JAMES PARKER MILLER
James Parker Miller was born July 1, 1915 in thesmall town of Hazel, in western Kentucky. His boyhood days were spent in Hazel and his collegeyears began at Murray State College, Murray, Ky.More information about his college years and hiscollege debating experiences may be found in "Pap
— The Broken Mold," a biography by his son, Rodney M. Miller.
He married Robbie Nell Meyers in 1942. "Bobbie," as she is affectionately called, stood by his side as afaithful wife and a true servant of God, even to hisdeparture from this life. Upon many occasions, both public and private, Jim said that he could not havedone his work without the help and encouragement ofhis good wife. Sister Bobbie Miller is an excellent teacher and writer. They have one son, Rodney M.Miller, who is a good preacher of the word and anexcellent writer in his own right.
As I prepare this article about James P. Miller for Searching The Scriptures, a monthly religious journalwhich we jointly brought into being in January, 1960,many nostalgic scenes compel me to stop and tarrywith the memories of varied interests and labors "Jim" and I spent together.
James P. Miller had a number of uniquecharacteristics which will never be forgotten by thosewho knew him or heard him preach or debate. No onewill ever successfully imitate his style. Who can forget that inimitable verbal ignition of a sermon,lecture or debate with: "Now in the very beginning. .."? And who can forget that vivid picture of himshaking the
silver hair on his head as he jabbed an index finger in
the direction of an audience while he pressed home a
point with thunderous voice, and then turn with the
pleading tones to make the application with: "Oh, let
me tell you something. . ."?
I see clearly that man of God standing before an
audience while a song of encouragement was being
sung, after preaching a sermon from the Book and
from his heart, with hands lifted and eyes searching
for some indication of a response to the gospel. He
had that rare ability to capture an audience with wit
and humor both in the introduction and illustration of
his lessons. He could carry an audience from laughter
to pathos, all to the end of pressing upon their hearts
the word of the living God.
James P. Miller was an evangelist, author,
debater, editor, and a friend to many of all ages. He
was well prepared for his work, both in attitude and
ability. He loved old preachers of the gospel and tried
to help them in many ways. He also had a special
place is his heart for young preachers. I personally
know of some who were helped almost beyond his
ability to do so. He gave them books, advice,
encouragement, and opened doors for them to begin
preaching when they had no one else to help at the
time.
While Jim loved old and young preachers, he had
little time and patience for any man who showed little
or no regard for the word of God, especially in
relation to the nature and work of the church,
whether he be preacher, elder, editor, college
professor, or just any member of the church. He was
long suffering toward one who indicated a desire to
learn and showed the change in his life as he learned
the truth.
In the spring of 1950 our paths crossed. I hadheard of him but it was not until I attended a meeting in St. Petersburg, Florida, in which he was doing the preaching, that I first talked to him. I was preaching in Clear water, Florida at the time. In thefall of 1950 he had dinner at my home. This was thefirst opportunity we had to talk about Bible mattersand things pertaining to the kingdom of heaven. I recall it well because it was the first time he gave meadvice, and I took it. Although he was but one yearmy senior, I often consulted with him about matters
of real importance to me and I always received good
advice. There were times when the reverse would be
so. This became a mutual part of our relationship
through the years.
On the occasion just mentioned about his advice to me in 1950, I had been writing for "The GospelBroadcast," a weekly paper owned and edited by thelate Eugene S. Smith of Dallas, Texas. Jim advised me to stop writing for that paper because of its reputation in Texas and other parts of the country, ofwhich I had little knowledge at the time. We talkedof the Lord's work upon many occasions from 1950 to1955, the year he had his great debate with MorrisButler Book in Orlando, Florida. Fast bonds of common interest were formed between us during thatdebate. This relationship grew for more than two decades. The Book-Miller Debate was published byme (Phillips Publications) in 1955.
As I prepared the last editorial for Searching The Scriptures before delivering it to the present ownerand very able editor, Connie W. Adams, I was givinga brief review of the beginning of the paper. I lift oneparagraph from that editorial of May, 1973, page 4 totell of the relationship we had:
"After two years of a very wonderful relationshipbetween James P. Miller and myself, brother Millerfelt the need to intensify his labors in other fields andarrangements were made whereby I would take thefull responsibility editorially and financially to continue the publication of the paper. During ouryears together not one unkind or angry word passedbetween us. I believe there has been the full trust and confidence by each of us toward the other. He has continued his work in trying to increase the circulation of the paper and to write articles as he hadopportunity through the years."
In the May, 1967 issue of Searching The Scripturesbrother Miller wrote in the editorial:
"As I look back on this beginning and on the start of Searching The Scriptures in January of 1960 Imarvel at the ease with which we worked. I do not remember a word said about any division of responsibility or duty, Elwood turned to the desk and I turned to the field. In other words, the new paperhad the simplest organization of any paper in history.It had an inside man and an outside man and this was it. I have remarked that Searching The Scriptures had about the same organization as you would have if two men got in a car and one said, 'I will drive,' and the other, 'I will watch the route.'"
"It is wonderful to state that in the ten years wehave been working together we have never had a misunderstanding of any kind or an unkind word everspoken. As far as I know we come as near agreeingon every verse of scripture as it is possible for twomen to do. We believe, speak and practice the same things. . ."
This was the relationship we had through the years.
We were not together much the last few yearsbecause we were separated by miles in our labors,and then his illness kept him confined except forthose opportunities to preach in meetings, which he holding a copy of the New Testament. Sorrow at theloss of one of the best friends a man ever had; joy because of the promise of God of the crown of life toall who are faithful unto death. I rejoice in the Lordbecause a soldier of Christ is resting from his labours(Rev. 14:13), and that "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of (one) of his saints" (Psa. 116:15).
I turned to embrace Bobbie (Mrs. James P. Miller)and try to comfort her because of our hope in Christbeyond this life (I Cor. 15:19). I could say only a fewwords. But through the mist that filled her eyes, andthe tears that coursed her cheeks, her courageoussmile came through the tears and she said: "We mustgo through this together, but God will take care ofus." After talking a few moments I told her I wouldsee her the next day and turned toward the rear ofthe chapel.
Halfway to the exit of the chapel I met Bob (Robert O. Miller, Jim's brother) and we claspedhands and spoke a few words. He said: "H. E., youand Jim have traveled many miles together and havespent many hours together in the Lord's work. He loved you more than you know. He talked about you many times and in many places. I know you will misshim." I said: "Bob, I appreciate what you have said.I loved him as much as he loved me. May God blessyou in your loss." The handshake was very firm asBob said: "Elwood, I love you; come to see me whenyou are in Kentucky." I nodded affirmatively and tried to swallow the lump in my throat.
Near the door of the chapel I met Rodney Miller,whom I first remembered as a 14 or 15 year old boy,and in his respectful and kind way he tried to say something to comfort me, while I knew he was carrying such a burden. Rod has always shown loveand respect for me, especially since he reached college age.
At 2 p.m. Tuesday, January 10, 1978, serviceswere conducted in the Seminole building in Tampa,Florida. It was in the building he had labored so hardto make a reality, and in which he had spent so manyyears preaching, teaching and debating.
The building was filled. "Buck" Warren led congregational singing and brother James R. Cope spoke of James Parker Miller and his work in the kingdom. He then preached from Ephesians, one of Jim's favorite books in the New Testament. This is what brother Miller wanted. Everett Mann assisted James Cope with a few remarks, reading of Scriptures and prayer. He was buried in Garden of Memories in Tampa, Florida.
To my brother, friend, and fellowservant of JesusChrist: you have been released from the fleshly bondsthat encounter all the sufferings of mortality, andhave entered into your rest to await the coming ofChrist. After a few more days or years I shall follow.We shall then know the reality of those things we believed, preached and hoped for during our sojourn upon this earth. Rest, Jim; you have fought a good fight, you have finished your course, you have keptthe faith: hence forth there is laid up for you thecrown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to you at that day: and not to you only, but unto all them also that love his appearing (2 Tim. 7,8).
(EDITOR'S NOTE: Five years ago my good wifewrote the following piece which was publishedanonymously in TRUTH MAGAZINE in the March22, 1973 issue. Because of some references in it, someacquaintances recognized her as the author of it andcalled, or wrote, to express their appreciation for it.While we do not usually publish material which hasalready appeared elsewhere, I gladly relinquish myown space this month to my faithful companion. I think she said something which needed to be said,and while I am undoubtedly prejudiced, believe shesaid it very well.)
THE BLESSINGS OF A PREACHER'S WIFE
Tonight is the 23rd of December. In another weeka new year will be upon us. It, naturally, is a timefor reflection and a time to count our blessings. Weare blessed because we live in America and are free to worship God in the way He commanded us; we areblessed because we have plenty to eat and warm houses in which to live while people in other parts ofthe world are starving. But there is one blessing thatI share with a relative few in this world. It is a blessing that I prize very highly and one that I amthankful God gave me the freedom and opportunityto choose—I am blessed in that I chose to become a preacher's wife.
I can almost hear some now saying: "That's a strange thing to say. She must be off her rocker insome way. A preacher's wife can't be thankful or call that a blessing. Why she is often criticized and puton the spot. Her husband is often gone for days at atime and she is alone. Her children are in the spotlight and their actions minutely inspected. Preachers never make much money or have fine houses. They must move every so often. How can shecall that a blessing?"
Yes, I can hear all these comments, even thoughunspoken. And I grant that most of them are true.But I still count it a blessing. Until recently, I nevergave it much thought. I just went along from day today doing what had to be done. However, some recent events have prompted me to reflect on this blessing. Perhaps my reflections can help a fewothers to appreciate their lot in life a little more andalso cause others to choose this way, if the choicepresents itself.
Recently, I have heard some voice the opinion thatthey did not want to be a preacher's wife or that theydid not want their girl to become a preacher's wife. I have heard of boys who want to give up preaching because their sweethearts did not want to be preacher's wives. You know, I never gave that awhole lot of thought. Maybe my mother wishes Ihad; but if so, she never spoke that thought. She did tell me that she wanted me to help make my husband a good one. Those of you who know him can judgehow well I succeeded!
What is the life of a preacher's wife really like?There are others who have been "at it" far longerthan I and who could tell far more about it, I am sure; but tonight let me give you some of my thoughts.
It will soon be twenty-eight years since I decidedto take that 'giant step' and I never have been sorryfor one minute. It has not always been smooth sailing or an easy course to follow. I have made a lot of mistakes — for these, I am truly sorry — but Godforgives a preacher's wife on the same basis He forgives anyone else. The brethren where we have lived have "put up with," encouraged, laughed, and even cried with us on various occasions. For this, Iam grateful. Without their help, I never could have"made it," I suppose.
I do not believe that I was consciously trained tobecome a preacher's wife. However, I never was discouraged. It just never really concerned me toomuch one way or the other. We had preachers in ourfamily (though all are either dead or liberal now), andwhen we could all get together, it was a wonderful time. I am sure that when I left to go to Florida College in 1949 the thought must have occurred tomy parents that I might marry a preacher, since thatinstitution was (and is) well known for the marriagesthat are created there. I am an "only child" and when I left for college it was for good, except forshort, infrequent visits. That is not the way I would like for it to be. However, because of our work it hashad to be like that. So, being an only child is noexcuse for not becoming a preacher's wife.
Next week is the twentieth birthday of our olderson. Some of you will remember where he was born.Not in some comfortable American hospital in myhometown, to be sure. No, he was born in a University hospital in Bergen, Norway, thousands ofmiles from either of our homes and parents, with adoctor who was a Communist and nurses and attendants who did not speak or understand English.It was not an easy time. We had few friends there then, having been in Norway only four months. Atthe time, I came as close to not caring about anything as I ever have. But I thank God that I did not entirely give in. Even then, I did not regret being a preacher's wife. What I am saying is this:There may be times when you, as a preacher's wife, will have to leave this country. It is almost a certainty that you will have to leave your hometownand parents. But as Jesus said in Luke 14:26 "If anyman cometh unto me, and hateth not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be mydisciple."
This is a time of protest and discontent. The younger generation are critics of the older generation.
They say we are materialistic. But I just wonder
what it is when a boy decides not to preach because
the girl he wants to marry just does not want to
move around every so often, or does not want to
leave her parents or her hometown. She wants the
security of a job and a house in one locality all her
life. Is this materialism? What else?
Preacher's wives are not a special breed. Why, God
did not even give us special admonitions as he did
the wives of elders and deacons. We have the same
admonitions as all other women. However, there are a
few commands which certainly pertain to a preacher's
wife.
As with other Christians, we dare not to gossip or
bear tales. No Christian should do this. And certainly
not a preacher's wife. She is in a position to know
things about other Christians which do not need to be
made public. Things are said to her and her husband
in confidence and she needs to be able to keep such
knowledge to herself, lest it hurt the person, her
husband, and even the congregation. In fact, some
things her husband should not even tell her. If I had
any one piece of advice to give any girl who is about
to marry a preacher, it would be, "Keep your mouth
shut!" Neither is it her business to advertise
decisions that the elders make, or, for that matter, to
try to tell the elders or her husband which decisions
to make.
And which of us has not at some time engaged in alittle self-pity? Some are more prone to this thanothers. But a Christian has no right or need to do this. We are called to serve God wherever and whenever we can. The preacher's wife cannot afford self-pity. There will often be times when her husbandwill be called away to the hospital to sit with a familyduring an operation; or to a funeral home after asudden death; or to a person's home during a trying time when a marriage is on the brink of failure; oreven to a local jail to help somebody in trouble. Shemust wait at home with a supper pushed to the backof the stove or in the oven. Or, he may be gone forseveral days at a time in a gospel meeting clearacross the country, or to a lectureship, or to adebate. Maybe he will even be involved in his workhalf-way around the world.
I have never asked my husband not to go where hethought he was needed for God's work. Yet, I mustconfess that I came close in 1971 when he and J. T. Smith decided to go to the Philippine Islands. I knewthere would be physical danger involved in such atrip; it would mean that the children and I would bealone for an entire month. What if one of the children got seriously ill? Or what if I became sick? However,I agreed that he should go. In fact, I knew he wouldgo before he even finished telling me of the need. Forsome reason, I have always believed that it was up tome to let him go and that it was up to God to takecare of him. So far, it has worked out that way. Howglad I am now that he and brother Smith went. Because of their efforts and the efforts of others who have gone, the brethren there have been helped immensely. By mail, I have come to know many ofthose people. They have had many difficulties and
troubles which many of us would find unbearable.
Would I be willing for him to go again? You bet I
would!
Congregations often expect too much of the preacher's wife. They seem to think that for somereason they "own" her and should be able to tell herwhat to do and how to do it. This attitude can cause problems. Let me hurriedly and thankfully say that I have never really faced this problem. The congregations where we have worked have been veryconsiderate along this line; but I do know that suchthings have happened. Just because the church ownsthe house in which the preacher lives or pays the rentfor him, does not give the members the right to tellthe wife how to run her house. This is their home for the time that they live there.
Neither does the congregation "hire" the preacher's wife. For the first twenty years we were married, I did a lot of secretarial work for my husband and thechurch. I knew how to do such work and was glad todo it. With one exception, I have never been paid forsuch work. However, a congregation has no right toexpect more from a preacher's wife along this linethan from any other woman in the congregation.
A preacher is not always as well paid as some inthis life. He does not have many fringe benefitswhich workers in plants or offices have. Few churchespay social security, health insurance premiums, or pension plans. Yet, I do not know of many churchesthat will deny a preacher an extra day off at aholiday season or fail to continue his salary during along, drawn-out illness. Though your daughter may not always have the "most" in this life, you can rest assured that there are fringe benefits which few others will ever have.
What am I talking about? For one thing: friends.Yes, our friends . . . from Maine to California;Washington to Florida; in Canada, Norway and thePhilippines. We would not trade these acquaintancesfor any amount of money on earth. These are peoplewith whom we have worked through the years andwho now have scattered around the country and theworld. They include preachers, and, yes, their wives.They include sons and daughters of preachers whohave grown up and married in the past few years.Whole congregations are included. These are all brothers and sisters in Christ, and all of them are (orshould be) striving toward the same goal—an eternalhome in heaven. These friends are the finest people on earth.
These "preacher-wife" years have meant a broadereducation for my children and me than would havebeen possible had we always lived in the same place.How else could we have seen the midnight sun ofNorway; the snow of northeast Ohio; the blastoff of arocket at Cape Kennedy; the rock-bound coast ofMaine; the lakes of Ontario; the cathedral of Worms,Germany where Martin Luther took his stand? I donot mean for this to sound as if we have been to these places just for the fun of traveling. That is notit at all. The work came first and that is what took us to these places, but I would be foolish to let youthink that it did not benefit our lives. It has even helped our children in their school work.
One of the greatest fringe benefits is being the constant recipients of the prayers of the congregation. Who else has God's blessing invokedupon them in public prayers as much as the preacherand his family?
Most of all, a preacher's wife develops a better understanding of people and a desire to have a partin the saving of their souls. Who could describe the frame of mind a preacher is in after someone hasobeyed the gospel, or a wayward church member hasrepented, or some evidence is seen of good resultingfrom your husband's efforts? Could it just be that Idid have some part in making that possible? If so,then it has been worth it after all.
Barbara C. Adams
FOR WHAT MAY A CHRISTIAN PRAY?
QUESTION: (NOTE: The following are excerpts from a letter identifying the issue on which our querist seeks information—MEP) I wonder if you agree with me that there is confusion and uncertaintyamong the brethren regarding what we have a rightto pray for. This may be, in some measure, the resultof an over-reaction to the charismatic movement. Since miracles have ceased, and God's revelation is complete, many seem to believe that there is verylittle we can ask for that would not fall into one of those categories.
For example, we hear brethren say when prayingfor the sick, "Bless the means being used in their care," or "Guide the hands of the doctors as theyminister." I am unable to see how it is less a miracle for God to guide the doctor's hands, or bless themeans being used, than for Him to touch the life andbody of the sick with his comforting, healing hand . . . . One preacher told me he didn't ask God's helpin preaching—that he had the Spirit-inspired word,and "What else can He do for me"? When James wrote that men should pray for wisdom, and Paulwrote the Corinthians that they helped in the deliveryof himself and his companions from the peril of death by their prayers, were these written only for the daysof miracles?—J.R.
ANSWER: I agree that there is confusion and uncertainty among brethren on the subject of prayer.Much of this can be accounted for on the followinggrounds: 1) Rationalism. Some accept only what canbe comprehended by human reasoning, plain statements of the Bible to the contrary, not-withstanding. These need faith. 2) A lack of knowledge of what the Scriptures teach on prayer,and 3) A failure to distinguish between God's miraculous power and His providential power.
The word "miracle" in our English Bible is a translation from two Greek words: 1) "Dunamis,"which is defined: "power, inherent ability, is used ofworks of a supernatural origin and character, such ascould not be produced by natural agents and means"
(W. E. Vine); 2) "Semeion" which is defined: "a sign,mark, token ... is used of miracles and wonders assigns of Divine authority" (Ibid). In the light ofthese definitions, let it be understood that by "God's miraculous power" we mean supernatural power—power that is over, above, and beyond natural ability, agents, and means.
Our querist understands that "miracles have ceased." This means that God is not exercising suchpower among men today. This, however, is not todeny that He exercises power above human ability through natural laws, agents, and means. The latter identifies His providential power. It is by this powerHe is able to answer prayer today above human ability, yet without working a miracle. While this means His providential power is limited in its operation to natural laws, agents, and means, it nevertheless, is far superior to human ability. This ought not to appear strange, because we see demonstration of it every day.
The fowls of the air and the animals of the earth hear the cry of their young and respond, over and above the ability of their young, fulfilling theirrequests by utilizing natural means—and this withoutworking a miracle. Parents, by reason of superiorknowledge, wisdom, and ability, continually exercisepower over, above, and beyond that of their young infulfilling their requests by utilizing the laws of nature—and this without working a miracle. Furthermore, this is our Lord's illustration of this very point: "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened untoyou: For every one that asketh receiveth; and hethat seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shallbe opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if hisson ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he aska fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children,how much more shall your Father which is in heavengive good things to them that ask him?" (Matt 7:7-11). The Bible teaches us to pray:
"Confess your faults one to another, and pray
one for another, that ye may be healed. The
effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man
availeth much" (Jas. 5:16).
"For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto theirprayers: but the face of the Lord is againstthem that do evil" (1 Pet. 3:12).
"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask ofGod, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed" (Jas. 1: 5,6).
"And this is the confidence that we have in
him, that, if we ask any thing according to
his will, he heareth us: And if we know that
he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that
we have the petitions that we desired of him"
(1 Jno. 5:14, 15).
There is nothing to indicate that these passageswere limited to or intended to apply only in the ageof miracles. Notice, we have the assurance that, if our petition be "according to his will, he heareth us."God wills for us only that which is for our good. Justas a parent often refuses the request of his child, forhis own good, so God in his infinite knowledge andwisdom sometimes refuses our request—and that forour own good. How thankful we should be for this!Parents sometimes err in their judgment; God neverdoes. Furthermore, we must be resigned to the factthat it is His will to grant our request now accordingto natural laws. Such are immutable. However, thisis not to say that, we can understand how He does it in every instance. A child may not understand,because of inferior knowledge and wisdom, how theparent fulfills his request. Nevertheless, he believes and continues to ask. So must we in making ourprayers unto God. Remember, Paul said that He "is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that weask or think" (Eph. 3:20). To conclude, simplybecause we cannot see, that He cannot bless the means used in ministering to the sick or guide thephysician effectively without working a miracle is toindulge rationalism. I may not understand how He does such through natural means, but such is nomore a miracle than hearing us when we pray in thefirst place.
POLEMICAL QUESTIONS NO. 2
This is the second in a series on questions asked inpublic debate. Roy Deaver, head of the Brown TrailSchool of Preaching, in Ft. Worth, Texas and I metin debate during July of 1977. As stated in a previous article, we agreed on written questions and answers. The questions were asked and answered before the start of each session.
In a previous article, I promised to prove that brother Deaver and his colleagues have given up 1 Cor. 16:1,2, as an exclusive pattern on when money may be collected for the church treasury. When I was a boy, in the hills of Oklahoma, I heard older preachers slap the pulpit and shout, "This businessof the sectarians, taking up a collection every night isunscriptural. 1 Cor. 16:1,2 teaches us that the first day of the week is the proper time for such collections." After this, they would give the old pulpit a second slap and say, "If you will come overto our meeting at the church of Christ we will notpass the hat every night but will cry out against it."Sad as it may seem that day is over. It has gone theway of the hoop skirt and spinning wheel. Later whenI started to preach, I believed what I had heard and started to preach the same thing. After years of study and debate, I still believe it will stand the heatof controversy. I stand firm on the platform that thefirst day of the week is the ONLY time (spelled witha capital O) that Christians may raise money for theLord's work. I assumed that most brethren believed this but I was in for the surprise of my Me.
I asked brother Deaver this question, "Would it bescriptural for an individual to give money into thechurch treasury on any day other than the first day of the week? His answer was, "YES" Gal. 6:10." After I got over the initial shock, I came back with asecond question, "Since you said yes, to my numberfour question on Monday night VIZ, that a Christiancan give money into the church treasury on a day other than the first day of the week, is the denominational practice of taking a collection on a day other than the first day of the week to put intothe church treasury a scriptural one? "Brother Deavercame back with his answer; "The fact is that a Christian may contribute into the church treasury attimes in addition to the regular first day of the weekcontribution (Gal. 6:10). What the denominations do is not a part of this discussion." Roy underlined thetwo words, "IN ADDITION" in his answer. So now, it becomes a matter of record. I copied his answerfrom his own handwriting and the tapes. I have no way of knowing how long brother Deaver has espoused this position. Nor, do I know how widespread its belief is among the liberal brethren. I must admit that I have never heard anyone actuallypreach this doctrine. I had a preacher to tell me backin the late fifties that he did not believe Acts 20:7 was binding. He admitted in his office at Clarksville,Arkansas that he had never preached the doctrine and his elders did not know of his convictions. He very frankly told me he believed lots of things hiselders did not know about. Do not all apostasies startin the fertile imaginations of the mind of the mortalman before they are preached? When old brotherTant said, "Brethren we are drifting.", I doubt thathe conceived of such a spiritual catastrophe.
You will notice in his answer he used Gal. 6:10. He did not quote the verse or even make an argument onit, he merely wrote it down with his answer. I haveheard Gal. 6:10 used to justify everything from holyhootenanies to church haberdasheries but never as a text on raising money for the church treasury. Gal.
6:10 is to the liberal brethren about what Jno. 3:16 is to the sectarian. One Baptist preacher told me thatthe Lord could have mailed Jno. 3:16 to us on a postcard and we would have everything we need to go toheaven. My liberal brethren obviously believe thatGal. 6:10 justifies about anything one desires to doout of the church treasury. The verse says "As wehave therefore opportunity, let us do good unto allmen, especially unto them who are of the householdof faith." Now brethren, honestly does this verse mention or imply a church contribution? Does it mention any day, especially a day other than the firstday? Does it in any way even remotely mention thechurch collectively doing anything? A person must behard pressed to give this as justification for a churchtreasury of any kind. Brother Deaver said in his answer that what the denominations do has nothingto do with the issue. I beg to differ with him and feelit has much to do with the issue. For example, if Ibelieved what brother Deaver says he believes I owethe denominations an apology. I have accused themof being wrong on their nightly contributions for years. If and when I believe what he says he does, Ineed to make both private and public correction.
You will note in his answer he used the expression"In addition to the regular first day of the week contribution." This brings up an interesting question.Since he calls the first day contribution the "regular" contribution do we have authority for an "irregular" contribution on some other day? If so, where is thebook, chapter and verse for the "irregular?" This also makes one wonder if the church could have two treasuries, one regular and the other irregular? Itseems that brother Deaver believes in taking up the regular and irregular and putting them in ONE treasury. We both have 1 Cor. 16:1, 2 for the regularbut where is the passage for the irregular?
Gentle friend, I was truly shocked when brotherDeaver gave up 1 Cor. 16 as the exclusive "TIME"for the contribution. However, I received a greater vibration when he told me the treasury could consistof beans and bacon. To prove I am not misrepresenting brother Deaver, I asked another question and here it is; "Since you said last nightthat the church treasury consists of more than money(items such as groceries, etc.) would it be scripturalfor a Christian to give such items on the 1st day ofthe week instead of money? His answer was, "In some cases, yes." I then asked this question, "In light of Acts 2:44-45, 4:34-35 and 1 Cor. 16:1, 2,would it be scriptural for anyone ever to put into thechurch treasury anything besides money?" His answer was, "absolutely so." There you have it in black and white. He says groceries such as beansand bacon may be put into the church treasury insteadof money. He did say, "In some cases" but never elaborated on what the cases might be. Years ago I met a Sabbatarian named Burt F. Marrs. He arguedthat the contribution of 1 Cor. 16 consisted of "Fruit" such as grapes and figs. He went to Rom. 15:28 where Paul says "Sealed to them this fruit." He saidit meant literal fruit such as grapes. I remember asking him if fruit always meant grapes and figs, didthe Jews have to cough up a stem of grapes whenJohn the Baptist said, "Bring forth fruits meet for repentance" (Matt. 3:8)? He did not reply.
When brother Deaver told me the church treasurycould consist of many things besides money, I wasstunned. When I pointed out that in Acts 4:37, thedisciples sold their land and laid the money at theapostles feet; he replied that Acts 4 had nothing todo with it. Again I beg to differ. Brethren it is laterthan we think. In our next article, we shall discuss the ramifications and consequences of this new doctrine. We shall discuss such questions as, if a brother gives a 250 acre farm to the church, what willthe elders do with it? Shall they farm it, rent it, leaseit, or put it in the soil bank? If a brother gives adrug store to the church will the elders operate it, sellit, or lease it out? Before you answer, think it overreal good.
In a previous article under the above heading, andbased on the words of Psalm 48:11-13, it was pointedout that just as Zion of the Old Testament hadcertain bulwarks that served to protect Israel fromapostasy, so also God's Zion of the New Testament
— the church — has safeguards that are designed to keep her pure in organization, in doctrine, and in worship. The first of these bulwarks that I proposeto discuss is the fact that the church has ....
A Divine Builder
The writer of Hebrews said: "For every house isbuilded by some one; but he that built all things isGod" (Hebrews 3:4). That every house has been builtby some one, is so self-evident as to be an axiom. Wecannot conceive of a house that did not have a builder. But it is also true of institutions or organizations, whether they are human or divine.They have been built by some one. That being true,it is important that we know that the church, thehouse of God, has been designed by a competentarchitect, and erected by a reputable builder.
Some one has said that, "No stream can rise higherthan its source." That is likewise self-evident. While a stream that begins in the mountain, may well fall to a lower level, the stream that begins in a swampcan never of its own power rise above its source. Thesame principle is true with regard to institutions andorganizations. No institution can rise about its builder, or founder. It takes on the nature of the onewho built it. If its builder is human, it can never beanything but a human institution. It would be as reasonable to expect to see a pine tree grow from an acorn as it would be to expect to see a divine institution produced by a human founder.
That is why denominationalism today presentssuch a bewildering picture, and is such an impotentforce. It is made up of religious bodies that have beenfounded and built by fallible men. Each denominational body can be traced back to someman, or it may be, group of men. The Lutheran church, for example, cannot be traced back beyondMartin Luther, who was its founder. True, he was agreat man, and performed a useful service to theworld in that he provided the spark that ignited theflame of reformation, and thus dealt the Roman Catholic church a blow from which it has never to this day recovered; yet withal he was a man, and therefore the church that was founded by him isnothing more than a human institution.
In like manner, the church of England owes its existence to King Henry the eighth, who broke awayfrom the church of Rome because the pope refused togrant him the right to divorce one of his many wives.It can thus never be anything but a human institution. The Presbyterian church had its originwith John Calvin who likewise broke away from thechurch of Rome. The Methodist church owes its beginning to John Wesley who, in his search for morespirituality, broke away from the church of England.The Mormon church began with Joseph Smith andhis claim to special revelations. The Seventh Day Adventist church began with Ellen G. White and herso-called visions. The Christian Science church began with Mary Baker Eddy. These are all human institutions because they were founded by men andtherefore reflect the characters of their builders. David said, "Except Jehovah build the house, theylabor in vain that build it" (Psa. 127:1).
The church of the New Testament, however, isof divine origin. When the writer of Hebrews said,"He that built all things is God", it was in a contextthat speaks of God's house, — the church — and which leads us to conclude that
God Is The Divine Architect
In his epistle to the Ephesians, in the fourth chapter, Paul wrote about his mission to preach tothe Gentiles, and the purpose of which was, "To make all men see what is the dispensation of themystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things; to the intent that now unto theprincipalities and the powers in the heavenly placesmight be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternalpurpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph. 3:9-11). Thus the church was built accordingto God's purpose. He designed it, and it was built according to His plan. Just as an edifice bears witness to the wisdom of the architect who designedit, so the church, designed by God, bears witness toHis wisdom.
A thought, not to be overlooked in this connection, is that the church was designed in the eternal purpose of God. The view held by the premillennial school of thought is that the church isjust an afterthought on the part of God, and notin His original plan. R. H. Boll and others, spoke of it as a "spiritual contingent". The theory that theytaught was that God had originally planned to set upHis kingdom on earth, and that Christ came to earth to carry out that plan. But because the Jews rejected Him and crucified Him God had to postponeHis plan for the establishment of the kingdom untilsuch a time as the Jews are willing to accept Christ.He then set up the church. Thus according to the theory, the church is only a stand-in for a postponedkingdom. Not a very lofty conception of the church!And instead of making known the wisdom of God, itwould seem that it only makes known His short-sightedness in that He did not anticipate the fact thatthe Jews would reject Christ.
Paul said, however, that the church was in the eternal purpose of God, as regards its beginning, and in Ephesians 3:21 he said, "To him be the glory inthe church and in Christ Jesus unto all generationsfor ever and ever. Amen." Thus the church which began in God's eternal purpose will continue throughthe ages of eternity to come.
Christ The Divine Builder
Matthew records a conversation between Jesus and apostles that took place in the parts of CaesareaPhilippi. In response to Peter's declaration that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, Jesus said,". . . . Upon this rock I will build my church. . . . "(Matt. 16:13-18). Thus Jesus identified Himself asthe builder of the church. There are some that teach that the church was built by John the Baptist, and that all that Jesus did was to enlarge and improveupon what John had built. The language of Jesus,however makes it clear that He was building thechurch from the foundation up, and not just doing arenovating job.
Not only does the church have a divine architectand a divine builder, but it was built according to adivine plan with divine specifications. The book of Exodus tells us that when God called Moses up into mount Sinai, He gave him the pattern for the building of the tabernacle. It was a pattern that wasvery specific even in the smallest details. He was toldof the material that was to be used, the dimensions ofthe tabernacle, its furniture, and the purpose of eachitem. Three chapters of the book of Exodus are usedin recording God's instructions which were further emphasized by the command, "And see that thou make them after their pattern, which hath been showed thee in the mount (Exodus 25:40). The writerof Hebrews quoted this charge given to Moses (Hebrews 8:5), the point of its application being thatthe church — the true tabernacle — has also been built according to a divine plan.
These facts — a divine architect, a divine builder,and a divine plan—serve as a mighty bulwark orsafeguard, that make the church a divine institution,and protects it from the weaknesses that are characteristic of human denominations.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: We are happy to introduce to our readers a fine young preacher with a promisingfuture. Kenneth L. Chumbley (known more casuallyas "Tack" to his many friends) was born and rearedin Champaign County, Illinois. His formal education has been at Florida College, Moody Bible Instituteand the University of Illinois. He is married to the former Cathy Forrester of San Jose, California andthey have two children, a boy (Gary) and a girl(Kelly). From 1974 to 1977 he labored with the OakGrove church near Louisville, Kentucky where he didexcellent work. Since March, 1977 he has workedwith the church in Rantoul, Illinois during whichtime the church has grown from 50 to 80. We firstbecame aware of his writing ability from the bulletinhe edited at Oak Grove. He is a careful student of the Bible and we expect to hear many good things fromhis work over the years.)
RENEWAL OF THE INNER MAN
The second Corinthian epistle yields a remarkableinsight into the career of the apostle Paul which noneof his other epistles give. From the opening sentencesto the close of the letter our attention is arrested by recurrent re-countings of the afflictions Paul had endured as an apostle of the Lord. In the first chapter Paul writes, "For we would not, brethren,have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us inAsia, that we were pressed out of measure, abovestrength, insomuch that we despaired even of life:but we had the sentence of death in ourselves." In chapter four, "we are troubled on every side, yet notdistressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed." The apostle further reveals, "For whenwe were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest,but we were troubled on every side; without were fightings, within were fears" (7:5). And towards theclose of this courageous epistle is found a staggeringcollection of catastrophes through which the intrepidapostle had passed (11:23-33). In enumerating thehardships he has endured, Paul was responding tothe charges which certain critics in the Corinthian church had leveled against him. In no other church were the apostle's adversaries more insolent,calumnious, or slanderous than they were at Corinth.Paul's reputation was attacked, his appearanceridiculed, his abilities as a speaker condemned, andhis motive maligned. It was to vindicate his authority as an apostle that Paul was compelled toreveal the ordeals which he had endured for the Lord. In contemplating the great and terrible trials throughwhich Paul passed, the question we must pause overis this: how was Paul able to hold up under all of thepressures and hardships he faced? What enabled Paulto make that remarkable statement in 4:8-9? What was the source of his strength? The answer to thesechallenging questions is found in the paragraph encompassing chapter 4:16 — 5:10.
"For which cause we faint not; but though ouroutward man perish, yet the inward man is renewedday by day" (4:16). That every man is a dichotomy ishere indicated by the words inward and outward. Todefine these two terms, we might profitably substitute the words "fleshly" or "physical" for outward and "spiritual" for inward. The physical and spiritual dualism of man is clearly taught throughout Scripture (e.g. 1 Thes. 5:23). Further note that even as the outward, physical part of man is being destroyed (through aging and physicalbuffetings) the spiritual side of man can be daily renewed. Its because of this spiritual renewal that Paul endures without despair the hardships of his life.What is it, then, that can keep the inner man in all of us renewed?
In answering this question, it will help us to makean observation which is often overlooked in studies of this passage. 2 Cor. 4:16 — 5:10 contains some striking similarities to what is considered by manyBible students to be one of the most difficult texts in the book of Romans: chapter 8:18-25. Note the remarkable parallels between the two passages:
2 Corinthians 4:16 — 5:10 Romans 8:18-25
- 4:16 Outward man decays 8:20-21 Creature subject to vanity; Bondage of corruption
- 5:2 We groan, being 8:22 Whole creation groans, burdened travails
- 4:18 Look at things not seen 8:25 Hope for things not seen
- 5:2 Desire to be cloth- 8:23 Wait for redemption ed with heavenly house of the body
- 4:17 Momentary, light af- 8:18 Sufferings of present fliction works eternal time not worthy to be weight of glory compared with the glory
to be revealed
By paralleling these texts we clearly see Paul is discussing much the same topic in both passages.This being true, these texts complement each other,and we can use one to help illuminate and interpretthe other.
Again considering the question, how is the inwardman renewed, carefully note the third parallel above.The child of God is looking and hoping for things not seen. These words immediately call to mind certain statements in the Hebrews letter such as the one made of Moses, "For he endured, as seeing him whois invisible" (11:27). (Also cf. Hb. 11:10, 13; 12:2.) Moses endured by looking at something not seen.Paul writes "the inward man is renewed day by day."How is the inward man renewed, kept vibrant, fresh and enthusiastic even as the outward man decays?"We look ... at the things which are not seen"; "wehope for that we see not." What are the unseen things which the child of God is looking and hopingfor? The answer is seen in our fifth parallel: we look forand hope for the eternal weight of glory,, the glory to berevealed with which the sufferings of this life offer nocomparison! It is this looking and hoping which gavestrength to Paul and to us today; it is this looking and hoping which renews the inward man.
What motivates godly men and women to day afterday struggle to make ends meet, working their fingers to the bone, performing thankless tasks,knowing that with each passing second their youth and vitality slips away, never to be regained? Is itnot the hope of a better life after this life is over. Thehope that "he which raised up the Lord Jesus shallraise up us also" (4:14); that we will be clothed withan immortal body, a house from heaven (5:2) whichwill never decay or grow weary; and that we can bepresent with the Lord! We grow weary in this mortalbody, but we are awaiting things now unseen, "the things which are not seen are eternal" (4:18). It is theinvisible things, the eternal things, which cause us toimitate Moses and Paul in patiently enduring theafflictions and buffetings of this life. After meditatingon these great truths, we more solemnly approach thewords of Paul in that central chapter of the New Testament, 1 Cor. 15:19, "If in this life only we havehope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable."
Is it not inspiring to have the light which gleams intoour minds from these texts! Do not these truths renew and give refreshment to that part of us created in the image of the Creator. Thus, we are saved by hope. Andit is in hope of and looking to the eternal things of Godthat we too can triumphantly declare with Paul, "Weare troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we areperplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed."
the editorial, which "pokes fun at" an editorial byConnie Adams in the October, 1977 issue of Searching The Scriptures, the editor also attemptedto review an article that I wrote in the same issue of STS on "Salvation By Grace Through Faith." (I will have more to say about the "review" later in this article.
Included in THE ENSIGN FAIR was an article byNorman L. Parks on the eldership which was acarbon copy of the J. D. Hall, Charles Holt position published in their paper SENTINEL OF TRUTH inthe 60s, of an elder being only an older man—no suchthing as an elder having any authority—no suchthing as the "office" of an elder, etc., etc. which hasbeen answered again and again.
Then there was the "wonderful" article by F. L. Lemley on "Freedom In Christ" in which he arguedthat we must accept "the Christians in all denominations." Hogwash! And, on and on it goeswith other "fine" articles by W. Carl Ketcherside and Buff Scott, Jr.
In reviewing my article, the editor either wittinglyor unwittingly perverted every argument I made. Inhis review of my article "Salvation By Grace Through Faith" Mr. Kilpatrick says, "Bro. Smith will deny that his teachings are legalistic and that heteaches salvation by works, yet his explanation willlead to no other conclusion. Plainly from his teachings, Bro. Smith has God's 'grace' operating through a system of 'works', that the system itself constitutes God's grace."
It should be obvious to everyone that Mr. Kilpatrick sets out to try to prejudice the minds ofhis readers by placing me in the position of being oneof those terrible "legalists." However, if I understand what Mr. Kilpatrick is saying in his explanation ofwhy I am a "legalist," then rather than deny thecharge, I plead guilty! For I do believe, in fact, that we are saved by faith (which is a work of righteousness given by God's grace, John 6:28-29), which works by love (Gal. 5:6). I also submit that Christ's dying on the cross was God's grace; that ourright to believe in Christ as the saviour of the world is God's grace; that the things were written that wemight be able to believe (John 20:30-31) and are preserved for all ages (1 Pet. 1:23) are God's grace;and that it is futile to call Christ Lord, and not dothe things He tells me to do (Luke 6:46; Matt. 7:21).If that makes me a "legalist" then I plead guilty! ForI believe we must obey Christ if we are to be saved(Heb. 5:8-9).
The thing that Mr. Kilpatrick and others fail to understand is that "all of God's commandments are righteousness" (Psalms 119:172). And, when Mr. Kilpatrick reviewed my article he perverted my position on "righteousness," because when he mentioned what I had to say about "righteousness"in Rom. 1:16-17, he failed to include the abovepassage by David or 1 John 3:7 which shows that theword "righteousness" is used in three different senses, and one of the usages is that which is to bedone. "Little children, let no man deceive you:(Including R. L. Kilpatrick, JTS) he that doeth righteousness is righteous even as he is righteous."Now if we want to be righteous even as God is righteous, we will do righteousness (obey God's commands).
In trying to do away with what was said about our"doing righteousness," Mr. Kilpatrick said, "We 'become' God's righteousness when we 'become' partof the righteous body of Christ." Just grant that theabove statement is true. How do we "become part ofthe righteous body of Christ?" "For by one Spirit arewe all baptized into one body. . ." (1 Cor. 12:13). Butbaptism is a command of God (Mark 16:16; Acts2:38; Acts 10:48). And Peter in Acts 10:34-35 said,"Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter ofpersons; but in every nation he that feareth him andworketh righteousness is accepted with him." (Emphasis mine, JTS). Does Mr. Kilpatrick believe that one must be baptized in order to be a part of thebody of Christ? Since all "God's commandments arerighteousness," and since we must "fear God andwork righteousness" in order to be "accepted" of Him, then I hesitate not to say that one MUST bebaptized in order to be saved, thus becoming a partof the body of Christ.
Mr. Kilpatrick then perverts Phil. 3:9 to try toprove his point. He affirms that Paul is denying that"salvation comes about as a result of obedience to a plan or system." Paul is here stating, in context,that even though he was a model case when it cameto keeping the Law of Moses, he realized that all thathad to be given up in order to win Christ (read Phil.3:1-9; thus salvation was not according to all that hehad done under the Law of Moses.
Finally, in examining the arguments I made in theOctober issue of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES, Mr. Kilpatrick lands on Rom. 4:4-5 to try to showhow I misrepresented Paul's position regarding doingany works. He quoted verse five, but completely leftout verse four which, in my opinion, is the "key"verse concerning this matter of works. Paul says inRom. 4:4; "Now to him that worketh is the rewardnot reckoned of grace, but of debt." If one kept a lawto perfection, then there would be no grace involved.God would owe that person salvation. However, noone but Christ has ever kept the law to perfection.But when a person sins, transgresses God's law (1John 3:4), his salvation then becomes a matter ofgrace, not debt, regardless of how much work he maydo in the vineyard of the Lord. Jesus said, "When you have done all those things which are commandedof you, say, we are unprofitable servants: we havedone that which was our duty to do" (Luke 17:10).
A very sad sidelight to this whole issue is that allof the material that I have presented in this article was prepared by me in 1966 in Dayton, Ohio to meetthe arguments of a Primitive Baptist Preacher. He didn't believe that there were any works that neededto be done in order to be saved either.
Conclusion
Since Mr. Kilpatrick chides me for believing thatwe must obey the system of teaching set forth byChrist in the New Testament, would he sign the following proposition for us to openly discuss the matter two nights where he preaches and two nightswhere I preach? Resolved: Salvation is solely byGod's grace on the merit of what Christ has done forus; and our obedience is not necessary to our salvation.
Affirm
:
Deny:
J. T. Smith -------
o -------------AUBREY C. BELUE
TO A GOOD ELDER.
As the years pass in the Lord's service, we experience the deaths of many brethren, loved ones, and close friends who have meant so much to us in life.
Such was the occasion at the passing of Aubrey C.Belue. Brother Belue was born in Tishomingo, Miss,in 1905; he died January 7, in Columbus, Miss. Hewas an elder of the East Columbus church since its beginning in 1956; prior to this he served in thisoffice at the old 5th. St. church in that city for several years. His total tenure of office as an elder spanned over thirty years.
AUBREY C. BELUE—THE MAN.
Brother Belue (affectionately known to most of uswho are younger as "Pa-Boo") was a great man. Helived in a small city; he worked 42 years for the postal service; he had very conservative political views (which he didn't mind sharing); he was a lover of music, and he was a strong believer in clean healthful living.
But above all this, he used his God-given talentsand abilities in a special way. He made it his life's goal to know the Word. When Aubrey Belue gave hisview on a passage of scripture, it was always wise tolisten and take note. He was also well read in modern religious thinking; especially among the brethren.
He worked hard at keeping the church pure. Healways looked to the future, not as an alarmist, butwith insight into what can happen and to avoid thetrends that can lead to apostasy.
He left a rich heritage to the younger. He relatedwell to young people and always sought to mold theirlives with principles to face the future. He has several"Timothy's" proclaiming the word today.
His family as Christians today attest to his role asa family man. I know of no other family that is more"wrapped up" in the Lord's work than Aubrey, Jr. (Buddy), Mrs. David (Betty) Haynes, and Mrs. Darrell (Mackey) Roberts; the children of Aubrey andGrace Belue.
I believe the greatest monument to Aubrey C.Belue is the faith he leaves behind. He being dead,will continue to speak through the influence hewielded on the lives of others.
I know my life is better, fuller, and more completefor having known and worked with Aubrey Curtis
Bob Walton, 507 S. College Rd.,Lafayette, LA 70503
James P. Miller
(His Last Meeting)
"Now as a beginning place" for what I want to sayabout brother James P. Miller, I'm thinking of the recent meeting in which he preached at the GayMeadows church here in Montgomery— Nov. 7-11,1977.
Brother Miller did not really feel up to holding thismeeting, but because of the support of this congregation of him in the two Miller-Woods Debateshere and his many friend, he wanted to come. I methim at the airport Monday afternoon (Nov. 7) andbrought him to our home where he stayed while here.His condition required that he bring along (in dry icecartons) specially prepared food by Bobbie to eat.
Jim said, "Herschel, I'm not well, but I hope it won't effect my preaching." And, it didn't. James P. has preached in meetings where I lived and workedbefore, and I can truthfully say his preaching was asfine, if not better, than ever. I was actually amazed,for after all his sickness, I thought he might belacking in some of that typical Miller effectiveness.There may not have been as much "bluster" (I use this word in a good and limited sense), but his speechwas very effective, his mind alert, and his sermons allwell arranged and true to the Book. I actually feltthat I was hearing brother Miller do some of the bestpreaching I had ever heard him do.
At home, Reba and I talked much with brotherMiller about our generation of preachers, the battles we have had to fight, treatment at the hands of brethren (both good and bad, but mostly good), ourfamilies, dying, and the hope beyond. Brother Jimfelt sure that his "race was nearly run". He said,"Herschel, this is the last meeting I will ever holdout of Florida. Maybe—just maybe I'll get to preach a little more around home." He was bothered at the thought of dying at our house-away from Bobbie andfamily . . away from his doctors. I really believe thisis what caused him, upon feeling some physicaldiscomfort, to close the meeting on Friday night andfly home instead of continuing through Sunday night,as planned.
Jim and I talked freely of dying. His faith and hopewas strong. In fact, he often was actually enthralledat the prospects of going on to that heavenly reward.Yet, he had many reasons for wanting to stay on. He dreaded leaving Bobbie ("Who works so hard at justkeeping me alive") and the companionship that had meant so much to him. Rodney, his wife, and grandchildren . . . these too, were dear to him and areason for his desiring to stay here a little longer.Too, continuing to be able to preach the gospel, thegreat ambition of his life, held great attraction. "I've studied and nearly know the Bible by heart and love to proclaim it."
As we talked on and on, I realized I was talking toa man who was truly as the Apostle Paul—"In astrait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and tobe with Christ; which is far better: Nevertheless toabide in the flesh" was appealing because of fleshly ties and help he could still be to brethren.
Now that the end has come, I am confident that James P. Miller is happy beyond words. The Lord whom he served and who blessed him through lifewill continue to bless those dear fleshly ties who remain here on earth, doing the same glorious workJames P. Miller did in life. "Though dead," brother Miller, "yet speaketh" through his books and remaining family.
Herschel E. Patton,
3753 Hunting Creek Rd. Montgomery, Ala. 36116
DOUGLAS K. SEATON, Route 1, Box 147, Concord, NC 28025 — Since our last report in this paper in October, 1977 we have had10 more responses to the gospel. Our contribution for 1977 was 50% higher than any year in the history of the church here. Presently we are running articles in two newspapers. Most of the baptisms we have had and several of the restorations are a direct result of home Bible studies. Several of the members here are now setting up and conducting their own studies.
LEONARD SALYERS, P.O. Box 66, Pound, VA 24279 — Since beginning work with the church at Pound two have been baptized, four restored and one has placed membership. When traveling through this western tip of Virginia, stop and visit with us.
WALLACE H. LITTLE, 2909 Old Greenwood Rd., Ft. Smith, Arkansas 72903 — We have concluded our work with the church in Peru, Indiana and are now working with Greenwood Road in Ft.Smith, Arkansas. Will all correspondents please take note of our new address.
(Editor's Note: The interesting column, OVERSEAS PREACHING REPORT, which was "prepared by Wallace H. Little for THE SOWER, will now be carried every other month as a regular feature of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES. We must not forget those dedicated men and theirfamilies who labor around the world, whether Americans or native workers in their own countries. We need to know of their triumphs, failures, problems and needs. This column is a great help in that direction. Wallace Little has shown unusual interestand gone to much time and personal expense in keeping abreast ofgospel work around the world. The first of his columns under this heading will appear in the April issue of this paper.)
Basil Cass Needs Help GENE TOPE, 1603 Lauderdale Dr., Richmond, Virginia 23233 —Readers of this periodical may remember the name, Basil Cass, because of the number of very fine articles that have been written in commendation of this South African gospel preacher and saint.This past September, Basil held a gospel meeting in the Indian area of Durban, South Africa, designated as Unit 9, Chatsworth. This meeting was an enthusiastic success, with five precious souls being added to the kingdom of God. The brethren living in Unit 9further urged brother Cass to move his efforts there from Port Elizabeth. Such a move had much to commend itself and Basil consented to do so at the end of 1977.
Basil has now made that move and is busily engaged in this
very prospective area. This work will keep him busy by night andday teaching publicly and from house to house both Hindu and denominational seekers after truth. BUT, he is in financial trouble as a result of the move. Living costs are somewhat higher in thiscoastal resort area than his former place. The moving costs have set him back considerably. Basil is in immediate need of $300 and needs a further $200 per month to help meet higher housing,petrol, and food costs. Will you help this worthy man? Can the church where you are help with his monthly expenses? If not, how about a "one-shot" contribution to help alleviate the immediate crisis? Any kindly inquiries addressed to brother Cass will be fully and honestly answered by him. He is a most worthy servant of Jesus Christ, and you can rest assured that your help is going where it will do much Scriptural good. Any measure of help will be truly appreciated by the Casses. Write airmail to: Basil Cass,
P.O. Box 875, Pinetown, 3600, Republic of South Africa.
A GOOD CHURCH AT WORK
The Imhoff Avenue church in Port Arthur, Texas is a worthy example to others in supporting gospel work in many places. Withless than 200 members, this congregation averaged over $1600 aweek in contributions during 1977. In addition to the support of Bill Cavender in the local work, they regularly supported 17 men in preaching in several states and in South Africa, Italy, Canada,Mexico and the Philippines. Additionally, they had a part in supporting 17 others during the year in work in several places athome and abroad. For 1978 their plans call for helping with costof living increases with men they are presently supporting, rather than taking on new ones. The following is quoted from the ImhoffAvenue MESSENGER OF TRUTH for January, 1978: "We are concerned here more and more with adequate wages for preachers.Comparatively few faithful men are being supported as they should be. With rising costs of all goods and services, with inflation, with preachers' costs in books, automobiles (a preacherwill wear out one in 3-4 years), rising costs of gasoline, insurance,oil and auto repairs, and other extra expenses which preachershave which most brethren do not take into consideration, we hopeto give men regular yearly wage increases." We commend these brethren for their continued efforts to sow the seed of the kingdomand for their concern for the well-being of those men with whomthey have chosen to have fellowship in the gospel.
The Work In Iran
James P. Needham reported in the January issue of TORCH onhis recent preaching trip to Iran. He spent about 30 days in late1977 working among American Christians in Iran, a territory"which approximates the ancient kingdoms of Babylon, Assyria, and the Medes and Persians. This trip was made at the invitation
____________________________________________________________________________________________________Page.15
of the brethren in Shiraz (a city toward the southern part of the country), and I spent most of the time there, but was able toarrange short meetings also in Tehran (the Capital) and Isfahan (a city about midway between Tehran and Shiraz). The trip wasjointly financed by the Palm Springs Drive church where I workregularly, and brethren in Iran."
He reported that there are now some 40,000 Americans in Iranand that it is estimated that by 1985 there will be between 80,000 and 100,000 there. Four families make up the church at Shirazwhile there are 35—40 in attendance at Isfahan. The group inTehran is small. During these meetings, two were baptized.
Except for the Americans present, the population is almost100% Muslim. An American preacher might be able to go and work with the American churches and have some success, thoughit appears there would be serious problems to face otherwise.While one might legally enter for preaching work among theMuslim, he would likely be afforded no legal protection and wouldbe in constant danger. The church at Shiraz thinks it best for American preachers to come periodically to teach and encouragewith the work carried on by local members usually. The Isfahanchurch is interested in an American preacher coming and working among local people. There is a language barrier which must be conquered. Tehran also is interested in securing an American preacher. American members have been able to influence Iranian people in their acquaintance to attend meetings in their homes andat least one Muslim has been converted. There are American jobsavailable ranging from teachers to technicians. Faithful Christianswho qualify might be able to render valuable aid to the cause in this country. Brother Needham says he will be glad to put anyinterested parties in touch with brethren there and provide thelatest information as to where the brethren meet. If you have friends or relatives being sent to Iran in their work, these contacts should be noted: In Shiraz, Marion Grant (Phone 22913or 14 Ex. 31), Frank Herrlein (phone 35212), or George Snyder (Phone 30372); in Isfahan, Jack Morgan (phone 40700), Wesley Scarbrough (phone 45834), or Joe Mulkey (phone 49034); inTehran, Lane Cubstead (phone 245932) or Bob Downing (phone 244950).
PREACHERS NEEDED GONZALES, LOUISIANA — The Southside congregation inGonzales is seeking a full-time preacher. We are a small, faithful congregation with an average attendance of 35, located between New Orleans and Baton Rouge. If interested, please call (504)644-4260 or 622-2368. WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA — The congregation which meets at 4801 S. Dixie Highway is looking for a man towork full-time as an evangelist. An experienced man in working with a small congregation is desired and can be fully supported financially. Interested individuals may contact: David Mulej, 4894
S. Kay St., Lake Park, FL 33410 or Kirby Mole, 8864 Dania Dr.,Lake Park, FL 33410. TRENTON, FLORIDA — The Cherry Sink church, just outsideTrenton, Florida, is in need of a preacher as of April or after. Anexcellent area for anyone with a young family as well. For furtherdetails contact the Elders: Lee Roberts 904-463-2490 or Jim
| 348 77 |