WHAT IS THE BIBLE? (No. 2)

STUDY IT TO SETTLE QUESTIONS OF DOUBT

Before one can really use the Bible as a rule of life andas a means of educating himself into life itself, he mustsettle many questions of doubt about the Bible. Such questions that suggest doubt originate in the minds of enemies of the Bible in one form or another. Prominent among these questions are those that deny the authority,authenticity, and credibility of the Bible itself. In other words, we must establish the Bible itself before we can use itin other ways already suggested.

Among these questions of doubt are such as, "How do weknow that we really have the Bible instead of a substitute?"That question must be settled before we can fully acceptthe Bible as a guide. Another such question, "Who wrotethe Bible?" This might imply that possibly someone wroteit other than the inspired men who claimed to have done so.This is important and must be answered before the Bible becomes our complete guide. "Do we have the Bible today as it was given to the inspired men?" This is likewise important in establishing the proper authority of the Bibleas the only rule of life.

THE METHOD OF APPROACH IN STUDYING ABOUT THE BIBLE

How shall we go about answering such questions as wehave just mentioned? It is obvious from the beginning thatwe must be as complete and thorough as possible in oursearch for truth, because the very part that is left untouched may be the matter that would prove that the Bible is not reliable. Therefore, we must run down every possible

doubt and settle it before we can claim for the Bible the authority we want. There must be three main sources of information searched in getting the answers.

THE HISTORY OF THE PAST

We must search into every phase of past history that isavailable to us. In so doing we can get accurate information about the Bible from its very beginning to the present day,and learn whether it has changed or not. We can also learn how the Bible was used from the very beginning. Past history is usually reliable because it cannot be altered. What has happened has happened and can never be changed. Whether we get an accurate report of the history must depend upon our source of information. Theonly unbiased way is to inquire into all phases available tous and separate the accurate from the unreliable.

THE BIBLE ITSELF

A study of the Bible itself will help us to see whether itis what it claims to be. Many have objected to this courseof investigation on the basis that it is the Bible itself thatis in question, and, therefore, cannot be a reliable source ofproof until its claims are established. Such an obligation iscontrary to our methods of investigation. If we wanted toknow whether a certain piece of land contained oil, wewould never think of looking on some other land, but wewould investigate the land itself to ascertain the answer.If we wanted to know whether the physical body is diseasedor not, we would investigate the body that is suspected ofthe disease. In the same manner we investigate the Bibleitself, of course with other proofs at hand, to determinewhether its claims are true or not. Such an investigationwould include the authenticity, the authority, the genuineness, and the inspiration of the Bible itself.

THE STUDY OF SCIENCE IN THE LIGHT OF THE BIBLE

By studying every available branch of science, and wespeak of real science, we can learn whether the Bible is inharmony with facts or not. If the Bible is a Book from God,then we know that it is in harmony with truth in everyfield, because God is the author of all truth.

By a thorough study of all these sources of informationwe can be able to answer all the questions of doubt thathave arisen through the ages and prove whether or not theBible is really what it claims to be. If it is, it must be theonly rule of life; if it is not, it is not worthy of man's time and effort in studying it.(To be continued)

HAVING THE MIND (ATTITUDE) OFCHRIST # 2

In our first article on this subject we learned thatChrist's attitude was one of humility and a willingness to do what the Father asked him to do,even to the point of leaving heaven, coming to earthand taking upon himself the form of a servant. Whatdoes it mean to become a servant? Servant = Slave

The word "servant" is from the Greek word doulos which literally means, "A slave, a bondsman—one who gives himself up wholly to another's will" (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, Page 158). This is

the attitude that Christ had, and He so stated inJohn 6:38 when He said, "For I came down fromheaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of himthat sent me." This is the lesson that all people ofthe world (including Christians) need to learn. In thesociety in which we live, the general attitude is "nobody is going to tell me what to do." This attitude is diametrically opposed to the attitude thatChrist had. Though Christ has not sinned from eternity to eternity, he was called upon by the Heavenly Father to "taste death for every man" (Hebrews 2:9). And, according to the definition of theword "servant" (slave)—one who gives himself upwholly to another's will—Christ did the very thing that he was required to do. He died for you and me.

Today, as in all ages, we have the privilege ofchoosing whom we will serve even as Joshua of olddid in Joshua 24:15. Paul said the Romans chose to serve the Lord. "Know ye not, that to whom ye yieldyourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are towhom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or ofobedience unto righteousness" (Rom. 6:16). Yes, Imay choose whose servant (slave) I will be. But whenI choose to be "bought with the price" (1 Cor. 6:20) Imust realize that from that point forward I must givemyself up wholly to the will of Christ even as Hegave Himself up wholly to the will of the HeavenlyFather. (Next Month, Obedient Servants).

A SHAMEFUL FAILURE

From the earliest divine promises of redemption,God made it clear that all nations were to be the recipients of his grace. To Abraham God said "andin thee shall all families of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 12:3). Isaiah foretold the establishment of the government of the Lord's house and said "all nationsshall flow unto it" (Isa. 2:2). When Daniel saw the coronation scene of Jesus, as he ascended to the Ancient of Days, he wrote "And there was given untohim dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that allpeople, nations, and languages, should serve him"(Dan. 7:14).

Jesus taught that the gospel was to be carried tomen of every nation. "Go ye therefore, and teach allnations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teachingthem to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, evenunto the end of the world. Amen" (Mt. 28:19-20)."And that repentance and remission of sins shouldbe preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" (Lk. 24:47). The gospel plan of salvation was first preached at Jerusalem to an audience of devout Jews. But from the beginning,Peter announced that the promise was not only to them and their children but also "to all that are afar off" (Acts 2:39).

Paul said the gospel was "to the Jew first, and alsoto the Greek" (Rom. 1:16). At the house of Corneliusin Caesarea, Peter said "Of a truth I perceive thatGod is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him" (Acts 10:34-35). Later, in Jerusalem, Peter informed the Jewish brethren thatGod "put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith" (Acts 15:9). Paul closed the great Roman letter by showing that thegospel he preached accorded with the scriptures ofthe prophets and was "made known to all nations for the obedience of faith" (Rom. 16:25-26).

Success of the Early Church

The apostles and early Christians took seriouslythe Lord's command to preach the gospel to thewhole world. Within twenty-five years of the day ofPentecost, Paul wrote from Corinth to the church at Rome and said, "Have they not heard? Yes verily,their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world" (Rom. 10:18). Within thirty years of the beginning Paul wrote the churchat Colosse of "the truth of the gospel; Which is comeunto you, as it is in all the world" (Col. 1:5-6). He further wrote of "the gospel which ye have heard,and which was preached to every creature which isunder heaven" (Col. 1:23). Those who did not gothemselves, had "fellowship in the gospel" with those who did go (Phil. 1:5). Those who assisted them on their way were thus "fellow helpers to the truth" (3 John 8).

They succeeded because they were convicted of thetruth. They believed that all men were under the condemnation of sin and that the gospel was the onlyremedy heaven provided to relieve that malady. Paul considered himself a "debtor" to preach the gospel toall men (Rom. 1:14). "The love of Christ" constrainedhim (2 Cor. 5:14). "Knowing the terror of the Lord" moved his weary feet over the roads of the empire to"persuade men" (2 Cor. 5:11). Neither hunger, thirst, cold, shipwreck, persecution, nor even martyrdomcould stop this work (2 Cor. 12:23-33).

The Gospel Is Still For All

Melodiously we sing "The blessed gospel is for all"while we sit on padded pews, in air conditioned edifices with beautiful carpets and elegant drapes. Outside, our fine automobiles, equipped with the latest gadgets, stereo rear speakers and CB antennas,await to transport us back to our fine houses to sumptious meals and an afternoon of leisure. Meanwhile back in the office under a clutter of bulletins on the corner of a desk is a letter from a gospel preacher whose conscience will not let him restuntil he goes to some barren field in this country oracross an ocean to preach that blessed gospel to menof another color and culture. He needs support for hiswork on a sustaining basis and travel expenses to gethim and his family to the field. Or perhaps he hasspent the last five years half way around the worldpreaching and needs to come home long enough tovisit his aging parents (or his wife's) and to refresh himself by visiting among brethren to report to thempersonally on his work. If he is lucky, his letter mayget shuffled around with a few others in a meetingwith the elders, or in a business meeting of all the brethren. In some cases the brethren would dig down in their pockets and help, if they knew of the need.Elders ought to think about that before tossing theletter into the trash can without even the courtesy ofa reply.

We sing "Far and near the fields are teeming" andthen hurry past a table where there is an increasingstack of reports from brethren in Mexico, South Africa or the Philippines, and never bother to evenread what they have to say. Announce a class on "World Evangelism" or a series of sermons on thattopic, and see how much interest is evoked!

Did You Know?

Did you know that only 7% of the world's population lives in the USA? Did you know that about 90% of the full-time gospel preachers are preaching in this land where only 7% of the worldlives? Did you know that congregations in the wealthiest nation in the world are supporting lessthan two dozen American preachers around the worldat this time, outside the borders of this country. Ofcourse, there are native preachers in a number ofother countries, some of whom are supported by brethren here. We should not be so unfair, nor conceited, as to think that unless an American is supported in another nation, that the work cannot beadequately done by native men in the field. Further,these native men are just as obligated as we are hereto not only take the gospel to their countries, but tolift their eyes beyond their own borders. Why cannotthe hundreds of native men in Nigeria and the Philippines, for example, spread out to nearbynations with the gospel? Yet, with all that, how canAmerican brethren salve their consciences for the shameful failure to train and send men to the outposts of the world with the gospel which we say isfor all?

Why This Failure? Preachers must accept a large part of the blame. Gentlemen, how many sermons have you ever preached on the subject? Have you ever conducted aclass to discuss the scriptural demand for this work,the desperate human need for it, and to assess whatis being done about it? Have you ever seriouslyconsidered scrapping all your excuses and devoting at least a part of your life to the work of preaching insome other nation, or in one of the great needy fieldsof our own land? Elders must shoulder some of the blame. Many have not bothered to acquaint themselves with the needs, problems and challenges of such work. Manyhave not seen to it that the flock is fed that part ofthe word. Sometimes, elders will stand between a worthy man who needs help for such an undertaking,and the congregation which is judged unwilling orunable to help, without letting them know.Parents are to blame for lacking the dedication toencourage their sons and daughters to take an interest in world-wide evangelism. The parents of somepreachers (and their wives) have hindered this workout of pure selfishness. You see, they do not want tobe separated from their children, and surely not fromtheir grandchildren! Over the years parents have seentheir sons go off to war in foreign lands. How much better it would be to give them up for awhile in orderto preach the gospel of peace.Christians are to blame for thinking of their own pleasure and comfort and closing their eyes to reality.The Christians of America spend enough money every year for sporting goods, soft drinks and chewing gum to support any number of native preachers in such countries as Mexico, Nigeria, India or the Philippines.My brethren, whatever the causes of this failure,they must be overcome. We must work while it is day. How shall we explain our failure in the judgment?

Open and Closed Doors

The church at Philadelphia had an "open door" setbefore it and God expected it to use its "little strength" to enter. Around the world there are now open doors for the gospel. Some doors which wereopen a few years ago are now closed. It is mandatorythat the people of God lift our eyes to white harvestfields the world over, stir our hearts with the greatneed we see, extend our hands of help, and hastenthe feet of those who are willing to enter these opendoors. If we cannot personally go, let us provide everything needed for those who can. The spirit ofevangelism is the very life of the churches. Withoutit, they will wither and die. This spirit is a unifyingforce to capture the attention and direct the energiesof those who might otherwise spend time and talentbiting and devouring one another. Think about this the next time you sing "The blessed gospel is for all. . . . Where sin has gone must go his grace, The gospel is for all."

WHY DID JOSEPH NOT PUT MARY AWAY?

QUESTION: I offer the following question for yourconsideration: By what authority would Joseph putaway Mary in Matt. 1:19? I realize he did not put heraway, but the indication is that he had the authorityand would have done so had not the angel intervened.—G.E.

ANSWER: The above question is pertinent to theissue discussed in this column, January '77 issue. The issue referred to was whether or not "fornication" of Matt. 19:9 is the "uncleanness" of Deut. 24:1. Our conclusion denied that the two are the same. The primary reason was that the lawdemanded the death penalty for those guilty of "fornication," hence, no writing of divorcement on thisground. The law was not optionally punitive in thismatter—not after conclusive, legal evidence had beenestablished. In an effort to avoid this conclusion,some cite cases of fornication that went unpunishedby death under the law (See examples in the formerarticle).

The above question brings into view another suchexample. This question does not necessarily identifythe position of our querist. Hopefully, his question isaltogether objective. It does merit due consideration, hence, I shall try to answer objectively.

While Joseph and Mary were only betrothed at thetime he "was minded to put her away," the betrothal thenwas as binding as marriage. The words of Matt. 1:19,20, "her husband" and "thy wife," indicate as much (Also Cf. Deut. 22:23, 24).

Concerning the authority "to put her away," I believe that Deut. 24:1 suffices to establish such. Concerning the ground upon which Joseph "was mindedto put her away privily," perhaps no man can speak withcertainty. This very fact suffices to show that thisexample cannot be used as proof that divorce underthe law of Moses was obtained upon the ground of"fornication" instead of the execution of the death penalty.

What alternatives did Joseph have? Look at his situation carefully. Prima facie evidence was presentthat Mary was with child. Yet, in this instance, it did not prove conclusively that she was guilty of fornication. This was Joseph's problem. No doubt, Mary offered to Joseph the true explanation. But who could believe it? Joseph was in a dilemma —to believe or not to believe her. If the latter, justice or righteousness would demand that he not consummate

the marriage—hence, put her away. His desire to believe his espoused must have been very strong, yet,to do so was next to impossible, until the angel appeared to him. In the meanwhile, he "being a justman, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily."

Justice sometimes demands mercy beyond thesatisfaction of legal requirements (Matt. 23:23). Outof respect for his beloved, with a terrible conflict ofmind, and with a desire to be just, he decides to hand her a bill of divorcement privately. "It was a relief that he could legally divorce her either publicly orprivately, whether from change of feeling, or becausehe had found just cause for it, but hesitated to makeit known, either from regard for his own character, orbecause he had not sufficient legal evidence. For example; if he had not sufficient witness, or if theirtestimony could be invalidated by any of those provisions in favour of the accused, of which traditionalism had not a few. Thus, as indicated inthe text, Joseph might have privately divorced Maryleaving it open to doubt on what ground he had soacted" (Edersheim, THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JESUS, Vol. 1, p. 154). That it was traditional among the Jews to give a bill of divorcement privately, in the presence of two or three witnesseswithout assigning any cause is corroborated by numerous scholars, e.g., Adam Clark, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, R C H Lenski, et al. Thus, Josephcould have acted harshly and demanded the death penalty upon grounds of fornication (Deut. 22:13-30),had he been able to meet all legal requirements, or hecould have chosen the way of mercy, which justice inthis instance seemed to demand. Our text indicates that he had chosen the latter when the angel appeared to him.

There is no evidence that Joseph intended to divorceher on the ground of fornication. The evidence points tothe other alternative —the way of mercy—thus, waving the cause of fornication. Since the offense was againsthim, this was his prerogative.

"IF YOU HAVEN'T TRIED IT, DON'T KNOCK IT!"

Among the asinine advice being spouted aboutthese days, we often hear the phrase that headlinesthis article. But a judge in Boston has chosen to heedsuch wisdom.

According to the Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer,Nov. 3, 1976, District Court Judge Elwood McKenney has decided to sample cocaine beforeruling on the state law that forbids it. He claims hisaction is like visiting the scene of a crime.

The Associated Press release gives the judge creditfor a reputation "for being very tough on drug cases, but also intellectually serious."

We don't question the honesty or the seriousness of His Honor in this matter. But in all seriousness, wewonder about his intellectual judgment. There's no parallel, that we can determine, between his intentions, and "visiting the scene of a crime." A parallel would more likely lie with the act of commiting a crime to see what it is like.

Does one have to get drunk and speed down thehighway before he is qualified to render a judgmenton the practice? All I need to do is look at the wrecksalong the way! And that's also all I need to do so far as the use of cocaine, and other drugs, is concerned.

"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly . . ." (Psalm 1:1).

A Misspent Youth

Some months ago, I was nosing around the magazine section of a public library. An article byfree-lance writer, Mara Wolynski caught my eye. Itwas entitled, "Confessions of a Misspent Youth." I copied the article, but the copier failed to pick up the name of the magazine.

For this reason, I almost threw it away. Buthaving reread it, I am impressed anew by it. It is aprime example of the total bankruptcy of permissivephilosophy in the training of children. So I'm going to use the article of unsure source for that reason. It is dated August 30, 1976, and I am reasonablycertain it appeared in either Time or Newsweek.

When Mara Wolynski was 4, her mother enrolledher in a school she calls "Sand and Sea." This school promoted the philosophy of "freedom" in education. There was no pressure to learn. Creativity was theone thing emphasized above all others. Great stress was placed upon the arts. If a child did not likemath, he was excused to write short stories, or meditate if he desired.

History was "learned" by re-creating its least important elements. They studied American historyby pounding corn, building teepees, eating buffalomeat, and learning a couple of Indian words. Theystudied Greek history by decorating costumes andmaking clay pots. They studied Egyptian history bybuilding pyramids. Mara did a 30-foot-long mural forwhich she copied hieroglyphics onto a sheet of brownpaper. But no one ever explained what these stoodfor, or who the Greeks, pilgrims, Huns, and ancientEgyptians were.

They did not learn to read until the third grade.(Reading discourages creative spontaneity.) As a result, the children from Sand and Sea faced highschool with all the glorious prospects of the poorestslum-school kids. One friend of the writer killed himself after flunking out of the worst high school inNew York at 20. Various others have entered mental institutions where they are free, once again, to create during occupational therapy.

Mara was given psychological tests in high schoolto find out why she was blocking out information."The thing was," she explains, "I wasn't blocking because I had no information to block." Her readingcomprehension was in the lowest eighth percentile.Armed with a will to achieve, she stumbled through high school and even college and is still amazed shehas a B.A.

She concludes the article with these sober words: "And now I've come to see that the real job ofschool is to entice the student into the web of knowledge and then, if he's not enticed, to draghim in. I wish I had been."

Meaningful reflections, those. Especially since theyare from a lady who has been there. Yet, we beholdtraditional education being changed in more and moreschools to accommodate permissive views. Solomon wrote: "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but achild left to himself bringeth his mother to shame"(Prov. 29:15).

It was also noted in the article that Sand and Sea has not turned out a single good artist. The arts, likeanything else, requires self-discipline, and a childdoesn't learn to discipline himself in an atmosphere ofpermissiveness!

General Welfare Corporation

According to the Nashville Tennesseen, Dec. 25,1976, "three Bellwood Church of Christ trustees havefiled suit in Rutherford County (Murfreesboro)Chancery Court seeking to declare the church's five elders, including minister George W. DeHoff, Sr., without authority to run the church."

In what must surely be one of the most confusedsituations I've heard of, the suit seeks that the defendants—(that's the elders, folks)—be "perpetually and permanently restrained and enjoined from interfering with the lawful conductof the responsibilities" of the trustees and from "calling, or attempting to call, meetings of themembers of said

general welfare corporation ..."

Yes, you read it right. This "church of Christ" waschartered as a "general welfare corporation" by the state of Tennessee in 1965. The institutional brethren have been claiming they believed this, but I've never before heard of a church becoming chartered as such!

Well, the plaintiffs allege that DeHoff resigned andthat the "corporations bylaws do not provide forthe other four 'elders' to lawfully hold any office inthe corporation."

Having written the above, I have sat with pen inhand trying desperately to think of an appropriateremark. I can think of nothing. I can only shake myhead. Eugene Britnell once observed that Paul andBro. Miller still marveled, but nothing surprised himanymore. I think I'm moving in that direction!

Have I forgotten? or was it so? Back when I was in

college (that is some time ago), it seemed to me

preachers had a greater interest in doing, what is

generally called, "mission work".

Then it was rather common for young preachers

("young preacher boys", as others called them) to

take a world map or atlas and "pick a country".

Sometimes two or three friends would plan together.

After picking the country they would begin to study

and plan for the time they would take the gospel to

that country. It was exciting—it was challenging.

A lot of study was made concerning the language,

customs, and standard of living in order to get ready

for this undertaking.

Oh, I wish there were MANY picking a country

today. Did you realize some countries were never

picked—and haven't been yet. Others were picked

but plans never materialized so no one ever actually

went. Still others were picked and later the work was

abandoned, so that now they desperately need

picking again! If you are interested get the atlas

down off the shelf and pick yourself a country. Then

go to the library and study up a bit on the culture,

and one day in the near future take the gospel there.

You'll be glad you did.

Are you having difficulty deciding on one? May I

offer some suggestions? Western Europe is wide

open, you might like one of these. Scandinavia has a

special place in my heart. What are the possibilities

in Yugoslavia or Romania? Maybe a journey to the

south sea, New Zealand or Indonesia. South America

is in the world too, had we forgotten?—there is

Brazil, Chile, Peru, etc.

It doesn't really matter which one—but PICK A

COUNTRY and do something about taking the

gospel there.

— Savannah, Tennessee

THE PROPHETS VIEW THE CHURCH

In the second year of the reign of king Nebuchadnezzar, he had a dream he could not remember. Not being able to recall the dream, theking sent for the magicians, the astrologers and thesorcerers to come to him for the purpose of making known his dream. The wise men could not and said,"tell thy servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation" (Dan. 2:4).

The king was not able to tell them the dream. However, he told them that if they did not tell him what he dreamed and also the interpretation, that hewould cut them in pieces and also their houses wouldbe made into dunghills. If they could tell him hepromised to reward them with gifts.

The wise men said, "There is not a man upon theearth that can shew the king's matter; therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things atany magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean" and "it isa rare thing that the king requireth, and there is noneother that can shew it before the king, except thegods, whose dwelling is not with flesh."

Upon making this statement, the king sent forth the decree that the wise men should be slain. Nebuchadnezzar was king of the mighty Babyloniankingdom. Babylon had taken captive the children ofthe Lord, among whom was Daniel and they had himin prison. When the decree went forth, Daniel and hisfellows were sought that they all might be killed.Daniel asked Arioch, who was captain of the king'sguard, why the decree was so hasty, upon which itwas explained unto him.

Daniel appeared before the king and requested timethat he might reveal the dream and the interpretation unto him. Daniel returned unto his companions, Shadrach, Meshech, and Abednego, and they requested, of the Lord, mercy. "Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a vision." Daniel blessed the God of heaven saying, "Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: Andhe changeth the times and the seasons: he removethkings, and setteth up kings; he giveth wisdom untothe wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding: He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and thelight dwelleth with him" (Dan. 2:20-22).

Daniel charged that the wise men should not be destroyed. He said they could not reveal the king's dream but "there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days" (Dan. 2:28).

Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar he dreamed of a "greatimage, whose brightness was excellent, stood beforethee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image'shead was of fine gold, his breast and his arms ofsilver, his belly and his thighs of brass. His legs ofiron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the goldbroken to pieces together, and became like the chaffof the summer thresingfloors; and the wind carriedthem away, that no place was found for them: andthe stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth" (Dan. 2:31-35). This was the first part of the king's request.

Daniel said, "Thou, O king, art king of kings, untowhom the God of heaven hath given the kingdom,the power, and the strength, and the glory; and wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts ofthe field and the birds of the heavens hath he giveninto thy hand, and hath made thee to rule over themall: thou are the head of gold. After thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee; and another thirdkingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all theearth. And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things and as iron that crusheth all these, shall it break in pieces and crush. And whereasthou sawest the feet and toes, a part of potter's clay,and part of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom; butthere shall be in it of the strength of the iron,forasmuch as thou sawest the iron, mixed with miryclay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron,and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partlystrong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawestthe iron mixed with miry clay, they shall minglethemselves with the seed of men; but they shall notcleave one to another, even as iron doth not minglewith clay. And in the days of those kings shall theGod of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never bedestroyed, nor shall the sovereignty thereof be left toanother people; but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, andthe gold; the great God hath made known to the kingwhat shall come to pass hereafter; and the dream iscertain, and the interpretation thereof sure" (Dan. 2:37-45). In these words, Daniel told the king the interpretation of his dream. I call attention to verse 45 where Daniel said, "... the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure." There can be no mistake about the interpretation of the king's dream.

In the fulfillment of this dream, one will see thatDaniel spoke of four great world empires. He identifies Nebuchadnezzar as being the head of gold,thus the first kingdom is specified for us. The greatBabylonian kingdom fell in about the year 536 B.C.

giving way to the Medo-Persian empire. This kingdom was headed by Cyrus, king of the Persiansand Darius, king of the Medes. About the year 330

B.C. this kingdom came to nought. The Greek or Macedonian kingdom with Alexander the Great ashead came into world leadership only to fall in about323 B.C.

Daniel said there would be four kingdoms and threeof them have already fallen. This leaves but one to beestablished by Rome. Daniel said the God of heaven would set up a kingdom in the days of these kings orin the days of the fourth world kingdom.

In Luke 3:1 we learn in the "fifteenth year of thereign of Tiberius Caesar" that John the baptist came "preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (Luke 3:3). Profane history tells usTiberius ruled from the year 14 B.C. till 37 A.D. During the rule of the Roman Caesars the kingdom was "at hand." The time is right for the God ofheaven to set up his kingdom, since it was to be established during the days of the kings of the Roman empire.

It was the God of heaven that was to set up hiskingdom during this fourth world kingdom. God would set up his spiritual kingdom during the periodof the carnal, political kingdom of Rome. Anykingdom which is spiritual in nature that did notbegin in the days of the Roman kings is not the kingdom over which Jesus Christ is king and the God of heaven set up.

From Matt. 16:19, one can learn that the kingdomof the Lord and the church of the Lord are both one and the same relationship. This being true, the religious institutions of earth today are ruled out asbeing the one that the God of heaven set up, becausethe institutions of earth are admitted to be youngerthan the Roman empire.

It makes a great difference as to the time that achurch had its beginning. David said in Psalms127:1, "Except the Lord build the house, they laborin vain that build it." Christ promised to build hischurch (Mt. 16:18). Christ is head over all things tothe church which is his body (Eph. 1:22-23). It wasfor the Lord's church that he shed his blood (Acts20:28).

Churches have had their beginning in 606, 1517,1535, 1560, 1607, 1729, 1830, in the last part of thenineteenth century and in the first part of this century, but all of these have had their beginning since the time the Lord's church was to be set up inthe days of the Roman kings.

Jesus Christ is the saviour of the body (Eph. 5:23).The body of Christ is the church (Eph. 1:22-23). If you want Christ to save you, you must be in therelationship over which he is head, and which he haspromised to save.

The second chapter of the book of Daniel tells usthe time the Lord was to establish his church. Anychurch not started at the time that Daniel 2 says cannot possibly be the Lord's church. This is the chapterin prophecy that tells when the Lord's church was tobegin. Other chapters tell where the body of Christwas to begin and others tell how it was to begin.

THE HEBRAISTS AND THE PURISTS

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,linguistics scholars were sharply divided in referenceto the mold or pattern into which the Greek of theNew Testament was to be cast. The Hebraists arguedthat the Greek New Testament should be understood in the light of Hebrew syntax. The Purists just asstrongly contended that the classical Greek should serve as the pattern. In its own peculiar way, therefore, each group took the Greek of the New Testament out of its contemporary setting.

Contemporary Usage

Perhaps Adolf Deismann has done more than anyother man to establish the fact that the Greek of the New Testament is neither strictly Hebraic nor strictlyclassical, but, rather, that it is the Greek of the period, the Greek of the common man. See Deissmann's Bible Studies, and Light From the Ancient East. See also volume 7 of The Interpreter's Bible. (I do not wish these references to be construedas a general endorsement of these works.)

Non-literary Koine words of the period may be citedin the New Testament. The word helikia, "stature,"that is found in Matt. 6:27 occurs in contemporaryliterature in the sense of "measure of life." In I Pet.

2:2 the adjective adolos, translated "sincere," occurs in Koine writings in the sense of "unadulterated."The verb "have" in the expression "They have theirreward," Matt. 6:2, 5, 16, is translated from the verbapecho, which occurs often in secular literature with the meaning "paid in full." The term "substance" in Heb. 11:1 occurs in business documents and means "title deed for property." In Eph. 1:14 the term "earnest" is found. In the papyri this word has thesense "part payment in advance." The Greek parousia, "appearing, coming," is used in the papyri to mean "the arriving of a king in a province." For further study see Moulton and Milligan's Vocabulary of the Greek Testament.

Peculiar Meanings in the New Testament

In this section I do not wish to appear paradoxical.I have stated my conviction that the Greek of theNew Testament is not a "Holy Ghost" language.Yet, there are Greek uses in the New Testamentwhich are not seen in secular literature. For example,the phrase "in Christ," en christo, sometimes called a "mystical dative," is peculiar to the New Testament.The phrase "believing on," pisteuon eis . . . ," is used to mean more than just having information.

Other words used with a deeper significance in the Greek New Testament are charis, "grace," eirene, "peace," pistis, "faith," etc.

America's way of life is guided by the notion thatactivity guarantees results. There is thought to be nosubstitute for action; if a goal is stubbornly resistant it can be forced to yield by "trying harder." The rallying cry of this cult of activity is "Don't just stand there, do something!" In business enterprise,as in government and education, the value of hardwork as a means of achievement has been replaced bythe idea that "doing something" is a virtue in itself.The present bureaucratic tangle which plagues us everywhere has been woven by committees within committees who worship their plans, programs, andprojects for their own sake, with near disregard forthe purpose behind all that activity. There is now little doubt that any question can be answered, anyproblem can be solved by more and better action.Just look! The most sophisticated example to date ofAmerican planning and effort put a man on themoon. We, however, are not certain why we did it, oreven if we had a reason at all.

This elevation to a virtue of mere "doing" carries over into our religion when we assume God is mostpleased with those who are most busy. That idea hasslipped into our thinking from some source other thanScripture. It is not that God is indifferent to the matter of human obedience to His will. He demands obedience and has promised to punish disobedience.There is no possibility of being God's servant withoutactually serving Him. Paul clearly asks, "Don't youknow that when you offer yourselves to someone toobey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whomyou obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?" (Rom. 6:16). Obedience will alwaysshow up in outward action; it cannot do otherwise.But outward action, for it's own sake, is not obedience.

With the knowledge that God expects active service to His will and the idea we have picked upfrom our society that "doing" has an inherent value all its own, we are alarmed at the thought of a Christian "not doing anything." We cannot think ofa real Christian not being "busy" in the Lord's work.From Satan's viewpoint, failing to prevent peoplefrom becoming Christians, he would delight inkeeping them inactive. I have a suspicion, though,that when inactive Christians wake up from their spiritual sleepiness and "get busy," Satan's next best tactic is to so concentrate their minds on what theyare busily doing that they forget why.

We naturally recoil in horror from the idea of Christians neglecting the work of the Kingdom whilethey take their sweet rest. Such a scene has the smellof spiritual death. Any serious Christian knows that,where they have burned low, the fires of zeal need tobe rekindled and sleeping souls ought to be roused to action. But not action for the sake of action alone. In fact, all the personal work programs, all the specialtraining classes, all the visitation projects, and all theother innovative ideas which we add to the whirlwind of activity we think will remedy the situation, mayobscure the fact that spirituality is what we are after.The Kingdom is not eating and drinking. Neither is itplans, programs, and projects, even though all thesehave their right place in the Kingdom. The blindingblur of activity in some churches is often mistakenfor true spirituality, as if smoke were a sure indicatorof fire. It is not always so.

The stark truth of the New Testament is that a church can be a beehive of well-intended activity andnot be anywhere near what the Lord wants. Christ warned the Ephesian church: "I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name,and have not grown weary. Yet I hold this againstyou: You have forsaken your first love" (Rev. 2:2-4).This church was on the verge of hell because theyhad forgotten why they were busy. They loved whatthey were doing too much to love the Lord.

There is little question that a breeze of spiritualrefreshment is blowing through many congregations.The desire to "do" is being fanned into flame. It is all very exciting to many of us. But already we havea few zealots who believe that doing is its own end.In cities where they are several churches, Christiansare wooed away from congregations where they are sorely needed with the promise of "being where the action is." Competition has set in some quarters among churches trying to outdo one another in coming up with the newest and best teaching "idea" or in devising the most interesting "program of work." All of this requires considerable organizationaltechnique and promotional expertise. Our gospel hasbegun to sound like: "Study business management 'and industrial psychology, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near!" Congregations are looking down their spiritual noses at others for not "doing" as much as they are. Doctrinal differences are waved aside with the taunt, "Well, at least we are 'doing' something," as if that said anything at all about their spirituality. The Ephesians were "doing" things too.

Christianity is not a corporation and was not meant to be run like a bureaucracy. It does not existfor the sake of its plans and activities, however sound and profitable (and even enjoyable) they may be. I wonder if, when we have set up more committeesthan Congress and initiated more projects than General Motors, we may not have planned,programmed, and projected the Holy Spirit right outof our affairs. I can hear many saying to the Lord onthat day, "Lord, Lord did we not do personal work in your name, and in your name teach many special classes?" It is an easy temptation to be so busy doing the Lord's work that we forget about the Lord.

— Gulfport, Mississippi

The apostle Paul declared, "there is one baptism" (Eph. 4:5). All who regard the word of God agreethat there is ONE baptism. However some questionshave arisen concerning this one baptism. What is thisone baptism for? What will this one baptism do?Where will this one baptism put one? What will bethe result of submitting to this one baptism? All ofthese questions can be answered very simply byturning to the word of God. I shall not quote theverses but will merely mention them. The reader is urged to turn and examine them.

1. Baptism is to save (Mark 16:16; 1 Pet. 3:21).
2. Baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).
3. Baptism is to wash away sins (Acts 22:16).
4. Baptism puts one into Christ (Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27).

1. Baptism puts one into the death of Christ (Rom. 6:3).
2. Baptism puts one into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13).

7. Baptism is part of the new birth which puts one into the kingdom (Jn. 3(5).

It will be readily seen that these seven things arenot seven DIFFERENT things. Rather, they are allone and the same. In other words, you can't be saved without having your sins remitted. You can't have your sins remitted without having your sins washed away. You can't have your sins washed away without getting into Christ. You can't get into Christ without getting into his death. You can't get into his death without getting into his body. And you can't get into his body without being born again. Thus, if you haveONE of these seven things, you have ALL SEVENof them!

We should like to point out that many of theseseven things were taught to the people AFTER theyhad been baptized. The Galatians were baptized thatthey might be saved, of course. But they were LATER told that they were baptized into Christ. TheRomans were baptized to be saved, but LATER weretold that they had been baptized into Christ. The Corinthians were told that they were baptized intothe body AFTER they had been baptized. I am saying this to call attention to the fact that one would not have to be familiar with ALL SEVEN of these expressions in order to be scripturally baptized.

If one sincerely believes that he must be baptizedto be saved or in order to obtain the remission of his sins (and thus submits to baptism) he would not necessarily have to be told that this baptism put him into Christ, into the death of Christ, into the body ofChrist, and into the kingdom of Christ. When one believes and is baptized he is saved regardless of whether or not he realizes that this constitutes the new birth. In fact one could be saved and go toheaven without ever hearing the expression, the newbirth. The apostle Peter said something about being born again but he was talking to people who werealready saved. There is no case on record where anybody ever told anybody, on Pentecost or thereafter, that they had to be born again. They weresimply told to be baptized for the remission of sins. Iam saying all of this to suggest that there are somethings we may learn AFTER we become Christians.

To say that a child of the devil must be taught thetruth relative to the Lord's Supper, the contribution, the singing, and other things that belong to the Christian before he can be scripturally baptized, is tofall into the denominational error that scrambles what comes before baptism with what comes after baptism.In the great commission Jesus said teach, baptize,and teach. It is clear that Jesus wanted some teaching done AFTER the baptizing. You may beCORRECTLY taught on how to become a child ofGod and then never live a single day of your lifeacceptable to God. The way you LIVE, the way youWORK, and the way you WORSHIP has nothing whatever to do with your becoming a child of God.Your life, your work, and your worship comes in theteaching you are to receive AFTER you become achild of God.

There is no doubt in my mind that people baptizedby institutional brethren are baptized scripturally.But there is no doubt in my mind that they havebeen taught wrong relative to some work of the church. Says one, "Do you believe one may be taughtwrong relative to some work of the church." Says one,"Do you believe one may be taught wrong and baptized right?" He must be taught right

on the subject of baptism but he may completelyMISUNDERSTAND some phases of church work and worship and still be scripturally baptized. In other words, if one is baptized by a "Christian Church preacher" and thoroughly understands thathis baptism is for the remission of sins and thus puts him into Christ, and later learns that the singing should not be accompanied by an instrument and that the society system in wrong itwould not invalidate his baptism.

Denominational baptism is any baptism, whether sprinkling, pouring, or immersion, which is administered by and upon the authority of a denomination. Mormon baptism is denominational baptism because it is administered by the authorityof the Mormon Church. Catholic baptism is denominational baptism because it is administered bythe authority of the Catholic Church. ANY baptism done by the authority of a denomination is denominational baptism. Denominational baptism is unscriptural and can have nothing to do with salivation. Care must be taken as we distinguishbetween what a denominational preacher does and what he could do. He does unscripturally baptize people. He could scripturally baptize people. If he baptizes anybody by the authority of the denomination, the baptism is UNSCRIPTURAL. If he baptizes anybody into any body other than thebody of Christ the baptism is UNSCRIPTURAL. If he baptizes anybody by the authority of Christ forthe remission of his sins, the baptism is SCRIPTURAL. Just to SAY that one is baptizing forthe remission of sins, as the Mormons do, does not make it so. They also SAY they are baptizing bythe authority of Christ, but that isn't so either. Christ has not authorized Mormons to do anythingbut repent and be baptized for the remission of THEIR sins. Let's not be confused. Let's determine if one has been baptized by the authority of Christ forthe remission of sins. If he has, let's not "work on it" and decide that we need to re-baptize him.

"HONEY"

The Hebrew word for honey is debish and there are68 references to bees, honey and honeycomb in theBible. The most frequent and familiar phrase is "a land flowing with milk and honey". Beginning inExodus 3:8, this phrase occurs twenty times in sevenOld Testament books.

The abundance of honey in Palestine is attested bythe numerous passages in which it is used (Deut.33:13; Judges 14:8; 1 Sam. 14:25, et al). Honey wasused instead of sugar in ancient times (Ex. 16:31). Itwas given with milk to infants and children (Isa.7:15). Honey was eaten alone (Judges 14:9) and withother foods (1 Sam. 14:27-ff.). It was also used as a figure of speech for gracious and pleasant things suchas the word of God (Psalm 19:10). It also meant the sweetness of grapes (Gen. 43:11). The hump of acamel is mentioned as like a bee-hive (Isa. 30:6).

John the Baptist ate honey (Mk. 1:6: Matt. 3:4) asa means of nourishment in the wilderness. Man can exist without weight loss or gain on a diet of milkand honey (cf. "Milk and Honey Diet" ABC & XYZ of Bee Culture pp. 420-422).

Let us stand for the truth. It has surprised me as ayoung man how hypocritical some people are. Peopleclaiming to be Christians (those who are supposed tobe in the church) are out drinking, dancing, dressingimmodestly, and acting like the world. I am ashamedof them! I realize that we all fall into temptation, butI am speaking of those who do not try to overcomeit.

Not only are some members of the congregationshypocritical in the way they live, but there are a fewof the "ministers" of the Gospel that are hypocriticalon how they stand. They will teach against orphanhomes, institutionalism, and the sponsoring church inthe "conservative" congregations and will teach for itin the "liberal" congregations. What are they afraidof? Men or God?

There are a few of the congregations in the OhioValley area that were once "conservative" that have fallen after the teaching of men instead of God's. A few of these congregations have returned to the truth, for they have realized that they must stand forthe truth. What about the others?

How many preachers teach against gambling?Dancing? Smoking? Movies? Such topics were taughton but are seldom heard today! Why? Other topicssuch as adultery, fornication, divorce, the woman's responsibilities in the home, the husband's responsibilities to the family, and against the sponsoring church should be taught on today. What happened? Refusal to stand for the truth!

We are teaching the world at all times, either byword or by actions. Paul told Timothy to be anexample in word, in conversation (life), in charity(love), in spirit, in faith, and in purity (I Tim. 4:12).

Standing for the truth is not an easy task. We willbe made fun of by our friends or we will even be putto death for what we believe. Nathan told the king hewas an adulterer (2 Sam. 12). John told Herod hewas wrong for marrying his brother's wife. John was put to death (Mk. 6:18).

I believe strongly that we should not and can not

hold back on the truth about anything. We must be

plain. Identify the people for what they are (Acts

7:52; 23:20). We must call their names (I Tim. 1:19,

20; 2 Tim. 4:10), we must identify religious groups

and their false doctrines (Mt. 23).

We must be simple in the truth. People must be

able to understand it. We can not double-talk or be

hypocritical. Truth is based on "the faith" and not

philosophies.

We must be forceful. We have to move people. We

must be earnest, sincere in what we believe. We must

LIVE IT!

I We must be truthful. In John 8:32 "the truth shall

make you free." We must be concerned for the lost.

If the truth is taught and it disturbs the

congregation, that congregation is SICK and is

DYING! We are not causing trouble. We can not hold back the truth (Ezek. 3:17). Why is it peoplethink others are troublemakers for standing up forthe truth? It must be taught. Whether it is an elder,the preacher, or another member, he must be rebuked.

We can not waste our time on simple, unlearned,and foolish questions. It is useless. (I Tim. 1:4; 6:5,20; 2 Tim. 2:23; Tit. 1:14; 3:9-1 Cor. 14:23; Eph 4:25).

Questions now to ask are: "Am I going t6 standfor the truth and go to heaven?" or "Am I going toHell for not standing up for the truth?"

Whether I am a preacher, an elder, or just a member, I MUST STAND or I will fall! Heaven orHell, which is it? _ Powhatan Point, Ohio

The above question is raised with great forethoughtand care, realizing that many are "experts" regarding the type, manner and method of preaching that is most needed. Nevertheless, we feel obligated topresent what the New Testament (what else) teachesregarding preaching.

We need preaching that is based on "the faith"(Gal. 1:10). Although it is popular to philosophizeand speak about "ideals," the apostles spoke God's truth and not their own whims and fancies. We need preachers who will appeal to the word of God andbase their conclusions on scripture.

We need preaching that is bold and aggressive.Peter prayed that God would grant them the courageto speak "with all boldness" (Acts 4:29). Paul and Barnabas found it necessary to speak boldly to the Jews in Antioch of Pisidia (Acts 13:46). Today preachers need to boldly and aggressively declare God's word to men.

We need preaching that is unmistakably clear andintelligible. When Paul preached he "reasoned" and "proved" his points (Acts 17:2; 18:4). Generalizingand speaking in sixteen syllable words was unheardin Bible times. Some folks won't like it, but preachersneed to be clearly understood in this modern era also.

We need preaching that is controversial, meetingerror face; to face. In the early days, there was agreat deal of disputing and debating (Acts 6:9; 9:28;17:17). Some today would not have liked New Testament preaching a little bit! The modern cry is:"Don't call names; don't condemn; just preach constructive lessons." The problem is that many areweaklings who are afraid to defend the truth and areworried about the loss of friendship and popularity.

We need preaching that is motivated by love forthe truth and for the lost souls of men and women (2Thess. 2:10-11). If we really are concerned about thelost, we .Will cease to "soft-peddle" the gospel, butwill truly tell it like it is."

The world needs preaching and the church needs preaching, but not the kind some want. Yet, if all preachers would follow the apostolic examples, theneveryone would get the kind of preaching that is sorelyneeded.

— Palmetto, Florida

I, for one, am weary of the current game of altering Mrs. and Miss to Ms., chairman to chairperson, spokesman to spokesperson, ad nauseam. Those who go to such extremes show a total ignorance and/or lack of reverence for the word of God.

"And God said, Let us make man in our image,after our likeness: ..." "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;male and female created he them" (Gen. 1:26, 27).Commenting on these passages, Adam Clark in Vol.1, Pg. 38, writes: "The word Adam, which we translate man, is intended to designate the species of animal, as chaitho, marks the wild beasts that live in general a solitary life; behemah, domestic or gregarious animals; and remes, all kinds of reptiles,from the largest snake to the microscopic eel."

The corresponding Greek word is anthropos, which means "A man, a human being," and is so translated in Mt. 4:4; Rom. 5:18 and many other passages toonumerous to mention.

An omniscient God created mankind — in the imageand likeness of Himself; the intellect, the mind, the soul, the spiritual being. ". . . In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; Male and female created he them; and blessed them,and called THEIR name Adam, (a man, a human being), in the day when they were created" (Gen. 5:1, 2).

'Chairman' simply designates the human being, the person who is presiding; 'spokesman' is the designation for the human being, the person, who isspeaking. Such terminology as chairperson can be carried to the point of being ridiculous; e.g., personhole/manhole; minuteperson/minuteman; person-made lake/man-made lake, etc.

God created mankind, male and female, equal invalue, but not necessarily in function. God set up theground rules, the guidelines for marriage and for thefamily. He, in His wisdom, knew under which conditions mankind could thrive, and survive. Man (the male) was to be the head of the house and be theprovider (Gen. 3:16, 19; 1 Tim. 5:8). The she-man (female) was to bear children, obey her husband,guide the house, and live an exemplary life (Gen.3:16; 1 Tim. 5:14). Of course this is an oversimplification in order to show that the Lord appointed different roles for the male and the female.Under these circumstances there was no confusion as to what was expected of whom, and the family unitwas kept intact and secure.

Modern theology and Women's Lib have concluded that equality is in function, not in value.In order to be truly equal they must do the samethings as men (males), act like men, and be treatedas men. In so doing, they are leaving the order thatGod established, confusing the roles that God assigned, and are destroying the family unit as God so decreed.

I don't want to be treated like a man. I like beinga woman—being loved and protected and entrustedwith the raising of a family. No greater praise isgiven than that given a faithful wife and mother inProverbs 31.

I am thankful I can serve my God as a she-man(female). I, too, have been given the responsibility toteach others the gospel of Christ (11 Tim. 2:2 — men —"a man, a human being," Young's Analytical Concordance, Pgs. 640, 642), within the limitations imposed by the word of God (1 Tim. 2:12). I am achild of God; as long as I serve Him and love Himwith all my heart and soul and mind, I am equal invalue with anyone, male or female, and have no needfor equality in function or role. There is total equalityin value in the body of Christ: "There is neither Jewnor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in ChristJesus" (Gal. 3:28).

10024 Enger Lane Bakersfield, CA 93308

HOGLAND — DEAVER DEBATE IN PENSACOLA

In the summer of 1976 the Bellview congregation in Pensacolaindicated an interest in a public debate on the cooperationQuestion. They selected Roy Deaver, Director of the Brown Trail School of Preaching, Fort Worth. Texas, as their representative.The Myrtle Grove congregation selected Ward Hogland of theWalnut Street church, Greenville, Texas, to represent them in the discussion. Both men are experienced in the field of polemics and well qualified to discuss the proposition. Brother Hogland will affirm "The scriptures teach that congregation 'A' may not (doesnot have the right to) contribute to (send money to) congregation'B' for the purpose of the preaching the gospel of Christ."Brother Deaver will affirm the reverse of this proposition. Datesfor the debate will be July 18-21, 1977. The discussion will beconducted in Pensacola though the exact place is not yet determined.

NEWS FROM INDIA

RAY F. DIVELY, 425 Dippold Ave., Baden, PA 15006 — OnDecember 24, 1976, John Humphries and I left for a month ofpreaching the gospel in INDIA. This was my fourth trip to India and brother Humphries' first. We started a new work in the state of Andhra Pradesh. As a result of our efforts, 185 souls were baptized into Christ and 10 churches were established. One churchwas established in Hyderabad and nine churches in the villages.Our time was spent in edifying brethren and teaching the lost.The brethren in India are young in the faith and inexperienced.They need edification. Long term visas are not available for brethren from this country. Therefore, shorter trips must continue. Faithful brethren need to go. More training classes are needed for the brethren.

There is much work to do in India. We haven't even touched the hem of the garment in this nation of over six hundred million people, which increases at the rate of thirteen million per year.These people are in deep poverty but are responsive to the gospel.We received more invitations to preach in the villages than we could accept. In two villages they told us they had been waiting for quite some years for someone to come and teach them ofChrist. India is indeed, "A field white unto harvest." On Lord's day we visited and preached for as many churches as we could,speaking to as many as five on a Lord's day. This kept usmoving. The brethren are not just waiting for Americans to comebut are working on their own. They are going to other villages and teaching the lost. Also, they are establishing churches. Wehave wonderful brethren in India.

In helping the brethren to do the Lord's work, we purchasedfour bicycles for the four leading preachers in India. Also, wepurchased a lantern for each of the ten new churches, as theymeet in the evening. The Lord's day is a work day in India. Wegave Bibles to all members who could read. We purchased song books for the congregations. Our work in India would have beenimpossible without the help of God, the Indian brethren and thebrethren here who supported us. We are thankful for our faithfultranslator, brother Devadanam and three Indian preachers,Samson, Rathman and Lazar. These brethren are outstanding and dedicated men of God. I will always be grateful for thefellowship the brethren have given me in preaching the gospel inIndia. (Editor's note: We understand that Peter McPherson of Jordan, Ontario will spend a few weeks preaching in India thisyear. We look forward to hearing the results of his labors there.)

JAMES P. MILLER, 1111 Hickory Lane, Cocoa, FL — Six havebeen baptized at Merritt Island in the last few weeks. Familieshave been reunited and the work is on the upgrade. This in spiteof the continued loss of interest in the space effort. The Cape islocated on Merritt Island. Through the generosity of brethren atPar Street in Orlando and brethren all over America, I have been

Page 15

able to pay all hospital bills and am looking forward to a fullschedule of meetings in 1977. The first was at North Miami, then Palmetto, Florida in March. April 24-29 will find me in Lubbock, Texas where Grover Stevens preaches. After the first of July my address willbe 2523 West Diana in Tampa. Through the generosity of Seminole we are moving back into our old house.DON GIVENS, P. O. Box 192, Haney, B.C., Canada - January hasbeen a busy month for us, especially with the Bible classes at NorthBend. We were with the brethren there for two weeks during whichwe had daily Bible studies from 9 till noon each morning and then from 6 to 9 every night. I taught a total of 20 different class sessions,and sat in on twice that many. Herb Forman and Earl Severson alsotaught classes. Bill Spaun has also gone for classes after we werethere. For the morning classes we averaged 45 to 55 with 65-75 for theevening studies. There were over 120 present the Sunday morning Ispoke at North Bend. This is amazing considering the fact that the littletown of North Bend has only about 500 people. Of course, we had some visitors from other towns. There are lots of young married couples there with small children.

In Haney we are still renting the Arts Centre. Attendance in Januaryaveraged 24 for the morning service. We still have to have one children's Bible class out in the hallway for lack of space. One member lives in Abbotsford, B.C. (about 30 miles southeast of Haney) and a work needs to be started there. This would be a goodplace for a man to move and start from "scratch." But where is he?Please continue to pray for us.

GOSPEL PREACHER DIES CARL B. McCULLOUGH, veteran gospel preacher, died of a heart attack on February 11, while in the home of his daughter inHenderson, Texas. He was born in Powell, Texas in 1915. He preached12 years in South Africa and North Ireland and worked with churchesin Texas and South Carolina. He was working with the church atEasley, South Carolina at the time of his death. James E. Wilson ofPalestine, Texas and Jesse Jenkins of Denton, Texas spokewords of comfort. He is survived by his wife, Ruth, two daughtersand six grandchildren. Our sympathy is expressed to the family.

A BIG JOB IN A SMALL AREA

Our friend, Thomas Hughes, who worships at Expressway inLouisville where the editor and his family are members, publishes aninteresting and stimulating report called ONE TEACHER'S VIEWPOINT. In his January issue he reprinted a letter received by the Expressway congregation from Bob Nichols now returned toJapan. We lift the following to help our readers grasp somethingof the magnitude of the task facing men like Bob Nichols working in other lands.

"To compare Japan with the US we get a bit better in the area ofunderstanding what the problem is that preachers in foreign fields arefacing. Let's start at the top. They have a population of some108,000,000 SOULS confined within a space of some 143,689 squaremiles or 752 plus people per square mile. Here in our land we have212,000,000 plus souls on 3,615,122 square miles or at the rate of

58.5 persons per square mile.

"Their nine cities in excess of 1 million total 21,971,000 plus! Wehave six cities in excess of a million and they total 18,771,000. So toNew York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Houstonwe would have to add Baltimore, Dallas, Washington to come up tothat total. How BIG is Tokyo? Well, for starters take Indianapolis,Cleveland, Milwaukee, San Francisco, 'San Diego, San Antonio, Boston, Memphis, St. Louis, New Orleans, Phoenix, Columbus, Seattle and Ft. Worth . . . add them all together and you would still be 28,000 SOULS SHORT OF TOKYO!

"In their number 2 city, Osaka, there is a (repeat A) church! Howwould you like just one congregation for Cleveland, Memphis,Atlanta, Cincinnati, Nashville and Baton Rouge? Not one church ineach of those cities . . . but one for the whole bunch!" NOTE: if youskipped the editorial, this would be a good time to go back and read it).