin were children ofwrath. They were not born in sin but by longpractice "cannot cease from sin" (2 Pet. 2:14). (3) Rom. 5:12. The expression "death by sin; and so death passed upon all men" is supposed to teach that men are born in sin. However, the verse saysthe reason "death" is "passed upon all men" is byreason of the fact "that all have sinned." Men choose to sin and thus are sinners (Rom. 5:12; 3:23). (4) Psm. 51:5. The expression "in sin did my mother conceive me" is supposed to teach the Calvinistic doctrine of "born in sin." However, this verse does not attribute sin to the one born but to the mother.Safety Rope
Keep in mind that I suggested in our first articlethat Brother Franklin Puckett said one time that Romans 2:11 is our safety rope. "For there is no respect of persons with God." If men are "born in sin" and God does not choose to save all men, then God is a respecter of persons. This Calvinism teaches when it says all that are "born in sin" are not given the grace of God that they might desiresalvation.
TRAVELING WITH TRANSGRESSORS
Benjamin Franklin had been preaching abouttwelve years, mostly in Wayne County, Indianawhen he received his first invitation to preach in aprotracted meeting "from the Church of Christ on Clinton street, Cincinnati." This was near the end of1846, soon after he launched his career as a religiouseditor. To reach his appointment, like preachersthrough the ages, he made use of a currently convenient mode of transportation. He took the "CanalBoat, Mail Express' which required twenty hours torun from Milton, Indiana to the Queen City.
While on the boat Franklin recorded some of his impressions of the journey. The ungodly people withwhom he was forced to travel in close quartersprovided the kind of unpleasant situation with which most Christians who use public conveyancestoday can readily identify to some extent.
"We have traveled in cold and storm, enduring almost every kind of fatigue," he wrote, "but the present is more disagreeable than anything of thekind we have ever met with. Some twenty of us arecrowded into the small cabin of the canal boat, andof all the miserable stenches from chewing, snuffing,smoking and spitting tobacco, we were ever compelled to witness, this is the nearest beyond the possibility of exaggeration."
As if the assaults from the tobacco fiends were not sufficient affliction, the good man's Christian sensibilities were subjected to other offences as well.He went on to say: "But what is worse, if possible,the company is almost entirely made up of Deists,whose mouths scarcely ever open without pouringout the most shocking oaths we ever heard. And toaugment the agony, we have on board one of themost foolish old drunken wretches we ever saw. . . . All manner of foolery that can be invented is continually going on. A good portion of the time, someone is sawing on an old fiddle, while others arewhacking down cards, amidst the most horrible profanity imaginable." (Franklin and Headington,the Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, p. 172.)
Human nature has not changed in the decadessince Franklin's ride on the canal boat to Cincinnati, although customs and fads have changed. But ifthere are fewer dippers and chewers of tobaccotoday, the shortage has been abundantly compensated by the Virginia Slims who love to dangle their filter-tip incinerators under our noses and encircle our heads with unwelcomed clouds of noxious incense. The infidels may wear differentdesignations today, but there has been no loss in theutilization of "the most horrible profanity imaginable." Surely the beating drums and bellowing demons that spew forth their noise froman overly amplified transistor radio, that seems tobe present in every crowd, is no less disconcertingthan the sawing on an old fiddle, even by the mostunskilled bow.
We cannot help but wonder what Paul had toendure from the pagan passengers with whom hewas forced to travel on the boats that plied theMediterranean Sea in the first century.
NOTE: This is the second in a series of three articles. The first article introduced the skepticismwith which new versions of the Bible generally arereceived, then a review of two of twenty argumentsadvanced against the New American Standard Bible, of which this series is a vindication. Thepresent article continues with a review of arguments3 through 10.
Argument 3
Mark 16:9-20. These verses are in brackets. Such diminishes respect for the accuracy and integrity ofthe version.
Answer 3
The brackets indicate that the manuscript authority for the verses is not so strong as, forexample, the first eight verses of the chapter. Verses9-20 are absent from the two oldest uncial manuscripts, the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus. They are also absent from the Old Latin codex Bobiensis as well as the Sinaitic Syriac manuscriptand about one hundred Armenian manuscripts. Origen, who lived A.D. 185-253 and whose quotations of the New Testament number 17,922,did not quote these verses nor did Clement of Alexandria, who lived at about the same time. Onthe other hand the verses are present in a vastnumber of manuscripts including the uncials Alexandrinus, Ephraemi Rescriptus, and Bezae Cantabrigiensis. Irenaeus (A.D. 202) quoted theverses, and they are present in the Diatessaron ofTatian in the Second Century. Inasmuch as the documentary evidence is not unanimous, the translators have indicated by brackets a divergencein the manuscripts. The Greek text of Westcott andHort also encloses the verses in brackets for the same reasons. (In a different context notice the brackets at John 7:53-8:11 in the American Standard of 1901 and the absence of them at the same reading in the King James.)
As for the "Addition" at the end of the chapter,there are several late manuscripts of the Seventh,Eighth, and Ninth Centuries which contain the "Addition." On the basis of that manuscriptauthority, the translators have included the wordsin the text, but have put them in italics, indicatingthat the weight of evidence is against them and that they are almost certainly spurious.Argument 4
Acts 3:19. New American Standard gives ". . .repent and return. . . ." To return is incorrect translation. Answer 4
The New American Standard has rendered epistrephate according to one of its several definitions. Greek and English Lexicon of the NewTestament by Robinson defines the word: "to return, to be converted."
Argument 5
Acts 3:21. New American Standard has translated ". . . until the period of restoration . . ." instead of ". . . until the times of restitution. . . ." Objection is that period should be plural. Answer 5
True. The Greek word chonon, the definition of which is times or periods, is in the plural numberand should have been so translated. The reading inthe margin is correct. However, the fact that the singular is put for the plural is not sufficient grounds for rejecting the version. The same argument could be advanced against the KingJames, which, for example, has put the singular forthe plural in 1 Corinthians 7:2 and the plural for thesingular in the translation of eris and zelos in 2 Corinthians 12:20. Argument 6
Acts 10:6. The words "... he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do . . ." are omitted. Since Peterstated them in Acts 11:14, the words necessarilybelong in Acts 10:6, and the omission of them inActs 10:6 is wrong in any case.Answer 6
The same words are also omitted in the American Standard Version of 1901. The reason for then-omission is not that the translators of either committee wished to cut them out of the text but that strong manuscript authority for them is lacking.The words omitted appear opposite this verse in themargin of a Fifteenth Century minuscule (69) and inthe text of several Latin manuscripts. But the vastmajority of manuscripts omit the words, hence theiromission in the New American Standard Bible and in the American Standard Version. Also the editions of the Greek New Testament by Scholz, Souter, Scrivener, Westcott and Hort, and Nestle-Aland do not contain these words. Probably theywere inserted by a scribe to conform with Acts11:14, a process called harmonization or assimilation. The question is not whether the angelspoke the words; certainly he did. Peter so stated in Acts 11:14. Rather the question is, do the oldest andbest manuscripts contain them in verse six? Nordoes Peter's mentioning them in Acts 11:14 provethey should have been in Acts 10:6, for Peter mentions details not in Luke's account. CompareActs 10:5,6 with Acts 11:14, 15. Or compare Mark'saccount of a given event with Matthew's.
Argument 7
Acts 26:28. New American Standard reads, "In ashort time. . . ." This is not the true rendering of theGreek. Such translation of the Greek has Agripparidiculing Paul's appeal. Answer 7
The Greek word for the phrase is enoligo. It isdefined "of time, little, short, brief (Robinson)"; "oftime, short (Thayer)' ; "in brief, in a short time,quickly (Arndt and Gingrich)." In the footnote in the American Standard of 1901 are the words in a little time. Argument 8
Romans 4:12. The text has been tampered with byrendering " . . . that faith of our father Abraham ..." with " ... the faith of our father Abraham. . . ." (A lengthy argument follows over the wordsthe and that.) Answer 8
The New American Standard Bible has translated properly. Tes pisteos are the words in theGreek text. Pisteos is the word for faith. It is in the genitive case, singular number. Tes is the word forthe. It is in the genitive case, singular number andmodifies pisteos. Notice verse 11 (in the Greek text)where the same words are translated properly the faith. That faith requires another word, ekeives. TheKing James has over-translated the article in making it a demonstrative pronoun. Other examplesof this error occur in John 1:21; 4:37; 6:32; Acts19:9; 2 Corinthians 3:17, all of which errors havebeen corrected in the New American Standard Bible and all but the first in the American Standard of 1901. Argument 9
Romans 11:26. "So all Israel will be saved . . ." is mistranslated. Also the words will be saved expressunconditional determination. Answer 9
The Greek word for So is outos. Its definition: "In the manner spoken of; in the way described; in theway it was done; in this manner; in such a manner,thus, so (Thayer)." As for the argument what will be saved expresses unconditional determination, theopposite is true. "If you want to express determination, compulsion, threat, or promise, reversethe order of shall and will. Use will in the first person, and shall in the second and third persons(Practical English by Semmelmeyer)." The noun Israel is in the third person as is the verb phrase willbe saved. The auxiliary will, therefore, does not express compulsion or determination but anticipation or expectation. Notice the proper use of
the auxiliary shall in shall be condemned of Mark
16:16 in which the auxiliary shall is used in the third person, expressing threat or promise. The New American Standard has translated this verse properly according to current English usage. (To Be Continued)
926 Taylor Ave. Alameda, CA 94501
QUESTION: Would you please answer some questions taken from Hebrews 8:3? I'd like the scriptures where the High Priest offered gifts andsacrifices? Also what is the difference between the two? I'd like a complete run down on what the Bibleteaches concerning the Law. —J.E.C.
ANSWER: Heb. 8:3 reads as follows: "For everyhigh priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices:wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer."
The difference between "gifts" and "sacrifices" has been stated as clearly by Adam Clark in hiscommentary on this verse as anything I have read,or anything I can say: " . . . Eucharistic offerings, and sacrifices for sin. By the former, God's government of the universe, and his benevolence tohis creatures in providing for their support, were acknowledged. By the latter, the destructive and ruinous nature of sin, and necessity of an atonement, were confessed."
Under the law of Moses various forms of sacrifices were offered, e.g., burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, peace-offerings, sin-offerings, trespass-offerings, and the burning of incense. These were priestly duties and were offered by both priest and high priest, except in a few instances when only the highpriest could function, e.g., special days, solemn occasions, and the annual atonement and related activities in the most holy place. That the high priest offered both "gifts" and "sacrifices" is evident from the instructions given to Aaron afterthe office of high priest was instituted (Lev. 21:1024; 24:1-9; 4:3-12; Ch. 16; Read also: Heb. 5:1-4; 9:6,7).
Concerning a "complete run down on what theBible teaches concerning the Law," this would takevolumes, and the limited space here simply will notpermit it. However, we shall be happy to deal withquestions more specific or any request not so involved.
A brief view of the overall design of the Hebrewepistle may be helpful. Throughout this book a contrast is drawn between the old order under Moses and the new order under Christ. The superiority ofthe latter over the former is emphasized—so muchso that the word "better," used in relation to Christ and the New Covenant, becomes the key word in theepistle. The Hebrew Christians urgently needed this
instruction, because there were adverse influencesand pressures upon them so that many were turning from the new order under Christ back to the old system of Judaism. Hence, the primary design ofthis line of argumentation was to secure loyalty toChrist and to prevent apostasy.
No scripture in this article. No scripture needed.The scripture references we could cite are all wellknown by Christians. Like the farmer who refused tobuy a book on farming because he already knewhow, just wasn't doing it; so are we. I speak of whatwe fondly call "personal work." We could call it concern for the lost or enumerate it among the worksHis disciples are expected to perform. There is noargument in the brotherhood regarding how to labelit. Furthermore, most everyone will agree that telling others about the Gospel is required of a saint.It's not because of a lack of unanimity among us orbecause of uncertainty as to its necessity. Whydon't we, then, tell others of Christ?
Is it because the plan of salvation is too complicated, too complex for us to grasp and thereby bequalified to expound to others? Hardly, else wewould be hypocrites due to our stedfastly maintaining that there is a simplicity inherent in His message that even the unwise of this world can understand.
Is it because our hours are so filled with the pursuits of this life that we "just don't have time" tospeak to others in a spiritual vein? Really now, howmuch time does it take to say: "We're having a gospel meeting at the church building; I'd like youto come." Can we spare a few seconds? How many times have we said "amen!" when the preacher stated that "anyone too busy to serve the Lord isjust too busy"? It's been proven too many timesthat we can do what we want to do. The graveyardbears mute testimony to the fact that many thingswhich we consider all-important can be left undone.
Is it because opportunities are not presented tous? No. Very seldom does a day go by that some person in a lost condition doesn't make some comment in reference to things religious or to God(even if in a very general way such as "Mother Nature") that we could capitalize on. Couldn't wemake it possible for a conversation on matters Divine to proceed from his remarking on the beautyof the day, even? Couldn't we make our own opportunities by leading the thoughts of others fromthe general to the specific? For example, couldn't we ourselves remark on the beauty of the day and then,using that thought as a starting point, go on into adiscussion of heavenly subjects? We need not lackfor opportunities, they are abundant. At the sametime we must create opportunities in addition totaking advantage of those that occur naturally.
Is it because people are just not interested in life after depth, not concerned about salvation? Weknow this isn't so. Millions are interested but theirs is a smouldering interest; we have the power toprovide the spark that will cause that interest toburst into flame. But there first must be a will; we can't if we won't. Maybe we're the ones who are not interested.
Is it because we are afraid of being repudiated,ridiculed, scorned? The early followers were subjected to all of these unpleasantries plus having their lives and limbs placed in jeopardy. Yet they continued to preach and to teach and to convert. We stand condemned today and without excuse on account of our lethargy and inactivity in a society that not only permits but encourages and admiresreligious activity and zeal.
Brethren, when every point having to bear on thisproblem is thoroughly analyzed, we are left withthe reason why we don't seek to save others. It is because we don't believe that those without Christ will be lost for eternity, without God, in a place ofendless punishment; we don't believe that they willbe consigned to Hell for rejecting the Son of man. If we did believe it, we'd suffer repudiation andderision; we would make our own opportunities; wewould find time; we would drop all of the worn-outexcuses that the Lord must have gotten tired of along time ago. Our waking moments would be filledwith concern for the plight and destiny of those whoknow not God.
No scripture in this article. No scripture needed.We show in our lives and in our actions that we don't believe it, anyway.
With the rise of liberalism among us there hasarisen a dangerous attitude regarding elders.Though elders are appointed by the church to feed,guide, oversee, and protect the flock (1 Tim. 3:1-11;Titus 1:5-11; Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1-4; Heb. 13:7, 17); it is fallacious to force them or to even allowthem to do the "thinking" for or to "make all the decisions" for the local church. Simply because theyare elders does not mean they are autocrats. Paultold Timothy, "Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Themthat sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear"(1 Tim. 5:19-20). This shows clearly that elders areamenable to the people who appointed them. To exalt them to the position where they are a createdFrankenstein in the church, a body politic to wield authority over the members, places them in an idealsetting to become "lords over the flock."
That very thing is condemned in 1 Pet. 5:1-4. Thisisn't fair to godly elders and neither is it fair to the church. Of course there are final decisions to be made by elders with reference to certain procedureand works. And they should be encouraged and commended in such work. But the New Testament concept of elders is that of shepherds tenderlyleading and guiding the flock. Little, if anything, issaid about their authority as "decision makers" for the church. They are to integrate the work andactivate the members. It is a matter of complete accord and cooperation between shepherds and theflock. Acts 2:44 shows that "all that believed were together, and had all things common." Acts 4:32continues, "But they had all things common." Acts
5:11 states, "great fear came upon all the church."In selecting men to help the widows, Acts 6:5 states:"And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen a man full of the Holy Ghost. ..."
The decision in Acts 11:26-30 was made by "everyman." Acts 13:1-3 and 14:26-28 show that the whole church is gathered together for a particular work orendeavor. Acts 15:1-3 tells that Paul and Barnabas were brought on their way by the church. Acts 15:4,22, 23 and 25 show that "the whole church" was invited to a certain business meeting regarding the issue of circumcision. The "multitude together" is kept informed of the outcome, in Acts 15:30. Col.
4:16 tells of an epistle to be read "in the church." Matthew 18:17 states: "Tell it to the church." Acts
11:22 speaks of the "ears of the church" at Jerusalem. Acts 12:5 tells of prayer being made "ofthe church." Rom. 16:23 calls Gaius a host "of the whole church." Also Rom. 16:23. 2 Cor. 8:19 speaksof messengers who were "chosen of the churches." 1Cor. 16:3, to the church of God at Corinth, says:"Whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters." 2 Cor. 8:23 calls these men "messengers of the churches." Phil. 2:25 calls Epaphroditus Philippi's messenger. "Send it unto the seven churches whichare in Asia" (Rev. 1:11). "To testify unto you thesethings in the churches" (Rev. 22:16). Regarding discipline, Paul said: "When you are gathered together" (1 Cor. 5:4).
These and other scriptures show that not all thework, the decisions, the needs, the responsibilities,and the endeavors of the church are decided in the back room of some elder's office. Sound elders understand this point. But there are others who donot. The work goes well when the church can say"our work"; it sours when it turns out to be "whatthe elders told us to do." That is the only point I ammaking. God bless our good elders, and may moreand more churches be set in order with godly men toaid and encourage us in the greatest business the world has ever known—the business of the Lord (Lk. 2:49; Acts 6:3; Rom. 16:2). And, yes, we are toobey them, to follow them, to remember them, andto pray for them that they may serve "with joy, andnot with grief: for that is unprofitable for you"(Heb. 13:7-17). But wise elders will not lord it overthe flock nor will they allow themselves to becomeisolated from the flock in their thinking and decisions.
327 Brewer Dr., Nashville,
Tennessee 37211
WE'RE GETTING OLD
"We're getting old," she says to me,This gal of eighty-four; "We're heading for the day wheneverTime shall be no more. My eyes are getting very dim;They're often filled with tears;My mind is full of memoriesOf many by-gone years. At night I often dream of homeAnd how things used to be, Of how we used to laugh and play,And climb that big oak tree. Whatfun we used to have back then,As now I reminisce, And yet thereare some things aheadI know that I must miss." As I view that old friend now,Her back is slightly bent; She trembles when she speaks to me,She knows her time is spent. Sotenderly she says to me,"I know we're getting old," And I can't help but think that sheWill walk the streets of gold.
Bob Felkner 206 Brooks Road Victoria, Texas 77901
J. T. SMITH, P.O. Box 866, High Springs, Florida 32643. After being away from full-time preaching for a period of time, my family and I will be attending the Sante Fe Hills church of Christ located about fifteen miles northwest of Gainesville, Florida. I will be working with them full-time, at least until school is out. After that time we may decide to leave this- area and move to another location. I appreciate the prayers and interest shown by brethren over the past few months. I am happy to report that all is well with me and my family at this time. Continue to pray for us.
RONNY MILLINER, 320 Oak St., Lebanon, Kentucky 40033.The work here in Lebanon has been blessed by the Lord in the past five months (since our arrival). The attendance for the evening services is up 40 %, and the contribution has increased about 30 %.Three have been restored and one baptized. Efforts in evangelism have been by a radio program and distribution of tracts, resulting in one home study. Other planned efforts for 1975 will be more doorto door tract distribution and a local question and answer newspaper article. We invite you to worship with us when you are in this area.
HERBERT FRASER, 1900 Jenny Lind, Ft. Smith, Arkansas 72901. After more than eight years with Foothills church in FortCollins, Colorado (being involved in the beginning of that work), I began with Park Hill church in Fort Smith, Arkansas November
24. Foothills church is in the best condition ever, having forsometime been characterized by excellent peace and commitment to divine truth. Prospects are good for continued growth. Park Hill church is manifesting the same qualities of harmony and devotion to truth. Present conditions are good and the future is bright.
NEW CONGREGATION GEORGE L. PEDEN, P.O. Box 7205, Macon, Georgia 31204. A new congregation has been started on the north side of Macon, known as Northside. This work began January 1, 1975 with mostof the nucleus coming from Westside in Warner Robins. Hollis Creel moved here to work with us on January 15. We have sixteen members. The average attendance has been: Sunday morning—18; Sunday evening—20, and Wednesday evening— 19. Averagecontribution has been $297.89 per week. We are off to a good start and looking to move ahead. Look for our ad elsewhere in this paper. Stop and visit us when traveling north or south on 1-75.
DEBATE ON WOMEN TEACHERS Howard See, of Nashville, Tennessee met J. W. Holcomb of Ashland, Kentucky in a public debate in the Ashland area February 17-21 on the subject of women teachers in classes for women and children. Brother See defended such practice while Brother Holcomb denied its scripturality. We are sorry we did notget this report in time to carry it before the debate took place.
PREACHERS NEEDED WALLA WALLA, WASHINGTON (Population 24,000). The church which meets in the Y.W.C.A. building on the corner of 1st and Birch Sts., needs a full-time gospel preacher. At present we havean attendance of about 15, but with three colleges in the area, there is good potential for growth. For details write or call: Spencer Talley, 1505 Pleasant, Walla Walla, Wash. 99362, phone (509) 5251904; or Gary Martin, 604 University #4, Walla Walla, Wash.99362, phone (509) 525-8956.
MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN. The church in Milwaukee is looking for a well-experienced gospel preacher to aid them in their work. The church is small and outside support will be needed. For further information write or call: David Girardot, 7339 W. Fernwood Cir. #4, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53219, phone (414) 545-1733 or Karl Diestelkamp, 8311 27th Ave., Kenosha, Wisconsin 53140, phone (414) 694-3552.
REQUEST FOR LOAN OF BUILDING FUNDS JERRY
F. BASSETT, P.O. Box 928, Bend, Oregon 97701. Since its beginning with six members in 1969 the church in Bend has outgrown the largest rental facility available and severely needs a building of its own. Further numerical growth and a full program of work will be nearly impossible without it. Since funds from commercial lenders are practically non-existent, we are turning to individual lenders to be able to complete our building. We emphasize that we are not appealing for a free handout, but for the loan of funds on a business basis. Total cost of the building is approximately $45,000 for a structure seating 150 with six classrooms. We have completed the sub-floor with everything paid for except one $2,000 loan. With funds promised so far from individual lenders we can finish the framing, siding and roofing. To complete the entire building and parking lot, we need to borrow approximately $20,000 more.
We are willing to pay a minimum of 8 % interest, less than we would have to pay a commercial lender, but more than most people make on funds deposited in savings accounts. If you have such funds available, your loan will be a tremendous help to the church in Bend. The work is being done by the members led by a brother who is a builder by trade. Our financial affairs are being handled by a brother who is trained, skilled, and working professionally in the field of finance. If you have funds to lend please call him, Jerry W. Wiser, at
(503) 382-0146, or write the church at the address above. All pertinent facts and references familiar with this congregation will be supplied upon request.
FROM FOREIGN FIELDS RAY DIVELY, 425 Dippold Ave., Baden, PA 15005. 1 spent the month of December and part of January on my second preaching trip to India. I joined Richard Swan who had already been there a month when I arrived. During the week we conducted a number of training classes which met morning, afternoon and evening. On Lord's days we visited and preached for as many churches as possible. We tried to edify the brethren and save the lost. During our stay 72 were baptized and seven new churches established. There are now over 700 members in twenty-five congregations. The hem of the garment has not been touched as there are over 600,000,000 people in India and the population increases at the rate of 13,000,000 per year. The people are in deep poverty but are responsive to the gospel. Brethren are in process of translating eight tracts into the Telugu language. There is a great need for gospel literature in their language for non-members and also for Christians. I will always be grateful for the fellowship the brethren have given me in preaching the gospel in India. As the Apostle Paul stated, "Not that I seek for the gift; but I seek for the fruit that increaseth to your account." FROM REPORT OF RAY VOTAW,
P.O. Box 801, Springs, Transvaal 1560, Republic of South Africa. Samuel Chimusi, now supported by the Northside church in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, established 5 churches among the copper compounds of Messina before he even met white brethren. He was converted by the late Abel Mbengwa and "turned loose" in Christ. I accidentally found
Page 16
him on the Rhodesian border in 1970 and we've worked together ever since . . . I was talking with Piet Morone in Togaza Villagein October and he said he had just gotten out of gaol (jail). Thishappens frequently for minor and even non-existent infractions.But while he was there he baptized the warden and fiveprisoners. He has been back there since to visit and baptized fivemore. On my last trip to Messina, Nsotani Malleka was baptized. He had preached for 40 years in the Zion Christian Churchin Rhodesia. He is now paving the way for Samuel to preach inthat country.
More recently I have been making some "forays" into villagesof the Oogies district, accompanied by local black brethren. Ourfirst convert in this area was Isaac Mphetla in 1972 who is nowpreaching, and is also State Representative for Lebowa from the Witbank-Highveld District. Two weeks ago I baptized AlfredMogane. Two months ago this son of a Bishop in the largestindigenous African church on the continent - Apostolic ZionChurch of Africa - said to me: "I want to become a Christian with honor. So I must return to my village in Sekukuniland,report my intentions, and be whipped. When I return I willcontact you." Two weeks ago the contact was made and heobeyed the gospel. . . . James LeGeua was converted 12 yearsago and is the most capable black preacher I know. He steadfastly refuses support for "full time" preaching. He says, "Too many preach support; I want to preach the gospel."
A CHURCH AT WORK
DANVILLE, KENTUCKY. The church at Danville has published a 21 page booklet which was distributed to all themembers detailing the work for the past year. This was in aneffort to keep every member informed. In addition to three gospel meetings, home Bible studies, a group teaching program,two radio programs (one daily and the other on Sundays), aweekly newspaper column, there was a tract for teenagers prepared by teenagers of the congregation. There is a class fordeaf students, in fact two such classes with attendance between 25 and 30. A song leader's class was conducted. Three journals are provided for the members: SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES, THE PRECEPTOR and TRUTH MAGAZINE. Theyare building a tape library of outstanding lessons on timelysubjects. The church withdrew from six unfaithful members.One more elder and two more deacons were appointed. A youngpreacher, Barry Hudson, worked with Royce Chandler and thechurch during the summer. Attendance averages 150 - 160. Inaddition to support for the local men, five other preachers arepartially supported; three in Kentucky, one in Missouri and onein the Philippines. We hope their zeal will provoke others tomaintain good works.
JAMES P. MILLER, 1111 Hickory Lane, Cocoa, Florida32922. We have a young man in the Merritt Island church who isat present a student at Florida College. He desires to preach forsome interested congregation for the summer months. If presentplans are realized he plans to go back to Florida College nextfall. I will be glad to put any interested congregation in touchwith this fine young man.