SEARCHING the SCRIPTURES

"These were more noble than those in"Search the Scriptures; for in them ye

Thessalonica In that they received thethink ye have eternal life: and they areword with all readiness of mind, and

they which testify of me" — John 5:39.

searched the scriptures daily, whetherthose things were so" — Acts 17:11.

•'DEVOTED TO THE SEARCH FOR DIVINE TRUTH"

SIN - CONVICTING SERMONS

by Donald R. Givens

My greatest desire is to go to heaven. Your greatest desire should be the same. But, one shallnever strive to please God and inherit eternal lifeuntil he realizes he is lost in sin.

Conviction of sin must precede obedience. Obedience precedes salvation. One of the things mostneeded today is the sin-convicting sermon. We do notneed sermons which entertain. We do not need sermons that tell pretty little stories. We do not need sermons which provoke constant little snickers and giggles. What we need is sermons which convict ofsin, and point to the Lamb of God who can washaway our sins.

Some brethren are so afraid of "hurting someone's feelings" that they never get around to exposing sin which damns one's soul. The devil has led us to believe that if we expose sin people will quit attending our services; so we lecture on economics,sociology, politics, cute little moral stories, or nicefamily episodes. Did all people gladly listen to Jesus?Read John 6:66 and compare Acts 22:22-24. WasJesus overly concerned about offending people? Lookto Matt. 15:12-14 for the answer.

The alien sinner needs to see himself as defiled in sin, polluted with iniquity, and helping the devil inhis efforts to destroy the kingdom of God. The gospelmessage will convict one of wickedness and point outthe wonderful cleansing found through the blood ofJesus.

In the first century, preachers convicted their audiences of sin. First, we see Peter in his first gospel sermon plainly saying: "Ye by the hand oflawless men did crucify and slay," yes, they hadmurdered the very Son of God (Acts 2:22). They werestunned! That hit them hard (verse 37)! Peter boldlymade the accusation. Those who were guilty KNEWhe was referring to them! Peter did not "beat aroundthe bush." If Peter had never had the courage tomake the accusation of sin . . . none would have been convicted and therefore none could have been saved.

Stephen was another evangelist who preached sin-convicting sermons. He was addressing an audienceof considerable size when he said: "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resistthe Holy Spirit" (Acts 7:51). Was that good psychology? Was that bad manners? Was that too harsh? You be the judge.

Stephen did not soft-soap, but in a straightforward manner accused them of gross evil. Will you accuseStephen of a lack of love? For his boldness, Stephenlost his life . . . but he saved his soul. Is it possiblethat preachers today who refuse to convict people ofsin with plain straightforward book, chapter, andverse, are saving their lives, but losing their souls?

The apostle Paul is another excellent example of a preacher who preached sin-convicting sermons. Whenhe went to Athens, the intellectual center of that day,he accused them of ignorance (Acts 17:23)! NowPaul, was that the right approach? Paul, don't youknow you made them mad? I fear that many of ourmodern preachers would not dare make such bold accusations of sin and ignorance before the outstanding intellectual leaders of our centers of learningtoday.

No, it is not popular to accuse people of sin and prove it to them, yet there can be no victory over sinwithout such proof and conviction. A man who doesnot realize he is lost, will not see any need for rescue.NO person is interested in what he must do to besaved, until he is convicted of sin and realizes he islost.

Friend, the devil has a program in this world. Yes,Satan intends to rob every boy of his honor and spiritual usefulness as soon as he becomes responsiblefor his actions. Satan intends to rob every girl of herpurity and chastity as soon as she crosses the threshold of responsibility. And he plans to lead every person to waste his mental and spiritual powersin sin and shame, working against God to destroy thechurch of the Lord.

Shall we preach and teach against the devil's program? or shall we pretend it doesn't exist? Whose side are you on? Your life is giving the answer.

2710 21st Ave. S. Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

TRIBUTE TO FRANK PUCKETT

There will be a thousand men who will take pen inhand and write a tribute to Franklin T. Puckett. This is as it should be for the Lord had no greater preacher. Born among the hills of his native Arkansas he had a way of influencing many churches.Brother Jack Hobby who worked with this congregation for many years on Merritt Island, Florida came under his influence as a boy and wasencouraged to make a preacher.

In 1955 I was in the very prime of life and had adebate with Morris Butler Book of the Christian Church on mechanical music. Frank Puckett moderated for me in that debate. It was held in the Howard Junior High School Auditorium in Orlando,Florida. The debate was to be published and thecharts were pinned to the curtain that was raised andlowered with a rope. In the course of the discussion,Book got his chair too close to the curtain and jokingly remarked that Brother Miller was about to hit him in the head. Everyone laughed and I thoughtthat was the end of the matter, but Brother Puckett would not have it so. As moderator he said the book would be read a hundred years from that time andunless the matter was made clear it would appearthat Brother Miller was running Brother Book trying to hit him on the head.

That was the kind of man Frank Puckett was. He wanted all things right. In his study and in his preaching he wanted the full meaning of every versehe used fully explained to the people. He was a greatman and a great preacher.

In the last years of his life he had gone back toFlorence, Alabama to work with the College View Church. This was the second time he had lived in Florence for he had worked with the Poplar Street congregation in the forty's. Recognizing his great Bible knowledge, the College View Church hired another preacher and let Brother Puckett go where hecould do the most good. He had been in meetings for41 consecutive days when he was stricken. He departed this life as the result of a heart attack andother complications that included a mysterious infection that caused his temperature to reach 107 degrees. One thing can be said of Frank Puckett, hewanted to be right.

THE CLAIMS OF ANOTHER FALSE PROPHET

"But there were false prophets also among thepeople, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies,even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shallfollow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom theway of truth shall be evil spoken of" (2 Peter 2:1-2).

The world has had many self-proclaimed prophets. These have established religious movements upon their false claims and deceived multitudes of the untaught. Mormonism wouldnever have been born without the pretensions ofJoseph Smith who claimed to be a prophet of Godand who is so regarded by Mormons today. It took the claims of Mrs. Ellen G. White to get Adventismoff the ground. Christian Science rests upon the prophetic claims of Mrs. Mary Baker Glover Patterson Eddy. Jehovah's Witnesses look to the claims of Pastor Russell and Judge Rutherford. It isunique that regardless of how far-fetched and absurd the pronouncements of these self-styled prophets and prophetesses, there are multitudes ready and willing to follow their errors.

Now comes Herbert W. Armstrong with the sameclaim. He is the founder of the Radio Church of God,now known as the Worldwide Church of God. For many years he preached on a nationwide broadcastand advocated Anglo-Israelism, Sabbath keeping,soul sleeping and a host of errors. In more recent times his son, Garner Ted Armstrong, has been theradio voice of "The World Tomorrow." I have heard it in many different states at practically all hours ofthe day or night. The PLAIN TRUTH magazine,together with these broadcasts purports to explainto the world the news behind the headlines. Everynational or international emergency was detailed inBible prophecy, to hear them tell it. But the boldestclaim we have seen from them yet came in the January, 1975 issue of PLAIN TRUTH in an editorial written by Herbert W. Armstrong entitled"Just What Is the Work?"

He explains that just as John the Baptist camebefore Christ to prepare the way for his first coming,even so, the Lord sent Herbert W. Armstrong toprepare for the second coming. But, let him tell youin his own words: "More than 41 years ago the living Christ called and chose me as his instrument in reviving and carrying out his Great Commission inthis END time." "The prophet Malachi prophesiedthat God would send a human messenger to preparethe way before Christ's coming to earth. But this prophecy describes TWO appearances of Christ onearth - the second of which, more than 1900 yearsafter his FIRST coming, is now imminent!" "Before the end of the first century 'the Work' had stopped. The true gospel of the kingdom of God wasthereafter taught secretly, but not proclaimed to theworld for 18 1/2 centuries." "All this refers to Christ's second coming in our time! So when the prophetforetold the human messenger, preparing the waybefore Christ's coming, he referred to John the Baptist (see Mark 1:1-3) only typically as a forerunner or type of one to prepare the way before Christ's second coming!" . . . "And the way is INDEED even now being prepared before Christ's return to rule." "That, co-workers and brethren, iswhat the living Christ is doing right now through me, through Garner Ted, and through His coworkers and church which stand loyally behind us inthis tremendous age-end commission!" "It's the most important Work given any human beings inthe past 1900 years. And nobody else is doing it! The full, awesome responsibility of it is on OURshoulders, whom God has SPECIALLY called now!" "As the original apostles were sent out toproclaim Christ's gospel in A.D. 31, I was ordainedand sent to proclaim the same gospel in A.D. 1931.". . . "It was through me that, in August, 1933,Christ raised up the parent church of this present'Philadelphia era' (Rev. 3:7-13) in Eugene, Oregon,U.S.A.; and on January 7, 1934, the gospel of thekingdom started going out over radio; on February1, 1934, the PLAIN TRUTH began publication.'The Work' was once again, after 18 1/2 centuries,UNDER WAY!" "Right now the living Christ is about to return to earth." "He called me as his instrument to announce all that in advance! He raised up my son Garner Ted to help me and to take over the chief executive administration of 'the Work,' now grown big and worldwide." "He called many others, to be trained in Ambassador College,for important phases of this most important work onearth!" "He called each of you to stand staunchlybehind me and Garner Ted, as human leaders, withearnest and fervent PRAYERS. With such tithes and offerings as he has made possible. With suchinspiration as you can give."

Well, there you have it. Herbert W. Armstrong isto the second coming of Christ what John theBaptist was to the first coming! He claims to havebeen called specially of God, claims this calling forhis son, Garner Ted, and wouldn't you know that hecalled everybody else to stand behind them not justwith prayers, but by all means, with tithes and offerings! Such humility leaves me speechless.

Brethren over the country are having to meet theerrors of these men. In private studies, questions must be answered and confusion lifted because of the false teaching of these self-appointed prophets.There have even been some members of the church carried away with this error. How shall it be met? Isuggest that these statements be held before peopleto let them see the broad claims being made. Then,let us proceed as we have with Mormons, Adventistsand others who rely on claims of latter-dayrevelation. We must show that "the faith" has been "once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3) and istherefore final. Through the knowledge of Christ,God has given unto us "all things that pertain untolife and godliness" (2 Pet. 1:3). Everything necessary to prepare us for the second coming ofChrist is in that "faith once delivered." When we prove that revelation is complete, adequatelyequipping us to every good work, then we have inthe same stroke disproved the claims of modern dayprophets, including Herbert W. Armstrong. "Beware of false prophets" and their "damnable heresies."

The resurrection of Jesus is the central item in the whole Word of God: it was promised in Eden,prefigured in Abraham, typified in Israel, sungabout in the Psalms, foretold by the prophets, predicted by the Lord, wrought by the Father, announced by angels, witnessed by disciples,proclaimed by the apostles, obeyed by believers, andconfessed by His enemies. Such is the chief factupon which the whole religion of Christ either standsor falls.

With most of the world looking heavenwardthrough skeptics' glasses, true saints must peermore keenly into the Word, to firm up and to securetheir faith. Since it is the Bible that tells of His resurrection, that same Book must be able to showthe proof of its claim. '

For some, the mere fact that the Bible says thisevent occurred is proof enough. For those, however,who place less confidence in the Scriptures, we mustshow such proofs as will cause them to believe bothin the resurrection and in the Bible which teaches it. If one can be convinced that Jesus was raised from the dead by the divine power of God, he must alsoadmit all that that same divine power reveals in thatsame Word. To prove the resurrection is to prove thetruth and the absolute certainty of Christ's religionand of the Gospel revealing that religion.

This was precisely Paul's plan of attack as, by inspiration, he pleaded his case against all the falsesystems of his day. In Athens, in Corinth—in every place he preached—the all-conquering proof of thegospel was Jesus' resurrection from the dead. He summed it up to the Corinthians this way: "Now Imake known to you, brethren, the gospel which Ipreached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand, by which ye are saved. . . . For Idelivered unto you first of all that which also Ireceived: that Christ died for our sins according tothe scriptures;" (I Cor. 15:1-4). The resurrection,with its meaning and application, was the beginning, the middle and the end of Paul's inspired gospel.

We can prove that specific prophecies were uttered hundreds of years before their exact fulfillment; we also can show, in great detail, theunity and harmony of the Bible, though it waswritten by forty different men, who were spread overthe whole eastern hemisphere and separated from each other by hundreds of years. Still other great evidences of the Bible's trustworthiness can be demonstrated, but of what importance are they ifJesus did not arise from His grave? Do we have hopeapart from a slain and resurrected Lord?

Seeing the capital importance of this proposition, then, let us look at some evidences which substantiate it as an historical fact.

There are a number of mighty arguments which we could examine. Several pages could be writtenabout the change that came over the Lord's disciples, how that at His arrest they fled as cowards but shortly afterwards, stood as martyrs;the only rational cause for such a change was the certainty of the resurrection. We might also arguethe evidence from the empty tomb, demonstratingthat the Bible's explanation is the only logical one.The Spirit's descending on Pentecost would make agood argument, as would the great number of credible witnesses who personally saw the resurrected Lord (I Cor. 15:5-7). Another possibilityis the testimony of the monuments established uponand perpetuated by that miracle; e.g., the church, the Bible, the Lord's day, the Lord's supper, and baptism. But as the scope of this article must begreatly limited, let me suggest that the strongest evidence is the complete lack of evidence—that is,the lack of evidence to the contrary.

No one has ever had such cause to disprove theresurrection as did those Jews who demanded His death and were then accused, on Pentecost, of being murderers. Jesus and His disciples had many bitterenemies who would have been savagely disposed todemonstrate, if possible, any error, falsehood or deception by the apostles; if their claims were falseor inconclusive, the rabid hatred of His opponentswould have published to the world. When was theevidence ever more available than in those verydays, and who would ever have searched more thoroughly to uncover it than those who were accused of His murder? But where is their evidence,their arguments, their debates, their writings— where is the dead body of this Jesus! All they couldmuster for a defense was the incredible tale of the soldiers, who weakly attempted to say that thedisciples stole the body while the guards slept. Ifthey were asleep, how did they know a disciple froman enemy? As this issue itself could fill many pages,let it be now sufficient to say that the soldiers provethemselves to be false and unreliable witnesses. All logic proves their explanation to be a lie.

If the apostles' claim was false, how do we account for their being allowed to run around loose,continuing to proclaim their "false" doctrine which, evidently, was "turning the world upside down"(Acts 17:6)? When these same mobs had so eagerly killed Jesus, why did they back off from His apostles? When their entire religious system wasbeing set aside (fulfilled —Mt. 5:17) and thousands were turning to this "new" religion, are we to suppose that these enemies, knowing Jesus and His religion to be frauds, decided to try a more un

derstanding approach?

Why did not the Sanhedrin arrest the apostles andmake them confess their deception? Why did theynot confront them with the soldiers? Why did theynot force these disciples to make a full confession of what had become of Jesus' body and of all theirother fraudulent acts? If there really had been anysuspicion that the disciples disposed of or still possessed the dead body, those rulers would haveused every possible means to recover it and forever quash the claims of a resurrection.

Campbell made a strong point when he, in hisdebate with Owen, said:

We have the testimony of Myriads of Jewsand Greeks who lived in those times and places,and had access to the evidences, who were as hostile to Christians and Christianity, as any skeptics now can be; and yet, so overpowering was the evidence, that from enemies they became friends. Their conversion was a proof ofthe facts. Look at the precautions taken by the Lord's enemies: a great stone was rolled across thedoor of the tomb; this stone was sealed by the chiefpriests and Pharisees; a Roman guard, as large as they wanted, camped in front of the grave toprevent a theft. But, as Home argues:

Notwithstanding these precautions,

however, early on the morning of the first

day of the week following, the body was

missing, and neither the priests nor the

Pharisees could ever produce it. Yet none of

the watch deserted their post . . . nor was

any force used against the soldiers, nor any

arts of persuasion employed, to induce them

to take it away or to permit any other person

to remove it. (Introduction To Scriptures,

Vol. I, pp. 108-9).We ask then, "What happened to His body?" His enemies could offer no proof of their position; in fact,many of His murderers were so convinced by theapostles' evidence that, on the day of Pentecost,they unhesitatingly admitted their own error.Thus, one of the strongest proofs imaginable was displayed to the world—the fact that about three thousand Jews, many of whom were, up to that day,vicious enemies of Jesus, confessed their faith in aresurrected Son of God. By Acts 4, the number ofthe men who believed "came to be about five thousand." If those very Jews who reviled, cursedand killed Jesus were forced by the evidence toadmit His resurrection, who today can seriouslydeny it? That they could not deny it then is an irrefutable argument that no man can deny it today.Judas Iscariot is another witness, one who mightwell head the list of all infidel, pagan and Jewishwitnesses. He had lived with Jesus for three yearsand was intimately acquainted with Him. If thereever had been any talk of deception, any insincere orunspiritual designs plotted to delude the people.

Judas would certainly have known it. Had he been able to accuse Jesus of any sort of wrong doing ordeception, he obviously had the disposition and theopportunity to do it. But his last few breaths were spent confessing that he had betrayed innocent blood.

How can we conclude without calling the apostlePaul to testify? Here was the most zealous and unrelenting persecutor of the gospel, who was transformed into its foremost proponent. What power was able to change this fierce zealot of Judaism, a well educated, intelligent scholar and logician, into a martyr for Christ? His metamorphosis can be explained only by the appearance ofthe resurrected Christ, recorded in Acts 9 and 22.

All the available evidence from those days and events supports the claim that Jesus was raised from the dead by the power of God. The overwhelming admission of His enemies, coupled withthe total absence of contradictory evidence, shouldconvince every honest heart of the truth of thisdivine fact. Upon it rests the hope of all mankind,and God has graciously flooded us with the testimony of its truth. We cannot accept this foundation stone without accepting all that is builtupon it, for the same divine power that wrought theresurrection also wrought the perfect, complete revelation of God's will for all men—the Bible. The two stand or fall together.

CALVINISM—No. 4

Having seen in the previous article in this seriesthat Calvinism teaches that men are "born in sin" or are totally depraved by inheritance, the next step ofthis system is to get man saved. Since man is so bad ("born in sin") it will take a miracle, we are told, tomake him want to be converted.

Notice again the teaching that men are "born insin." "We believe the Scriptures teach that man . . .fell . . . in consequence of which all mankind are now sinners not by constraint but choice, being bynature utterly void of that holiness required by thelaw of God, positively inclined to evil" (Hiscox Baptist Manual, page 60). "Dearly Beloved, forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin" (Methodist-Episcopal Discipline, 1892, page 233)."Dearly Beloved forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin" (Methodist Discipline, 1904, page 291).

Direct Operation of Holy Spirit

"Man having brought himself under the curse ofthe law by his fall, it pleased the Lord to make acovenant of grace wherein he freely offereth untosinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ, requiringof them faith in him that they may be saved; and promising to give unto all those that are ordainedunto eternal life his Holy Spirit to make them willingand able to believe" (Article 7). "Man, by his fallinto a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation" (Article 9). "This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, . . . the creature being whollypassive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses;until, being quickened and renewed by the HolySpirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call andto embrace the grace offered ..." (Article 10). "The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled tobelieve to the saving of their souls, is the work of theSpirit of Christ in their hearts" (Article 14)."Although the gospel be the only outward means ofrevealing Christ and saving grace, and is, as such, abundantly sufficient thereunto, yet—that men whoare dead in trespasses may be born again, quickened or regenerated — there is moreover necessary an effectual, insuperable work of the Holy Spirit uponthe whole soul for the producing in them a new spiritual life, without which no other means will effecttheir conversion unto God" (The Philadelphia Confession of Faith) (Article 20). "The new birth, isthat change wrought in the soul by the Holy Spirit,. . . the change is instantaneous, effected solely bythe power of God, in a manner incomprehensible toreason . . . and without it salvation is impossible"(New Hampshire Confession of Faith, Article 6) (TheHiscox Guide For Baptist Churches, pages 165-197).

Action Apart From Word

The Calvinistic concept of the Holy Spirit in theconversion of a sinner is that set forth in the above quotations, namely, the Holy Spirit operates directlyupon the heart of the sinner separate and apart fromthe word of God. This the word of God does not teach.

The agency the Holy Spirit used to convert sinnersis the word of God (Eph. 6:17). Observe in every record of New Testament conversion listed in the book of Acts, the word of God was preached to thosein need of salvation. The Holy Spirit converted them,but He exerted his power and influence upon themthrough the word of God.

The New Testament affirms the action performedby the Holy Spirit is also to be said to have been accomplished by the word of God. Thus, the HolySpirit is found working through the word.

(1) Rom. 1:16-17. Paul affirms in this passage thepower of God to save is "the gospel of Christ." Thepower the Holy Spirit uses is directed through thegospel to the heart of the sinner. (2) 2 Thess. 2:13-14. These men are said to be chosen "to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth; whereunto he called you by our gospel." The Spirit sanctifies but it is accomplished by "belief of the truth." (3) I Cor. 4:15; 15:1-4. Paul shows the Corinthianswere "begotten" "through the gospel." By the gospelPaul says they had been saved. The Holy Spiritsaves but salvation is accomplished by the preachingof the gospel. (4) James 1:18, 21. James teaches that men are begotten "with the word of truth" but this implantedor engrafted word "is able to save your souls." Whenthe word is preached and obeyed, it will save men.The Holy Spirit saves men through the preaching oftruth into which He guided the apostles (John 16:13). (5) I Pet. 1:18-25. Peter says men are "redeemed"and this is accomplished by "the precious blood ofChrist." This is done when they "obey the truth through the Spirit." Redemption and obedience to truth is the same as "being born again" but the new

birth is "by the word of God." The new birth is experienced when "the gospel is preached unto you."When the gospel, the truth, the word of God is notpreached then men cannot be born again or be redeemed from sin.

It takes the preaching of the gospel to save menfrom sin. Where the gospel has not been preachedmen have not been saved. If God sends His HolySpirit to save and men cannot resist His power, whyis it that there are no saved people where the wordhas not been preached? If apart from the word of Godthe Holy Spirit saves men, why is it necessary tosend men to preach the gospel? Why does not the Holy Spirit operate directly upon their hearts on theother side of the world and eliminate the need of sending men over there to preach?

Rom. 2:11

"For there is no respecter of persons with God." Ifthe Holy Spirit operates directly upon the heart ofmen to save them, if one is lost, it will be God's fault and not man's. God did not send the Holy Spirit to operate upon man's heart and thus God is responsiblefor lost mankind, according to Calvinism.

Note: This is the last in a series of three articles. The previous articles have been primarily a review ofsome arguments advanced against the New AmericanStandard Bible. This article completes the review ofthe arguments, then finishes with a discussion of somedefects and excellencies of the version.

Argument 10

1 Corinthians 7:25, 40. New American Standard gives, "I give as an opinion. ..." Paul did not mean to state an opinion. Answer 10

The translators have rendered the Greek according to one of the several definitions of the word gnome.Definition: "opinion, judgment (Analytical Lexicon)";"view, judgment, opinion (Thayer)"; "mind, judgment, opinion (Robinson)." Literally, the Greek may read, judgment but I give or opinion but I give. The word as is not in the Greek text. The objectionthat Paul did not say that he was giving an opinionmay be valid.

Space will not permit me in this article to reviewthe last ten of the twenty arguments; however,fairness compels me to consider briefly argument 15.

Argument 15

Colossians 2:12. New American Standard omits the article before faith. Translators ought to have retained the article.

Answer 15

The article ought to have been retained; it doesappear in the Greek text. But the objection that thetranslators seem to be trying to rid themselves of thephrase the faith is not a valid objection. On the samegrounds the King James would have to be rejected,for it commits the same error by omitting the articlebefore the word faith in Galatians 3:14; 3:25; Ephesians 2:8; 2 Thessalonians 3:2 and numerous other passages. In fact, it was the treatment of the definite article in the King James that required special attention by the 101 translators previously mentioned. One of those 101 translators was Alexander Roberts. He wrote, "But in the KingJames Version this point of accuracy has been entirely neglected. The Greek language has a definitearticle, and its omission or insertion in a passageoften has the weightiest effect upon the sense. Yetour translators seem to have been ignorant of thisfact, and have treated the article as if it were not ofthe slightest importance . . . they have omitted it intheir version where it existed in the original; theyhave inserted it where it had no place in the Greek."See Matthew 14:8 where omission of the definite article is harsh. Compare smoother reading in New American Standard.

We must note that such departures from gram

matical precision are common in every version of the

Bible, for the English idiom will not always tolerate a strict rendering of the Greek. Sometimes the articlemust be inserted to accommodate English idiom as in1 Corinthians 1:20 in which the literal reading of theGreek text is pou sopos, pou grammateus, where wise? Where scribe? Good English idiom requires insertion of the article, where is the wise? Where is the scribe? And quite often instead of the aorist tense,the perfect or pluperfect brings out the meaningbetter in our language (See Matthew 19:20). The jobwhich translators have of turning the Greek into good English idiom without detriment to the sense is oftenexceedingly difficult. Sometimes they must decide whether good English idiom must give way to grammatical strictness or vice versa. One may getsome idea of the problem by examining the literalreading of John 11:6: "When therefore he heard thathe is sick, then indeed he remained in which he was place two days." To reject a translation on the grounds that the definite article was omitted or inserted or that the tense of a verb was imperfectly rendered is to reject all of the versions.

To sum up, the arguments urged against the New American Standard Bible are in the main unsound. Some of the arguments are gross blunders since theyare based on words non-existent in the Greek text. Others are little more than quibbles. Still others advance arguments that may also be urged againstboth the King James and the American Standard.

Yet to suggest that the New American Standard iswithout fault would be hazardous. The translation of Acts 10:43 is an unhappy rendering. The marginalreference to Obadiah 10:14 at 2 Chronicles 28:17 is a discrepancy as are the misspelled words in Amos 1:4and Philippians 4:6. Like all other translations, it isthe work of imperfect men and will contain minorerrors and defects, for God has not seen fit to provideus with infallible translators.

But in my own view the translators of the New American Standard Bible have followed sound principles and made the best use of their resources.The rendering of the participle in Matthew 16:18-19 isa decided improvement. Shall have been bound more accurately expresses the sense of the Greek than shall be bound. What the apostles spoke on earth bymeans of the Holy Spirit was that which first had been bound and loosed in heaven. And the attention given the Greek particle me, hitherto neglected,provides an insight and a fresh look into numerous passages. Consider John 6:67 in which the negativeparticle has been taken into consideration. "You do not want to go away also, do you?" gives an insightinto Jesus' feelings that we do not see in other versions. Or John 7:52 in which "You are not also from Galilee, are you?" suggests disdain of the Pharisees for Nicodemus but not an inquiry. Then notice the proper use of the italics in John 4:20: "Ourfathers worshipped in this mountain: and you peoplesay that in Jerusalem is the place where men oughtto worship." The italicized word brings out what the woman is saying. The woman is not asserting thatJesus alone had said that Jerusalem was the placewhere men ought to worship, but what she is asserting is that the Jewish people said that men ought to worship in Jerusalem. The italicized word isauthorized by the Greek umeis legete, which is theverb phrase for you say in the second person, plural. Umeis is the second person pronoun in the pluralnumber. Here it is used to denote emphasis becausethe woman is asserting. If the woman had wanted tosay that Jesus had told her she ought to worship inJerusalem, she would have used the second person, singular su legeis. Then too the use of Arabic numerals is most welcome. ". . . of the tribe of Dan,were 62,700 . . ."is much to be preferred to ". . .ofthe tribe of Dan, were three-score and two thousandand seven hundred (Numbers 1:39). . . ."

In short, the New American Standard Bible vindicates itself. It is a conservative translation, faithful within the bounds of human limitations to the Greek text. It is, in my judgment, to be recommended toeveryone who wishes to read, as did our brethren inthe First Century, the inspired Scriptures in an idiomwith which he is most familiar, with the confidencethat he is reading a clear and accurate rendering ofthe Holy Scriptures. Like the King James, it has itsminor errors and defects, but also its acknowledgedexcellencies. It sets forth the Gospel message in language that is direct, plain, and meaningful. Unlikethe Hebrew scholar Broughton, one could hardly wishrather to be torn asunder by wild horses than to allow the version to be imposed on the church.

926 Taylor Ave. Alameda, CA 94501

PRECIOUS THINGS

It is quite interesting that the two epistles of Peter use the word "precious" more than all the rest.The word is defined as, "of great value; highlyesteemed or cherished." It is used in connection with many things in the Old Testament. Items of wealth,fruits, one's good name, are said to be precious. But Peter attaches special significance to the term precious as he describes four items which challengeour understanding and thrill our hearts.

He speaks of faith as being precious as it is tried. "That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it betried with fire, might be found unto praise andhonour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 1:7). The second epistle addresses "them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our SaviourJesus Christ" (2 Pet. 1:1). The theme of Peter's first epistle seems to be "the Christian in the crucible." Faith under fire, tested in the crucible of trial and adversity increases in honor. Under such circumstances it improves in value as well as proving its value. Like precious metal refined by fire, faithwhich has withstood trial is indeed precious, yeamore precious than gold.

Faith that can stand trial must have the Lord Jesus Christ as its object. "For except ye believethat I am he, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24).He is an object worthy of trust and fidelity. When the evidence of his divinity is considered and accepted one is realistically committed in allegiance toHim. Just as one in pledging allegiance to the flag ofour country indicates commitment to its principlesand faith in its foundation objectives, so the morelofty idea of allegiance is attendant when Christ isthe object of our faith.

Faith must also be considered in a subjective sense. Precious faith, that which will stand trial, is subjective to the right things as comprehended inthe statement, "So then faith cometh by hearingand hearing by the word of God" (Rom. 10:17). Theacid test of faith is obedience. Jesus challenged hisdisciples, "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say" (Luke 6:46)? Marks statement of the great commission includes the simple statement of requirement for forgiveness ofsins. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be

saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned"(Mark 16:16). Genuine faith has the proper object,Christ, and is subjective to the proper thing, theWord of God. There must be a believing in the Manand an unreserved acceptance of His plan. This isfaith that will save, faith that will stand the pain oftrial, adversity, and temptation. The tears of persecution, disappointment in men, will neither dampen nor discourage, but will refine our faith tothe richness comprehended in "precious."

Secondly, Peter speaks of precious blood. "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemedwith corruptible things, as silver and gold, fromyour vain conversation received by tradition fromyour fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:" (1Pet. 1:18-19). With but slight meditation upon theidea of redemption the pulse quickens and our interest is stirred. Redeemed is the idea of, "to release on receipt of ransom." If Christians, we are redeemed with the "precious blood" of Christ, "as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." This isan Old Testament reminder of the sin offering underthe Law. Jesus' blood was shed as were these blood offerings. Yet, there is one significant differencebetween the Old Testament sin offerings and the blood of Christ. The Old Testament offerings werethe condition of forgiveness, His blood is the meansof forgiveness.

Redemption's plan was not complete until the shedding of the precious blood of the Son of God. InHis life, in His death, through His blood redemption is. "But God commendeth his love toward us, inthat, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.Much more then, being now justified by his blood,we shall be saved from wrath through him" (Rom.5:8-9). Salvation, nevertheless, is conditional. Faithin the blood of Jesus Christ does not precludeobedience. There are actually two sides to the matterof salvation, God's part and man's part. God's partis expressed in the sending of His Son, His death, burial and resurrection, and the publication of thegospel. Man's part involves obedient faith to therequirements of God. "And being made perfect, hebecame the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" (Heb. 5:8-9). Indeed, precious blood,precious because of what it is, redemption's price.

Thirdly, it is the precious Christ that is givenattention. The words of Isaiah, "Behold, I lay inSion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he thatbelieveth on him shall not be confounded" (Isa.28:16), serve as introduction to, "Unto you thereforewhich believe he is precious" (1 Pet. 2:6-7). The Psalmist complements the prophet's statement in the words, "The stone which the builders refused isbecome the head stone of the corner" (Psa. 118:22). Consider the term "rejected" or "refused" as connoting, to cast aside as worthless after trial andexamination. This is a prediction of the wholesalerejection of Christ by the Jew. Such rejection did notaffect the purpose of God, as premillennialists say.

He, nevertheless, became the "head stone of thecorner." "For other foundation can no man lay thanthat is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11).

This is God's "elect," the precious Christ. "A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence" to the disbelieving Jew and for that matter, to all who disbelieve. Reason being, "for they stumble at the word, being disobedient" (1 Pet. 2:8). But, "Unto you therefore which believe he is precious" (verse 7).To the eye brightened by faith he is a "living stone,"not inert and lifeless. He being raised from the deadto die no more, being alive, is the source of life to thebeliever. Thus, resting upon the chief corner stone,the precious Christ, the believer acquires life, becomes a "living stone." Ah, so precious, the Christ.

Finally, the inspired penman is brought to usethis impressive term as a description of the promisesto the faithful in Christ. "Whereby are given unto usexceeding great and precious promises:" (2 Pet.1:4), looks back to verse one for identity, "to themthat have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." The promises here considered are precedented upon faith, the blood, and the Christ, aspreviously considered.

This initial paragraph of 2 Peter focuses upon ourbeing "partakers of his divine nature, havingescaped the corruption that is in the world throughlust." The pristine beauty of Eden furnished a stagefor Adam and Eve in their sinless perfect condition.This original purity and God-likeness was lost because of sin. Transgressing the law of God, Adamand Eve brought their expulsion from the gardenand the attendant material consequences. Looming over all this in its blackness was death spirituallybecause of the sin. Thankfully, it does not end here.That which was lost in disobedience is regained inobedience to God's will, restored in the transformation of conversion. "But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord,are transformed into the same image from glory toglory, even as from the Lord the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:18). "And have put on the new man which isrenewed in knowledge after the image of him thatcreated him" (Col. 3:10). "Partakers of his divine nature," what precious promises and to think theyare yours and mine.

Indeed, precious things, valuable and priceless beyond compare. Precious faith, precious blood, precious Christ and precious promises. Howprecious are they to us really? The answer dependsupon how precious our soul is to us.

SOME THOUGHTS ON PSALLO AnIntroduction

The controversy continues regarding the meaningof the Greek verb psallo and its cognate noun psalmos. Traditionally, instrumentalists and non-instrumentalists have amassed lexical evidence in an effort to determine whether psallo in New Testament passages allows (or even demands) the use of mechanical instruments of music in the worship of Christians.

I have studied and taught Greek for nearly twenty-five years. I have a deep and abiding love of thelanguage. I seriously doubt, however, that an appeal to lexicons is a very fruitful exercise. I make this statement—which may startle some people—simply because it is always possible to discover lexicographers on both sides of any word battle. Alllexicons are human productions, and after one hassifted all available evidence he is still faced with the task of determining what evidence is in harmony withthe contextual facts of Scripture.

Another Instrumentalist Writes

Robert E. Gulledge, Sr., who is described in a footnote as "a Christian minister living in Jerseyville,Ill.," wrote an article which appeared in the December, 1974 issue of The Christian Standard. Inthis article Mr. Gulledge presented a brief study ofthe words "psalms," "hymns," and "songs." It is not my intention to review this study in its entirety;however, I wish to comment on two short portions ofit.

Mr. Gulledge writes the following paragraph regarding psallo:"Psalming (psallo) —'singing with an instrument,' is introduced into the New Testament Scriptures just'as it is written' in the Septuagint. Romans 15:9 is the Sep-tuagint Psalm 18:49—therefore, it now stands in the New Testament Scriptures 'as it is written.' If Psalming does not stand in Romans

15:9 as it is in Psalm 18:49, then it does not stand 'asit is written.' " In his closing paragraph, Mr. Gulledgewrites as follows:

". . . The position held by 'exclusivists' demands a different set of definitions for the same musical terms within the same centuryat the same time in the same language for thesame people."

On the Making of Lexicons

Before coming directly to a review of the statements of Mr. Gulledge, it is appropriate to observe the genesis of lexicons. To coin an expression, "man was not made for lexicons, but lexicons, for man." That is to say, dictionaries werenot made and then forced upon their users. To the contrary, dictionaries merely reflect the uses that are more or less current. If a lexicographer is contemporary with uses, he may ask people for the specific implications of their words. Obviously, a lexicographer of ancient uses must derive his information from the contextual evidence of the literature he is studying (such as the LXX, or theNew Testament) and/or from contemporary evidencesuch as non-Biblical literature, inscriptions, and similar evidence.

Lexicons and Specific Cases

A dictionary definition of a word does not necessarily mean that every single person or group uses that particular word in that particular way. An excellent illustration of this may be seen in Webster's definition of the word "baptize": "To dip or immersein water, or to pour or sprinkle water upon, as areligious rite. ..."

I, for one, do not intend to include sprinkling andpouring in my definition of "baptize" just becausethese meanings are found in Webster's dictionary.

If I should write an article on the word "baptize,"and that article fell into the hands of a non-Englishspeaking reader who turned to Webster's dictionaryand found "sprinkling" and "pouring" included under"baptize," would it be proper for that reader to assert, in the absence of any contextual evidence,that I practice sprinkling and/or pouring?

Similarly, one should not take a definition out of aGreek lexicon and force it into the exegesis of a passage in the complete absence of any contextual evidence. I believe this method of exegesis has beenemployed by some writers in their study of the termpsallo, even as that term occurs in the LXX, to saynothing of its occurrence in the New Testament.

Implications of Psallo

When lexicographers state that the literal meaningof psallo is "to pluck, twitch, or twang," they do notsimply draw these words out of the air arbitrarily. Itis evident that this judgment is based upon ancientuses and settings of psallo.

When it is observed that psallo sometimes meant"to pluck the hair of the head," is this simply an arbitrary judgment? When it is said bylexicographers that psallo sometimes meant "to pluckthe plumbline of the carpenter," is this just drawnout of the air for no apparent reason? Obviously,there is some contextual evidence somewhere to support this claim.

Similarly, when it is asserted that psallo in somepassages of the LXX may mean "to pluck the stringsof a harp," is this observation arbitrary? When it issaid that psallo in some passages of the LXX may mean "to sing to the accompaniment of a harp," isthis judgment arbitrary?

It seems to me that lexicographers include the harpand/or other objects (hair, etc.) in their definitions ofpsallo on the basis of contextual evidence. Furthermore, the absence of such contextual evidence must be a prime factor in the decision of such men asMoulton and Milligan to give "sing" as the meaningof psallo in the New Testament, (Vocabulary of theGreek Testament, p. 697.)

Psallo in the Septuagint

For purposes of reference it may be useful to list all the occurrences of psallo in the LXX. It should be noticed that chapter and verse listings vary in someversions. Variant chapter numbering is indicated by parentheses. Further, one reference from the apocryphal book of Sirach is given, along with variations found in the LXX version of Aquila and ofSymmachus. The occurrences of psallo are as follows: Judges 5:3; I Kings 16:16, 17, 18, 23; 18:10; 19:9; IIKings 22:50; IV Kings 3:15; Psa. 7:17; 9:2, 11;12(13):6; 17(18):49; 20(21):13; 26(27):6; 29(30):4, 12;32(33):2, 3; 46(47):6, 7; 56(57):7, 9; 58(59):17;60(61):8; 65(66):2, 4; 67(68):4, 25, 32, 33; 68(69):12;70(71):22, 23; 74(75):9; 91(92):1; 97(98):4, 5;100(101):l; 103(104):33; 104(105):2; 107(108):l, 3; 134(135):3; 137(138):1; 143(144): 9; 145(146):2; 146(147):7; 149:3; Sirach 9:4; Aquila 32(33):3; Symmachus 32(33):3; 68(69):13; Isa. 38:20.

Even in the preceding references from the LXX,psallo does not always necessarily imply the harp. Arather exhaustive article on psallo appears in volume 8 of Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. The article was written by Gerhard Delling. Mr. Delling notes, ". . . often the obvious sense is 'to play,' esp. when an instrument is mentioned Psa. 33:2; 71:22 . . . but also Psa. 27:6; 57:8 . . . where singing and playing go together . . . Elsewhere the idea of praise by song as well as stringed instrumentis suggested, Psa. 9:11 . . . Hence one must take intoaccount a shift of meaning in the LXX in other passages in which the idea of playing is not evident.In many places the thought of 'to play' to Yahweh (in His honour) is a natural one, and this could beintroduced into other passages, esp. when the Gk. equivalent contains esp. the idea of playing."

Mr. Delling is simply stating that psallo in the LXX may mean either "sing," "play," or "play and sing," depending upon the context. Notice carefullyhis use of the words "obvious," "mentioned," "suggested," "evident." These are common terms used in contextual studies.

"As it is Written"

Mr. Gulledge seems to think that "as it is written"in Rom. 15:9 means "as they sang," for he writes, " . . . if psalming does not stand in Romans 15:9 as itis in Psalm 18:49, then it does not stand 'as it is written.' "

It is evident that Paul is not saying "I will psalm as they psalmed." To the contrary, the clause "as itis written" does not modify the statement "... I will confess . . . and sing. ..." The clause "as it is written" modifies the statement that precedes, " . . . that the Gentiles might glorify God. . . . " That is to say, the redemption of the Gentiles is in harmonywith "what is written" in Psalm 18:49.

Same Words With Different Meanings

Mr. Gulledge apparently reasons that it is unrealistic to have a different set of definitions for the same musical terms within the same century atthe same time in the same language for the samepeople. I affirm, however, that this is precisely whatwe have in reference to the use of the Septuagint byNew Testament Christians.

It is a simple fact that the use of the King JamesVersion of the Bible by present-day Christians involves exactly the same phenomenon. Christians today read the English of the KJV, recognizing thatsome of the words do not have the meaning that theyhad in 1611. It is true that Christians today do notlive in the same century as that of the writing of the KJV, but neither did New Testament Christians livein the century of the production of the LXX.

Furthermore, it is evident to everyone that manypresent-day English words are used with different meanings by people who are supposed to be speakingthe same language. The "rock" generation has completely revolutionized the meanings of such terms as "grass," "pot," etc. etc. In religious circles the term "baptism" obviously does not convey a single,standard meaning even though it is used by peoplewho are supposed to be speaking the same language.Every thoughtful person realizes that this confusionof meanings is eliminated only by a study of thecontextual uses of words.

Psallo in Modern Greek

As a final note, it may be of interest to observethat Swanson's pocket lexicon of modern Greek defines psallo, "sing" (hymns). In his English-Greek section, under "sing," he gives tragoudo (general); psallo (in church); kelaido (of birds). Under tragoudi (the noun cognate of the verb tragoudo), he gives "popular song."

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they arecommanded to be under obedience, as also saith thelaw. And if they will learn any thing, let them asktheir husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

This passage continues to be the subject of controversy among brethren. I have no illusionsthat this article will end that controversy, but I dowant to present for your consideration my convictions regarding these verses.

Throughout the letter of 1 Corinthians Paul dealtwith problems that troubled the church in Corinth.In chapter 14 he addressed himself to the conduct ofthe Corinthians in the assemblies in which spiritualgifts were exercised. From his remarks we can conclude that their activities were not always edifying, that they were characterized by disorderliness and confusion. It is in this context of urging orderliness that Paul addressed the women inverses 34-35.

In verse 34 Paul clearly ordered the women tokeep silence, saying that it was not permitted for them to speak. Then in verse 35 he said that it was ashame for women to speak in the church. YET, this same Paul commanded all Christians (includingwomen) to sing (Eph. 5:19, Col. 3:16). Singing is aform of speaking. If it is a shame for women to speakin the assembly, how is it that God could demand that they sing?

I believe that the answer is found in the last half of verse 34. After saying that it is not permitted for them to speak, Paul adds, "but they are commandedto be under obedience, as also saith the law." Thus, the fundamental principle Paul was teaching was forwomen to be under obedience. Speaking is contrasted against being under obedience (note the word "but"); thus, the kind of speaking Paul wastalking about was such speaking as would violatethat principle of being under obedience. Singingobviously does not violate that principle; therefore,she can properly be commanded to sing, since singing does not fall within the realm of the kind of speaking forbidden in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. Shecan speak so long as she remains under obedience.Evidently, as Paul was seeking to correct the disorderliness and confusion in the assemblies at Corinth, part of that situation was caused by womengetting out of line by the manner in which theyspoke.

Verse 35 shows that it was only a certain class of women in Corinth who were causing the trouble.Note that the women: (1) had husbands, and (2) hadhusbands who were able to instruct them in truths they did not understand. This excludes a lot of women. Since (1) the assembly under discussion was one in which divine truth was being revealed asspiritual gifts were exercised, (2) Paul had justaddressed the prophets (inspired teachers) in the verses immediately preceding his instructions regarding the women, and (3) the women of verse 35were the wives of competent teachers of truth, it isreasonable to conclude that the women were the wives of the inspired men (prophets).

In considering that Paul forbade these women toask questions in the assembly, remember that theprinciple upon which the prohibition was based wasthat women were to be under obedience. The type ofspeaking forbidden was such that violated that principle. Evidently, then, these women were askingquestions in such a manner as to be out of obedience.Perhaps the situation was that while their husbandswere revealing divine truth, the wives would interrupt with questions; such would surely be out ofplace and productive of disorder.

The instructions to ask their husbands at home does not apply today as it did to the wives of theprophets. Women today do not have to ask theirhusbands; they have Bibles just like their husbandsdo and are just as mentally competent to find the truth in their Bibles as are their husbands. The women of verse 35 had no inspired book to guidethem, but they had inspired husbands; womentoday have no inspired husbands, but they have aninspired book.

The prohibition of asking questions surely doesnot apply to the Bible class situation of today. TheBible class of today is altogether different from theassembly in which divine truth was being revealedby inspired men. When men and women are gathered together to study in an effort to learn and help each other understand the truth that has beenrevealed, it certainly is not getting out of subjectionfor a woman to humbly ask a question or submit anidea for the class's consideration. Certainly, in sucha situation a woman can get out of line in the manner in which she asks questions or sets forth her ideas; to do so is to violate the principle Paulstressed in 1 Cor. 14:34-35 regarding being underobedience.

Conclusion: The fundamental principle of womenbeing under obedience still stands, and any type ofspeaking that violates that principle is wrong. Themanner in which some of the Corinthian women spoke did violate it. Women today should take carethat they do not. But women can speak so long asthey do so in a spirit of submissiveness, in such amanner that they do not violate the principle ofbeing under obedience. P.O. Box 147

Truman, Arkansas 72472

"For no prophecy ever came by the will of man:but man spake from God being moved by the HolySpirit" (2 Peter 1:21). "Every scripture inspired ofGod is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, forcorrection, for instruction which is in righteousness:that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16, 17).

In this age of skepticism, it becomes necessary forChristians to stand up and be counted and to deal aknock-out blow to those who would belittle the Bible. The Bible claims to be the word of God; but Modernists are trying to sift out part of its teachings and claim we have no use for parts of it. Ibelieve the Bible to be the Word of God, spoken bythe Holy Spirit, God's agent, to men who were moved by the same to write the exact words thereof,and that there is not one mistake or contradiction in the entire sixty-six books.

Let us show one of the evidences of inspiration asfound in Gen. 1:11. We have the law that every seedproduces after its kind. Another is found in Isa. 13:17-22, Isaiah prophesied the destruction of Babylon.Four hundred years after the prophecy was made thecity was destroyed, and to this day it has not beeninhabited. Why don't the Bible-dishonoring, church-ridiculing, Bible-hating infidels in the church provethat the Bible is just a book of tales, by building acity on this ancient site, or by dwelling there? Thiswould settle the matter!

Now let us look at the New Testament for an evidence of its inspiration. Paul said: "Grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing theflock; and from among your own selves men shallarise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them" (Acts 20:29, 30). In 2 Thess. 2:7, Paul wrote, "For the mystery of lawlessnessdoth already work" and by the sixth century theapostasy was complete, just as Paul had written.

Someone has said of the Bible: "This book contains the mind of God, the way of salvation, thedoom of the sinner, and the happiness of the believer. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, and its decisions areimmutable. Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. Herein heaven is opened,hell is disclosed. It should fill the memory, rule theheart, and guide our feet. It offers happiness for children, inspiration for youth, strength for maturity, assurance for old age, comfort in death,and salvation and riches and glory and a reward foreternity." I do not know the author of these words,but let all of us profit from them.

Today we are in the midst of a world revolution and the very foundation of civilization is being shaken; but the church of Christ with Bible in hand is the only thing that can swing this wicked world back to decency, save humanity from an awfulperiod of darkness, and keep the sunlight of God'sredeeming love shining in the hearts of men.

18112 Regina Ave. Torrance, California 90504

During the last few years many of the brethrenhave become elated at a new device for drawing largecrowds into their meeting houses—the bus ministry.Really though, there's not anything especially new about the device. The Baptists and other denominational folk have been using the system foryears. It is what has made possible the "Tabernacle-style" church houses that have begun to dot the landscape in many of our cities. Many brethren haveargued, "Well, the Baptists are getting good results out of it, so it must work." As a consequence, denominational programs and gimmicks are examined, sectarian "how-to-do-it" manuals are read, and the system is fitted bodily into a congregation's program. "After all", it is argued, "it works doesn't it?" Soon children are being given candy, refreshments, and prizes for boarding thebuses and attending regularly. Suddenly the GrandOld Gospel that was once the drawing power to salvation (Rom. 1:16; II Thess. 2:14) goes flying outa bus window. "Why, it doesn't matter what youuse to get them there, just so Christ is preached tothem", the prevailing voice says. One problem thatgoes unnoticed is that whatever it takes to get thatkind of person to come the first time is what it isgoing to take to keep him coming. And, if the prizethat the church of Christ is offering is inferior to thatbeing proffered by the Baptists, it is for certain thatwe will lose out on these that sell themselves to the highest bidder. I wonder what scriptural precedentpeople think they're following when they offer carnalrewards for spiritual service in this manner? Whathappened to the biblical axiom that those who seekto receive earthly compensation as their payment forspiritual service rendered have been "paid in full":"Verily I say unto you, They have received theirreward" (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16). This practice actuallyencourages the attitude that Jesus condemned.

I was recently surprised to see that some of theBaptists are even beginning to object to this kind ofabsurd trafficking in human souls. I was surprisedbecause Baptists took the lead in the use of this andevery other kind of gimmick and contrivanceimaginable. Everyone from karate experts to moviepersonalities have been invited to speak and performduring their worship services to draw crowds to theirmeeting houses. But, Forrest L. Keener, pastor of the Bethel Baptist Church of Lawton, Oklahoma,recently launched an attack upon such methods usedin bus ministry promotion. In the July and August

issue of Faith Magazine, a Bob Jones Universitypublication, Keener attacked the abusive techniquesunder the title, "A Critical Analysis of Modern 'Give-Away Bus Promotion'." His study of thesetime-honoured practices led him to brand them as a"hypocritical exploitation of children", and toconclude that "these tactics never actually increase the number of converts". Furthermore, Keenerrealizes that a lowering of standards must follow orthe results will not be lingering. He says, "Meanwhile, sound doctrine occupies second place or no place at all." He then adds, "The common denominator that I seem to see in all fervent users of cheap tactics is that they rate doctrine after 'results', and sometime belittle doctrine altogether." This frank assault upon an almost universallyaccepted practice among Baptist churches was bound to draw fire. In the August 3, 1973 issue ofThe Sword of the Lord, Dr. John R. Rice, the editorof the paper, expressed his shock and surprise atKeener's remarks. A long expertise followed in which Rice made quite a play upon Baptist tradition and perverted a number of scriptures endeavoring toput some Biblical props under a totally unscripturalpractice. His miserable display would almost certainly convince any honest person that such tacticscompletely lack scriptural authority. I must confess, though, that Rice did do a little better job on thesubject than I have heard any of the brethren dolately. At the very least he made an attempt tojustify it by the Bible. Many of the brethren havegiven up this idea altogether. That is the reason thatthe like of this is being practiced by churches of Christ at all.

When will some brethren realize that you can't trick people into becoming Christians? There are noshort-cut methods or sure-fire gimmicks that willreplace the simple gospel of Jesus Christ. It remains the power of God to salvation (Rom. 1:16) and theonly thing that can draw men to Christ (II Thess.2:14). It will probably take the brethren a while yetto recognize the fruitlessness of any attempt toimprove upon God's plan, but the realization is justas sure to come to them as it has to some of the Baptists. Real conviction can't be bought. Even theBaptists are beginning to see that.

113 S. Electra Gallatin, Tennessee 37066

THE CONVICTION OF YOUTH Cindi Sullivan, daughter of Wayne Sullivan, gospel preacher,was recently chosen Homecoming Queen at Colonial HighSchool, a very large school in Orlando, Florida. When Cindi wasselected as a candidate she went to the sponsor and told her thatif she should be chosen as queen, she would neither participate innor reign over the traditional dance which follows the ball game. The teacher assured her that if chosen she would not be requiredto act contrary to her convictions. She was chosen to be queen,but did not participate in or reign over the dance. Sometimesyoung people may feel that in order to participate in some of theschool activities and be popular with the other students theymust forfeit their convictions. This is not sol (Palm SpringsDrive BULLETIN, Altamonte Springs, Florida, Dec. 16, 1974).

EFRAIN PEREZ, Santiago, Chile. In December, 1974 wemade a trip to Valdivia, 700 miles south of Santiago, to visit acongregation we had heard about but had no contact with before now. Valdivia is a nice city of about 150,000. Here we metBrother Ernesto Ortega who is 86 years old and who has beenpreaching the gospel for 45 years. He shares with other brethrenin preaching now for the congregation of about 35 members.They have property where the church meets. In our studies theyrecognized some errors and readily rejected them. We rejoice inthis and recommend these brethren as faithful to the Lord. As soon as funds are available we plan to translate and print"Walking by Faith" by Roy Cogdill.FROM REPORT FROM ANDY DEKLERK, P.O. Box 31, Plaston 1244 E/TVL., South Africa. We begin this new year fullof hope and greatly encouraged with the events of the past fewweeks. Our new meeting house is under construction; two families attended services in response to our weekly newspaperarticle and I have already had classes with them; a letter wasreceived from a lady who receives our bulletin requesting moreinformation concerning baptism; a full page article will be in thisweek's newspaper on the "Charismatic Movement" which is showing its ugly head here as well. Although few in number weare all thrilled with the prospect of meeting together to worshipin a nice, neat, clean building without having first to clear awaybeer cans and having to sit through service with the smell of old beer and cigarettes in the air. This is what we have had tocontend with these last few weeks, in the rented hall. The Lord has blessed us so abundantly that everything looks good andwonderful as we begin this new year in His service. We would appreciate receiving bulletins from where you worship or anyspecial outline studies you may have engaged in.

JAMES O. LOVELL, 8 Doone Rd., Pinetown 3600, Natal, Rep. of S. Africa. We have been having a hard time about themeeting place at the back of the residence of one of the brethren.At first, the Development and Services Board ordered him totake it down. We have pursued every possible way to keepthis structure as it is. With the help of the Department ofCommunity Development we have been able to keep the structure as it is. We are praying that we shall be allocated one ofthe sites in Shallcross where we can build. This is doubtful since these allocations are usually made on the basis of the numberof members. On November 10, the Shallcross church withdrew from five of its members. While such is not a happy occasion, it is an evidence of growth for this church. In October and November we baptized nine. That makes 24 since we came in April. We have started holding two mid-week services so we can

Page 16

teach all these new converts. We continue to be thankful for your support and prayers.

ROBERT C. ARCHER, 1500 South Ridgeland, Berwyn, Illinois 60402. The Lord has blessed our efforts in 1974. Twenty-twohave responded to the Lord by being baptized. The remarkable thing about this is that 19 of these were adults from the community . People are still interested in their salvation! What does 1975 hold for us? We, of course, do not know; but we look forward to the challenges of the coming year with enthusiasm and optimism. Brethren, pray for us. ROBERT S. SWAIN, Lompoc, California. I began labor with thisnew congregation the first Sunday in March. We are located in the Lompoc, Mission Hills, Vandenberg Air Force Base areas. We want to especially alert service personnel who might be transferred toVandenberg and invite you to come worship with us in a faithful congregation. For further information or trans-portation please contact Robert Cunningham at (805) 733-2104.

PREACHERS NEEDED ASHLAND, OHIO. The small congregation in Ashland is in need of a preacher. The congregation has an adequate building and some support available, though some will have to be raised elsewhere. Interested persons should call Wallace Smith, 752 E. 7th St., Ashland, Ohio 44805, phone 325-3610. GARDENA, CALIFORNIA. The church in Gardena is looking for a full-time preacher to begin work now. The church is self-supporting andprovides a house for the preacher. Those interested may contact Ed Rose at (213) 545-0045 or Mark Stringer at (213) 542-9384.

NEW CONGREGATION

JESSE W. BROOKSHIRE, P.O. Box 5765, Texarkana, Texas 75501. For a number of years conservative brethren in the Texarkana area have given thought and discussion to the need for a congregation on the Texas side of Texarkana. This much neededwork became a reality the first Sunday in December, 1974 when four families met for the first time. Since then three more families have joined forces with us. There is complete harmony and cooperation in all scriptural ways between the new congregation andFranklin Drive. Daryl Powell and I share the preaching. We meet at 3107 Summerhill Road, Texarkana, Texas. If you are traveling through this area, stop and worship with us. Exit off 1-30 on Summerhill and 7 blocks south. See our ad in this issue of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES. Warren Cheatham of Irving, Texas was with us in a meeting the last of March.