HATING THE PROPHET

All through the history of sinful man the word of God has always had two effects upon man: it makes himrepent and turn to righteousness, or it makes him hatethe message and the prophet who brings it. When Ahabwas king of Israel, he followed a very wicked course andgathered about him many false prophets who would prophesy as he desired. This is very much like religiousconditions in the world today. The preacher who dares to speak what God has revealed on all matters, especially when it condemns the general practice ofpeople, becomes the object of hate.

"And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, Thereis yet one man, Micaiah the son of Imlah," by whom wemay enquire of the Lord: but I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so" (1 Kings 22:8).

Ahab was not the last man to hate a prophet becausehe did not speak good concerning him. This attitude was characteristic of Israel all through their history.Stephen concluded his discussion with the Jews of theSynagogue with these words: "Which of the prophetshave not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the JustOne; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers" (Acts 7:52). For these words Stephen was killed by the mob.

The setting of the statement in 1 Kings 22 shows thatthe king of Israel had designs against another king and wanted the help of Jehoshaphat in the effort. He already had the death sentence passed against him byElijah because of his crime of greed and murder. His evil wife Jezebel had developed a plan which he carried outto have Naboth killed because he wanted his vineyard.When Elijah told Ahab that "in the place where dogslicked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy bloodeven thine" (1 Kings 21:19), Ahab replied to Elijah:"Hast thou found me, O mine enemy?"

Paul inquired of the Galatians, "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" (Gal.4:16).

Why is it that a man can be corrected—told thetruth—about many other matters, but makes you hiseternal enemy for telling him the truth about God'sword? A stranger can be stopped on the street and toldthat he is going into danger if he keeps on in the direction he is going, and he will thank you and takeanother course. But your best friend can be sinningagainst God and if you tell him about it he will, inmany cases, become your enemy.

Maybe the answer to this strange behavior lies in thenature of religion itself, and in the fact that most peopledo not like to be considered ignorant of such important matters. Most people think of religion as a thing sopersonal that it should not be changed. They think of itas a sort of heritage that belongs to their ancestors. Forthis reason it is an insult to tell them that they are wrong.

Men do not like to appear uninformed in the basic andimportant matters of life and eternity, but the terribletruth is that the great majority of this age is ignorant.To try to tell one the truth when he considers himselfinformed enough to know, is an insult.

But neither of these reasons appear in the case ofAhab's hate for Micaiah, It was a clear case of a manwanting to do a thing but not wanting to reap the consequences. He wanted to be told that he would be victorious in spite of the fact that he knew a prophethad told him he would die. Those today who want tohear "good" about themselves when they are doingthose things that are wrong are in the same class withthis evil king.

It will be observed that the truth was not changed because several hundred prophets spoke "good" of the king, nor was it changed because the king hated theprophet and had him put in prison. It is the same today. The truth remains the truth whether we believe itor not, and even if we hate the preacher.

Page 2

The religious population of the world, whether actively practicing the precepts of their religion ornot, will cry out against the man who has the convictionand courage to speak out against error in doctrine andpractice. "Hast thou found me, O mine enemy?" theywill cry. Many will say or think: "but I hate him; for hedoth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil," Do not confuse the message with the messenger. You willnot destroy the truth by killing the bearer of that truth."Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell youthe truth?" (Gal. 4:16),

Foy E. Wallace, Jr. Passes

We received word that Foy E. Wallace, Jr passed away on December 18 at the age of 84. We take note of his death with mixed emotions.

Many brethren are indebted to him for the valiant battle he waged against Premillennialism. While editor of the Gospel Advocate, he engaged Charles M. Neal in debate at Winchester, Kentucky in January, 1933. This marked a turning point in that struggle. In 1936 he started the Gospel Guardian, later changed to the Bible Banner in which he waged war on the college in the church budget and against developing signs of a greater institutionalism. In 1950 he began Torch in which he wrote some of the clearest material anyone has ever produced in opposition to church support of institutions and centralization of power.

In 1956 he held a meeting at Glenwood Hills congregation in Atlanta, Georgia whilethe editor labored there. I have never enjoyed nor profited more from a meeting than that one. He spent his sixtieth birthday with us the day it ended. One night he exposed the sponsoring church and charged that it (1) made ecumenical elders, (2) was guilty of religious feudalism, and (3) made chain churches which he called "Piggly Wiggly churches of Christ."

It is regrettable that he allowed personal bitterness to alienate him from the brethren who appreciated his work the most. From about 1960 on he allowed his influence to be used by those who formerly he opposed. It was tragic to see him often preaching forsmall gatherings of people many of whom had no appreciation for his work and to whom he was only an aged, long-winded preacher.

We must leave his case in the hands of Him who judges righteously We still preachmany things he taught us.

CWA

Searching The Scriptures

Volume 21 January, 1980 Number 1

Published Monthly at

BROOKS, KENTUCKY

Second Class Postage Paid at Brooks Kentucky

and at an Additional Mailing OfficeUSPS-487-440

CONNIE W. ADAMS, Editor

Office of Publication52 Yearling DriveBrooks, Kentucky 40109Phone (502) 957-2257

SUBSCRIPTION RATES

$7 per year in advance

Club rate. $6 per year for 4 or more

Bundles to one address:

12 for$ 5.00 24 for$10.00

Group subscriptions 12 for $ 5.00 per month 24 for $10.00 per month

Address subscriptions and manuscripts to Connie W. Adams. P. O. Box 68, Brooks, Kentucky 40109.

Address supply orders to Religious Supply Center, Inc , P. O.Box 13164, Louisville, Kentucky 40213 Phone 1502) 3669014.

POSTMASTER. Send change of address forms to P. O. Box 68, Brooks, Kentucky 40109

The Search for the Ancient Order

By Earl Irvin West This two-volume work on the search for the landmarks of primitive Christianity covers the Restoration Movement from 1849 1906 Volume I traces the history from the early beginnings through the movements of Stone. Campbell, the early pioneer preachers. Lard, McGarvey and others. Volume II, carries on from the Civil War to "Horizons of Destiny.

Vol. I $14 95 Vol. II $14 95 Now Ready— Vol. III $14. 95

Religious Supply Center. P. O. Box 13164 Louisville, KY 40213

THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS

The first four verses of Jude sounded a warning tothose within the church of that day to guard against "certain men" who would creep in "unawares" and undermine that system of divine truth which he called "the faith." Jude was written late in the first century when the issues facing the church had taken on a different complexion from those of the first few decades after Pentecost. By this time the formal Jewish opposition had lost its punch and the church faced theinsidious threats of bizarre philosophical approacheswhich came in with the advance of the gospel in Greece and North Africa.

The trouble they faced did not come from frontal assaults on the faith from the unbelieving world butrather from the deceitful behaviour of those who professed allegiance to the truth while drawing awaydisciples after them. Attacks from without have alwaysdrawn the people of God closer together. The greatest devastation has always come from within.

A Body of Truth — "The Faith" The appeal of Jude 3 is to contend for "the faith." This argues that there is a body of teachingdistinguished from all human wisdom. What pertains to"the faith" can be determined. If not, then contentionfor it would be impossible. It is popular these days toargue that truth cannot be known absolutely, that every generation and every person must find what appears tohim to be truth. Jesus said "I am the way, the truthand the life" (Jno. 14:6). Before Pilate he said "I cameto bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of thetruth heareth my voice" (Jno. 18:37). The fulness of grace and truth came by him (Jno. 1:14, 17). He promised his apostles to send the Holy Spirit to guidethem into "all truth" (Jno. 16:13-14). There is a body oftruth called "the faith" which may be known so that "saints" may contend for it.

Complete Truth — "Once" Delivered

The finality and completeness of this body of teaching is indicated by the word HAPAX translated "once" (KJ), "once for all" (NIV and NASV). This body oftruth has one time for all time been made known. This passage strikes a death blow to all claims of latter day revelations. It argues the finality, completeness and all-sufficiency of God's revelation. There is nothing left tobe added from human wisdom. Nothing should be subtracted from it. Indeed, "His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. 1:3). It was during oneinterval of human history that God began and completed the revelation of that body of truth called "the faith." Paul said "once was I stoned" (2 Cor. 11:25). That exhausted the number of times he was stoned. "It is appointed unto man once to die" (Heb. 9:27). Man's appointment with death is summarized and finalized inthat statement. When Jude said the faith was "once for all" delivered to the saints that argues for the fulness andcompleteness of divine truth in what God delivered. Every system of religion based on the claim of latter day revelations is therefore false including Mormonism, Adventism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Armstrongism and other systems of like nature. They all have in commonthe notion that divine revelation was not once delivered. If the fulness of its revelation occurred in the first century then all such claimants are proved to be falseteachers, blind guides and deceitful workers.

Authoritative Truth — "Delivered"

When Jude said this faith was once "delivered" he emphasized the authoritative nature of this body ofteaching. In Titus 1:3 Paul said that God "hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me. . ." This has reference to the apostolic preaching, the kind which Paul did. There arethree terms used in the New Testament to describe these men through whom this revelation came.

(1) Ambassadors. Paul said "We are ambassadors for Christ" (2 Cor. 5:20). It is a misuse of scripture to apply that statement to modern-day Christians. The term "ambassador" implies a commission, suggests anofficial embassy and includes credentials to demonstratethe authority by which these ambassadors spoke. Toreceive an ambassador is to extend recognition to thepower which sent him. Likewise, the rejection of an ambassador is the rejection of the power standing behind him. Jesus said to his apostles "He that receiveth you receiveth me" (Mt. 10:40). These men were sent forth to bind and loose what had already beenbound in heaven (Mt. 18:18). Unto them Jesus said "Whose sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them;and whose sins ye retain, they are retained" (Jno. 20:23). Unto these ambassadors of heaven the Lord gave the power to state divine law. The law did not originate with them for it was already settled in heaven. They made it known. Further, they weregiven credentials to show their official embassy in themiraculous powers they possessed. "Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds"(2 Cor. 12:12). The age of miracles belonged to thetime of their ambassadorship. During the time they were involved in this apostolic preaching, their credentials confirmed their word (Mk. 16:20). (2) Earthen Vessels. In order to "deliver" the faith, Christ chose the earthen vessels of the apostles intowhose hearts he shinned the light of inspiration. "ForGod, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shinned in our hearts, to give the light ofthe knowledge of the glory of God in the face of JesusChrist. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels,that the excellency of the power may be of God, and notof us" (2 Cor. 4:6-7). The "earthen vessels" of this passage were those who had the light of divine inspiration and therefore does not relate to preachers otherthan those who originally "delivered" the faith. Since

they had "the light" of divine knowledge, their messagewas authoritative and not to be rejected.

(3) Witnesses. The faith was "delivered" by witnesseswho saw the Lord, heard him speak, knew directly ofhis deeds and could speak as eye witnesses of his resurrection. Jesus said to them just before his ascension "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnessesunto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth"(Acts 1:8). Peter said "We . . . . were eyewitnesses ofhis majesty" (2 Peter 1:16). John wrote "That whichwas from the beginning, which we have heard, which wehave seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon,and our hands have handled, of the Word of life. . . . declare we unto you" (1 Jno. 1:1-3). The specialappearance of the Lord to Paul was to make him "aminister and a witness both of those things which thouhast seen, and of those things in the which I will appearunto thee" (Acts 26:16). The faith was "delivered" bychosen and empowered ambassadors who were vessels ofearth into whose hearts the light of divine truth shone,and who were witnesses of the power and majesty of ourLord. What they "delivered" therefore is authoritative and binding on earth even as it is bound in heaven.

Trustees of The Faith — "The Saints"

Knowledge of the truth delivered and obedience to itmade saints of them even as it does today. A saint isone made holy and consecrated to the Lord's service. Every saint should cherish the truth which set him freeand should seriously consider his obligation to guardthat body of truth which made him free. The faith isworth contending for. The word "contend" in Jude 3 represents the most strenuous effort required of man. It speaks of struggle, of intense effort. If the faith is not defended from those who creep in unawares then thehope of all mankind is lost. When saints grow wearyfrom the struggle and retire from the field of battle thenthe enemy shall take captive souls at his will. Those ofus who live now are deeply indebted to those who havegone before us who had to sort out truth from error andwho, upon finding truth, contended for it with all theirmight. We owe it to the faith itself to contend for it. Weowe it to ourselves. We owe it to our unsaved friends and loved ones. We owe it to generations yet unborn.What God delivered must be kept as he gave it. "Thereis one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:5). Let usbe constantly aware of the sly maneuvers of those whowould slip into the flock, deny the faith, compromisewith error and lead souls astray. "Watch ye, stand fastin the faith, quit you like men, be strong" (1 Cor. 16:13).

INTRODUCTION

The first chapter of a book entitled "Bible Briefs

Against Hurtful Heresies" by H. Boyce Taylor,

published in 1977, is called "Campbellite Questions and

Baptist Answers." The material was printed in the

January 1977 issue of "The Baptist Challenge" edited

by M. L. Moser, Jr. of Little Rock. In the first weeks of

1978, I reviewed the material in ten lessons on radio

station KXLR in Little Rock. I now desire to review the

material in writing for the readers of Searching The

Scriptures and then I hope to publish the material in a

booklet for a wider and more permanent circulation.

I sincerely hope that many good people who wear the name "Baptist" will have opportunity to read this review. I realize how prejudiced and emotional we can become about our religion, especially when someone questions or denies our cherished beliefs. Therefore, let me say in the beginning of this study that I have absolutely no hatred or animosity toward the Baptistpeople. Many of my friends and relatives—both deadand living—were and are members of the Baptistdenomination. But truth should be more important to usthan anything else on this earth, and to me it is. I hateno group or individual, but I certainly share the feelingof the one who wrote, "Through thy precepts I getunderstanding: therefore I hate every false way" (Psalm119:104). If I say something which you find to be contrary to the scriptures, do not believe it. But if whatI present in this review is the truth, then that's the wayit is and it will be true when we all stand in judgmentand are judged by that standard (John 8:31, 32; 12:48).Truth is not negotiable, and our rejection of it does notchange it in the least (Rom. 3:3, 4).

What is "Campbellism"?

Before continuing, we need to say some things aboutAlexander Campbell and the use of the term "Campbellite." We shall begin with this definition:

"Campbellites: A term sometimes applied to Disciplesof Christ (a) whimsically, by themselves; (b) ignorantly,by the non-church public; (c) viciously, as well as ignorantly, by the less enlightened members of the lessenlightened sects." (Encyclopedia of Religion, Published by Vergilius Firm, 1945, p. 116.)

It has been said that when a football is thrown during a game, three things can happen and two of them arebad. In this definition, we find all three positions bad. Ido not believe that Christians should accept an unscriptural name nor joke about such serious matters.And the other two alternatives are surely unacceptableto all honest people.

The truth is, there is no such thing on earth as a Campbellite or a Campbellite Church! You never saweither. The term is used in derision by those who areenvious of people who insist upon wearing a scriptural.name—Christian. "Campbellism" is only a figment of the confused minds of denominational preachers. Myresentment of the material under review and my defenseof those who are called "Campbellites" is not to be construed as an admission of being a Campbellite. I reject the term, just as I do all human or unscripturalnames in religion.

What About Campbell?

Alexander Campbell (1788-1866) and his father, Thomas Campbell, and the Campbell family came to America as Irish immigrants and were reunited in 1809.Thomas and Alexander, along with other great men ofthe restoration effort, had, through their study of theBible, come to reject Catholicism, protestantdenominationalism, and all human creeds. They came toreject their unscriptural baptism and were baptized(immersed) into Christ for the remission of sins as theBible demanded. They issued such challenges as "Let usspeak where the Bible speaks and remain silent wherethe Bible is silent" and "Let us call Bible things byBible names and do Bible things in Bible ways."

I have in my office a picture of a monument which stands in the Cane Ridge Cemetery near Paris, Kentucky. It says that the man who is buried there was united with the Church of Christ at Cane Ridge in1807. That was two years before Alexander Campbellcame to America, and he was a Presbyterian when he came to this country. On the subject of names, he wrote, "But, alas, the enemies have blasphemed the blessed gospel by pasting our sinful names upon it tobring it into disrepute."

Campbell was a great man with a brilliant mind. But he was only a man, and was right only as he believedand obeyed the scriptures—the same as with any of ustoday. If anyone can name something which we teach orpractice that originated with Alexander Campbell, wewill reject the teaching and cease the practice—gladlyand gratefully!

Our Review Begins

As we begin our review of the material, we quote thefirst paragraph:

"Three copies of a little leaflet published by someCampbellite brother have been sent to the writer of late.The leaflet is entitled 'Questions for Baptists.' At the head of the leaflet is the language of the Apostle Peterexhorting us to 'Be ready always to give an answer toevery man that asketh you a reason for the hope that isin you with meekness and fear.' Believing in the sincerity of those from whom these questions have come, with meekness and yet with delight the writerundertakes to answer these questions."

Mr. Taylor does not mention the name of the authorof the questions directed to the Baptists, therefore I donot know who he was. Since it is a common practice for some Baptist preachers to refer to Christians as "Campbellites," and because of certain statements made, I assume that the questions were written by someone in the church of Christ. Neither Taylor norMoser would deny that by their use of "Campbellites"they have reference to the church of Christ.

The questions are clear, pointed and relevant, and aswe shall see, merit better treatment than they receivedin Mr. Taylor's answers.

The Question, Answers, and Review

"1. 'Why are you a Baptist?' Because Jesus Christand all His apostles were Baptists, for they were allbaptized by the first Baptist preacher."

There's not a word of truth in his answer! Christ and the apostles were not Baptists, and the teaching andpractice of John was as far from that of a modern Baptist preacher as black is from white or truth fromerror. Baptist preachers today baptize those who confesstheir "salvation" and "because of' the remission of sins. John baptized those who confessed their sins, and hisbaptism was for (unto) the remission of sins. Read Mark1, verses 4 and 5.

If Christ and the apostles were Baptists, they and allthose who were responsible for writing the scriptures did not know it, for no mention was ever made of it. If Christ received "Baptist baptism" he must have been in the Baptist Church. But that cannot be true, for he wasbaptized by John before the church was established—even according to Baptist doctrine. If Christ and the apostles were Baptists, then should notall people today be Baptists, and would it not followthat they must be in order to follow the Lord? It wouldbe interesting to hear a Baptist preacher quibble anddouble-talk in answer to that question. Again, if Christand the apostles were Baptists, what does that imply concerning the Catholics, Methodists, Presbyterians,and all others? Are they all lost, or would a Baptistpreacher argue that they can be saved even though theydo not follow Christ and the apostles?

We shall have more to say about John and the namein response to other questions and answers.

(This study will be continued in the next issue.)

OUT OF CONTROL

No! deserves to be placed on the list of endangeredspecies of words. It is on the verge of extinction fromour vocabulary. With each passing day, more Americansdemonstrate that they are unable, and unwilling, to restrain themselves from anything their impulses suggest, and the spirit of the day is caught by therefrain of a recent pop song which exhorted us all to getout on that floor and "boogie-oogie-oogie till we just can't boogie no more!" The result has been terrifying: having neglected the restrictions that served as our controls, many of us are spiralling downward in a moraltail-spin.

Many forms of this indulgent behavior are obviouslyserious. The epidemic of teenage pregnancies and VD,the prevalence of drug, alcohol, and tobacco addiction,the random violence menacing our cities, the sordidnessserved up to us as entertainment, and an unfortunatelylong list of other problems sicken us and let us knowjust how undisciplined we have become. But this lack ofrestraint is not confined to the moral weaklings in society. All of us, to some extent, have lost control. During the holiday season just passed, for example, howmany among us restrained ourselves responsibly in theuse of our credit cards? How many of us put reasonablelimits on our eating? The inability to say No! is morallydangerous, no matter who suffers from it.

I believe the most regrettable aspect of our 'permissive society' is that it reflects a shortage of individual SELF-control. It is easy to blame our woes onsociety. But society is a collection of individuals. And ifsociety is permissive, that only means that individuals,like you and me, are. Instead of waiting for societycollectively to become more restrained, we need to beginnow making ourselves more disciplined. We need the courage to assume responsibility for ourselves. We need to decide personally to choose the very best and determine, God helping us, that our lives will be reasoned and rational. No one can do that for us.

Too often we rely on salvation by legislation. We simply assume the answer to any social problem lies in more and stricter laws. Good laws, of course, are beneficial and necessary, but in a country where individual citizens cannot or will not place self-imposedchecks on their own behavior in obedience to common sense, there is little hope that any externally-imposedregulations will help much. What is required at thepresent time is not a proliferation of legal statutes. Wealready have more laws than a policeman can shake abilly club at. What we do not have is sufficient self-mastery on the part of each person.

Parents, I suspect, need especially to take note of the

importance of moral self-restraint. It is not enough to

force our children to do right. At some point in the

future, our restrictions on their behavior will cease to be

enforceable, and unless we have also taught them how

to make responsible choices for themselves and equipped

them with their own internal moral gyroscopes, we will

see them flounder as adults.

In a certain sense, we who are Christians are

'controlled' by God. But in another important sense, we

are to be controlled by ourselves. Listen to Paul: "I run

in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way,

as not beating the air; but I buffet my body and make

it my slave, lest possibly, after I have preached to

others, I myself should be disqualified" (1 Cor. 9:26f).

Paul certainly understood that ultimately the

restrictions were God's and that it would only be by

His help that he could live within them, but he surely

also understood that God expected Paul to be big enough

to CHOOSE these restraints as his own and to exercise

his own self-mastery in the application of them. Paul,

with his vigorous and manly sense of moral self-

command, would be appalled at the flabby

impulsiveness of some of us who cannot even

voluntarily cut down on our gasoline consumption,

much less impose the limits of moral decency upon

ourselves. Contrary to popular thinking, reasoned discipline does not hinder freedom. To think so is to confuse true freedom with reckless abandon. Actually, control makesfreedom possible. The steering wheel of a car restricts itsmovement. But unless we define freedom as the right ofthe car to propel us into any ditch or oncoming vehicle itpleases, we would say that adequate 'discipline' at the wheel is one of the restraints that allow a car to be useful and not destructive. Similarly, as an old saying goes, nohuman being is really free who cannot command himself.As Peter, writing by the Holy Spirit's inspiration, put it,"By what a man is overcome, by this he is enslaved" (2Pet. 2:19). It does not take a very expensive dictionaryto explain the difference between liberty and libertinism.From a purely practical standpoint, then, we need self-discipline to be useful as well as free. After all, theman who does not stand for something will fall foranything, and he who is everywhere is nowhere. But,more important, from the Biblical standpoint, a lack ofpersonal control is sinful. Self-restraint is everywherepraised in the Bible as a virtue (Gal. 5:23, 2 Pet. 1:6,etc.). And Peter pointed out that, as the world getsworse, there is all the more need for us to be in command of ourselves: "prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled" (1 Pet. 1:13, NIV). As common wisdom tells us, following the path of leastresistance makes men, as well as rivers, crooked.

Now 1980-81 Catalog Ready

Have you received a copy yet? If not, you may have one free. Write to:

Religious Supply Center

P.O. Box 13164, Louisville, KY 40213

In Psalm 90:10,12 we read: "The days of our yearsare threescore and ten, or even by reason of strengthfourscore years; yet is their pride but labor and sorrow;for it is soon gone and we fly away. . . . So teach us to number our days, that we may get us a heart of wisdom."

These words were written by David nearly three thousand years ago. Yet they state a fact that is just astrue, and contain an exhortation just as much neededtoday as when David wrote them. For in these words David teaches us something of the brevity of life, and ofthe value of time. This should be of particularsignificance to us at this season of the year, when ourthoughts are tuned to the new year that we have justentered. Before you read this article we will have crossed the threshold of the year of our Lord, 1980. Theyear of 1979 is now history, and has taken its place withthe preceding years as a part of the past.

For everyone, the beginning of another year should bea time for sober meditation. For we are now one yearnearer to the end of our earthly sojourn than we were atthe beginning of 1979. Which means that we have oneyear less to prepare for the day of judgment when wewill receive according to the deeds done while in thebody, whether good or bad (2 Cor. 5:10). A story thatimpressed itself upon my mind years ago, concerned aman who died very suddenly. His friends were heard toexpress their sorrow that he had not had time to preparefor death. They were wrong! He had those years that hehad lived. That is, in tact, the purpose of living, — toprepare for death and the judgment (Heb. 9:27). How precious a thing, then, time should thus be! Yet howmuch of it is wasted by so many, impatiently waitingfor comparatively trivial plans for the future to materialize, or some supposedly important date to arrive, and failing to realize that the present is all thatwe have.

A World Governed By Time

God, Himself, is not subject to, nor restricted by thelimitations of time. Isaiah describes Him as "the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity" (Isa. 57:15). Peter said: "A day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Pet. 3:8).Nevertheless it has pleased him to place us in a worldthat is governed by time. Some one has said that timeis but a broken off fragment of eternity. One poet hassaid:

Out of eternity a new day is born.

Into eternity at night will return.

Living thus in a world of time, our plans and activities are carried out with due regard to its limitations.

Solomon said: "For everything there is a season, and a

time for every purpose under heaven" (Eccl. 3:1).

Recognizing that principle, the farmer sows his seed in

the spring, and reaps the harvest in the autumn. For

the wage-earner there is a starting time and a quitting

time. Business transactions are carried out with due

regard to time. Bills and installment payments become

due at a certain time of the month, and beyond which

they are reckoned as past due. Business documents, to

be valid, must bear a proper date. A non-dated or

improperly dated check can invalidate it, and justify a

bank's refusal to cash it. The events of history have

been recorded with respect to time, not only in terms of

the day and month and year that an event transpired,

but also with reference to whether it was B.C. or A.D..

Lawbreakers are often required to serve "time", which

means being deprived of their liberty for that portion of

their life.

And so, as our thoughts are turned toward the year that

lies ahead, let us look again at the words of David: "The

days of our years are threescore and ten, or even by

reason of strength fourscore years; yet is their price but

labor and sorrow; for it is soon gone, and we fly away."

In these words David tells us that Life Is Brief.

While, to the child, time often seems to drag; for

those that have attained the allotted span of seventy

years, or even by reason of strength eighty or more

years, life has seemed very brief. Ask anyone who has

lived to ripe old age, and he or she will tell you how

rapidly it seems that those years have flown by. And

those of us who have reached, or passed middle age find

that each succeeding year passes a little more rapidly

than the preceding one.

There are various expressions used by the inspiredwriters of the Bible that teach us about the brevity oflife. David likened man's life-span to "grass which groweth up. In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down and withereth" (Psalm 90:5,6). Job said: "My days are swifter than a weaver's shuttle" (Job 7:6). To anyonewho has seen a weaving machine in operation, the figureof the shuttle as it rapidly travels back and forth is suggestive of the rapidity with which our days come and go.

The writer of the book of James gives us an impressive illustration of the brevity of life, and somewords of caution as to the uncertainty of our carryingthe best laid plans to fruition. "Come now, ye that say, Today, or tomorrow we will go into this city and spend a year there, and trade and get gain: whereas yeknow not what shall be on the morrow. What is yourlife? For ye are a vapor that appeareth for a little time,and then vanisheth away. For ye ought to say, If theLord will, we shall both live and do this or that" (James4:13-15).

Thus James compared our life-span to the wisp ofearly morning vapor that is so quickly dispelled by therising sun. One moment it is there. In a few moments itis gone. And how much like life! Here is a man of fortyyears, at the peak of his physical and mental powers.One moment he stands before us, vibrant with life, andradiating confidence in his plans for the future. But tragedy strikes in the form of a heart attack, or an automobile accident, or an assassin's bullet, and in the

next moment he lies before us a lifeless corpse, his plans

unrealized. Thus James taught us that we should make

our plans subject to the will of God. "If the Lord will,

we shall do this or that." Some one has well said that,

Man proposes, but God disposes. Which means that

God has a way of bringing the best laid plans of man to

nought.

So because of the brevity of life, it was thus David's

plea that God would

Teach Us To Number Our Days.

How much we need to remember that time is a

precious commodity, and should not be wasted. During

the past few years governments have become greatly

concerned about the rapid depletion of non-renewable

resources, — natural gas and crude oil. They are now

telling us that the known supplies are rapidly dwindling

and could conceivably come to an end in the near future.

Therefore they are urging us to use what we have to the

best advantage. While this is a matter to be deeply

concerned about, of far more importance is the need to

realize that time is also non-renewable. Once it is gone it

is beyond recall.

Jesus taught both by word and example the value oftime. On one occasion he said: "I must work the works of him that sent me while it is day: the night comethwhen no man can work" (John 9:4). He lived about thirty three years on earth, and his personal ministryoccupied but three and a half of those years. Yet thinkof what he accomplished in that time (John 21:25). Andall because he realized the value of time, and used it tothe best advantage.

The apostle Paul also taught us something of thevalue of time when he wrote: "Look carefully how yewalk, not as unwise, but as wise; redeeming the timebecause the days are evil" (Eph. 5:16). A footnote offersas an alternative reading, "buying up the opportunity."The idea suggested is that our lifetime is a time of opportunity. We redeem that time by making use of theopportunities as they come. Since the same opportunitynever presents itself more than once, if we do not makeuse of it when it comes, it is lost forever.

A Proper Sense Of Values Needed

In placing a proper value on our time, we need tohave a proper sense of values, and apportion our timeaccordingly. This raises the question of, How much ofmy time is given to preparation for eternity as comparedto the time that is spent in earthly pursuits?

Some years ago I read an article by some one whose name I have forgotten, the substance of which was abreakdown of the average life of sixty five years and theamount of time spent in various activities. I remind youagain that the figures given were the average, and notnecessarily true of everyone. The facts presented were asfollows:

1. Three years spent in education. That is as if onewere to attend school twenty four hours a day for 1095days.
2. Eight years spent in amusements. I presume thatthis represented time spent in watching television andattending ball games.
3. Six years spent eating. I remind you that this isthe average.
4. Five years spent in transportation. That would be

the time we spend in our cars and other conveyances,going to and coming from work and other places.

1. Four years spent in conversation. Remember, thisis average.
2. Fourteen years spent in work. Based on a fortyhour week, I presume.
3. Twenty four years spent in sleep. So when thefabled Rip Van Winkle slept for twenty years, he gotnearly all his at once.
4. Three years spent in sickness and convalescence.For some, this figure may seem abnormally high, butwas given as the average.

The interesting (and disturbing) aspect of the articlewas that it went on to point out that if one were tospend one hour each week in a church service, that inthose sixty five years it would have added up to lessthan five months. Think of it! Sixty four years spent inpursuit of things that will benefit the body which oneday will return to the dust from whence it came. Lessthan five months spent in preparation of the soul foreternity. Yet how many there are who think that anhour spent in worship on Lord's day morning fulfills their responsibility insofar as spiritual necessities are concerned. Such a concept is the result of a mixed upsense of values.

Yes, this life, which is a time of sowing, is short.Eternity, which is the time of harvest, is long. Lord,teach us to number our days!

THE NEW JERUSALEM

QUESTION: In Rev. 21:2—When John saw this Holy

City the New Jerusalem coining down from God out of

Heaven and he was to be their God and dwell with

men—When was this to take place and where? Is this

literal or symbolic language? — D. H. M.

ANSWER: Three of the most popular views concerning this passage are: 1) A Premillennial View.Some premillennialist teach that this is the fulfillment of Matt. 5:5: "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inheritthe earth" and 2 Pet. 3:13: ". . .we look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." They conclude that this is a picture ofthe righteous coming down out of heaven to dwell on thisliteral earth after it has been renovated, purified, andmade the eternal abode of saints. 2) The Victorious ChurchIn The Present. Some hold that this is a picture, in symboliclanguage, of the church of today—victorious over the tribulations and foes of the past (Judaism and Heathenism)and in a society entirely different from the past and morefavorable for fulfilling the mission of the church. 3) TheGlorified Church In Heaven. Some hold that this is a picture, in symbolic language, of the triumphant churchafter it has conquered all foes (symbolized in the preceding chapters); after the destruction of the presentorder (Rev. 20:11); after the judgment (Rev. 20:12-15), andfinally at home with God forever—glorious and precious inHis sight, the recipient of eternal bliss indescribable forevermore. This is the view I hold to be true.

In determining the truth on this issue, one should consider carefully the different uses made of the expression "the heavens and the earth" in the Scriptures.Not even "the new heavens and the new earth" are always used in reference to the same thing. The contextof the expression throws light on its meaning in anygiven place.

In Gen. 2:1 the expression obviously refers to part of God's work during the creative week of chapter one. InGen. 1:8 we find that the firmament is called heaven. The earth and the atmosphere which envelops it andwhich makes possible life on the earth is the "heavensand earth" of Gen. 2:1. This is God's order or arrangement for man's physical welfare—a physical dwelling place for man. The basic idea of "God's order or arrangement for man—a dwelling place—is alwaysinherent in the expression. However, it is variously usedin a material and spiritual sense. The context is the primary determining factor.

Concerning "heaven" the Bible is written in recognitionof three (2 Cor. 12:2). These are generally understood to be;1) the atmosphere that immediately

envelops the earth and which makes possible life

thereon; 2) the planetary region, and 3) the place where God

dwells. When joined with the word "earth" the reference is

usually to man's dwelling place, either physical or

spiritual.

Isaiah, in symbolic language, foretold the passing of theold order under Moses (a spiritual relationship for the Jews)and the establishment of the new order under Christ (aspiritual relationship for all) by use of these terms. In Isa.

51:4 God said to "my people . . . my nation" (Jews) that"a law shall proceed" from Him which would be "for a lightof the people" (Jews and Gentiles). However, first, their heavens would vanish like smoke and the earth would wax old like a garment (v. 6). Thus, the old order would passaway. He then says, "that I may plant the heavens, andlay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people" (v. 16). Isaiah had already prophesied thenew order, the law of which was to go forth from "Zion" andbe for "all nations" (Isa. 2:2,3). The remaining chapters ofIsaiah concern primarily this new order under Christ, hence, are Messianic prophecies. A contrast is drawn between the old and the new in these words: "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind . . . The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat strawlike the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain,saith the Lord" (Isa. 65:17,25). The word "create" emphasizes the complete newness of the new spiritualdwelling place for man. It is the same word found in Gen.

1. The contrast between the former enmity of Jew and Gentile and the peace between the two in "the new heavensand the new earth" is symbolized by the animals mentioned(Cf. 11:6-9; 2:1-4). The fulfillment of this prophecy of peace is established clearly in Eph. 2:12-16. The book of Isaiah closes, in beautiful symbolic language, picturing "all flesh"worshiping before the Lord from one appointment of worship to the next in what Isaiah calls "the new heavensand the new earth" (Isa. 66:22-24). Therefore, Isaiah's "new heavens and new earth" is the spiritual dwelling place forman in the gospel dispensation—the church or kingdom ofour Lord.

Peter draws a contrast between "the heavens and the earth" which "were of old" and the "heavens and the earth, which are now" (2 Pet. 3:5-7). The former "overflowed with water" and "perished." The latter is "reserved unto fireagainst the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men"and is to "pass away with a great noise" melting with ferventheat and being burned up (v. 10). The contrast seems tobe material and between antediluvian and the postdiluvian dwelling places for man. Peter then expresses the hope of all saints, "Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a newearth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Pet. 3:13). Peteralso shows that this new order is after the judgment (v. 7).This parallels what John wrote in Rev. 21:1. John sawthis "new heaven and new earth" after the destruction of the present order (Rev. 20:11) and after the judgment (Rev.20:12-15). I, therefore, conclude that Peter and John's "new heaven and earth" is the eternal abode of the saints.

There is nothing in the Scriptures to indicate that this "new heaven and earth" (Rev. 21:1) is the old heavenand earth made over—renovated and purified. NeitherMatt. 5:5 nor related passages teach it. The expression"inherit the earth" in the original text is variously translated "inherit the land." Its origin involves God's promise to Abraham (Gen. 12:7). Until Canaan was conquered by Israel the Jews anticipated the time whenthey would "inherit the land." Afterward, the expression came to be used proverbially with reference toblessings anticipated at the hand of God (Cf. Psm. 37:3,9,11, 22, 29, 34). Isaiah said, "Thy people alsoshall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land forever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands,that I may be glorified" (Isa. 60:21). This verse is partof the Messianic prophecy which our Lord read and applied to Himself (Isa. 61:1-3; Lk. 4:16-21). Therefore, "inherit the land" here refers to the spiritual blessingsreceived through Christ, the great deliverer. All spiritualblessings are in Him (Eph. 1:3). According to Isaiah theobjective was "that I may be glorified." Paul says that this is done in the church (Eph. 3:21). Since Jesus was discussing kingdom principles in the Sermon On The Mount, it should not be thought strange that he shoulduse this proverbial expression to show that "meekness"is a condition to the spiritual blessings in the kingdom.

The expression "coming down from God out of heaven" (Rev. 21:2) symbolizes ownership or origin ofthe "holy city, new Jerusalem" (the people of God). Ifsuch were seen coming up out of hell or up out of thesea or up out of the earth (Rev. 13:1,11), it would havesymbolized a different origin. John saw holy people who truly were of God—the glorious church, "without spot,wrinkle, or blemish" (Eph. 5:27), "as a bride adorned for her husband." He then describes the bliss of this "new heaven and new earth"—the reward of the righteous, the eternal abode of the saints.

The Scriptures do not teach anything that wouldjustify modern day concepts of "The New Planet, Earth," or a Utopian "World Of Tomorrow."

Such is truly an important question especially in thewake of many modern campaigns, schemes, and denominational devices that have begun their advanceinto the Lord's church. As the cry goes forth as to theneeds of the "modern" church, the answers echoed in return all too often reflect the attitude of many who seethe church in nothing more than a physical role. "Fellowship halls," "youth programs," "puppet ministries," "bus ministries," and all forms of church supported recreation are among the answers received toour question. However, is this what the church needs now? Is this what marks the characteristics of a "strong" church? Many in the pulpit as well as in the pew answer emphatically, "NO!" by showing that thekingdom of God is not eating and drinking (physical),but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit(spiritual— Rom. 14:17). And yet, how many of us turnright around and think that if the church just had alarge meeting house, large attendance, and large contribution that such would fulfill the needs of the church and automatically make it strong? Inconsistent? Indeed it is!

Notice if you will that it is to this problem that Pauladdresses himself in 1 Cor. 1-4. The situation here was one that found the Corinthian brethren viewing thechurch from a carnal, fleshly, and human viewpoint andnot from the spiritual standpoint of God (3:1-4). Andthe message of these first four chapters to us is that tobe spiritual and understand spiritual things and gain spiritual values, then we MUST QUIT THINKING CARNALLY ABOUT THE LORD'S WORK! In view of this, Dear Reader, let me suggest to you that the church just needs now what it has always needed.

Gospel Preaching

Whatever happened to soul inspiring sermons on Repentance, Baptism, Faith, Discipleship, the Church,Worldliness, the Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus etc. . . that used to ring boldly from the pulpits acrossthe land? Whatever became of the preacher who couldhold his audience spellbound because of his acute knowledge of the Word of God and yet at the same timenot lose the simplicity of the message so that even thesmallest school child could understand? Whatever happened to the preacher who would feed his audiencespiritual food based on book, chapter, and verse ratherthat a constant diet of commentaries and writings ofmen? Now this is not to say that there are no inspiring sermons being preached today, or that there are no preachers who can hold an audience, nor is my purposeto condemn any who might quote a particular scholar tooffer clarity on a specific point or word (I often do).BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT AT THE ROOT OF MANY A PROBLEM TODAY, LIES THE LACK OF SIMPLE BIBLE PREACHING! I am convinced that in a good many places a generationmay be arising that knoweth not the way of the Lord.Such should not be! As a young preacher, I take carefulnotice of the words of the older apostle to young Timothy to "preach the Word." NOT human opinions, NOT the writings of men, BUT THE WORD! It would seem that we have developed a tendency to thinkthat to be a successful preacher in God's kingdom onemust become a "specialist" in one field or another. Andwhile there is something to be said for someone who haspursued knowledge in one particular area let us neverlose sight of the fact that what we need to "specialize"in is the WORD!

Notice the words of the apostle in 2:1 -5:

"And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come

with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming

to you the testimony of God. For I determined to

know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and

Him crucified. And I was with you in weakness

and in fear and in much trembling. And my

message and my preaching were not in persuasive

words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit

and of power, that your faith should not rest on

the wisdom of men, but on the power of God."Yes, the power of preaching lies in the Word and not inman! Paul later stated that preachers are nothing morethan planters and water-boys for it is Almighty Godwho causes the growth (3:4-7). Yes, what the churchneeds now is, as one fellow put it, "just plain ol' gospelpreachin'!" What characterized the growth of that earlychurch? What made it strong? Gospel preaching by suchmen as Stephen, Peter, Paul, Timothy, Barnabas, andothers. Men who preached Christ and Him crucified.May we follow their example!

Gospel Listeners

Not only does Paul admonish Timothy to "Preach the Word" in 2 Tim. 4:1-4, but the apostle also shows usthat preaching is a two-way street. There is the messageand there is the reception of that message. Notice verses3 and 4: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths."Yes, there are two things necessary for successful communication of a message. There must be (1) a transmitter, and (2) a receiver. Sometimes the receiverof the message of Christ is not very receptive to thatmessage as evidenced by some of the reactions to firstcentury preaching by Stephen, Paul, and even ChristHimself. So in this passage Paul admonishes Timothy not to become discouraged by those who reject themessage (want their ears tickled) nor to detour himselffrom the message but to continually preach the Word"in season and out of season."

However, a simple study of the book of Acts willshow that there ARE individuals earnestly searching fortruth and that many of the first century gospel sermonswere followed by great results (Acts 6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20). And I sincerely believe that with goodsound Bible preaching today the same results will, can and do occur!

In other words, what the church needs today is gospellovin' church members! Members who are zealous and at the same time couple such zeal with knowledge (Rom.10:2). Members who will demonstrate the courage to change their lives and bring them into accord with God's Word and members who love the truth and who will uphold it. What does the church need now? DevotedChristians!

Gospel Elders

We're hearing a lot about shortages these days andwe've no doubt heard of the "preacher shortage" in the church today (and sadly to say the shortage is a reality), but I believe that there is an even greatershortage of men who are willing to dedicate their lives tothe role of a shepherd of a local flock. And if there is anything that the church needs today it would be godlyshepherds or elders. Men who have developed thequality of sound leadership required of a bishop. Men who put the kingdom first and men who support soundpreaching. And if you worship at a place where there aregodly men who serve you need to thank the Lord forthem and get behind them. But why does a shortageexist? Could it just be that there is a lack of preaching on the eldership? Could it be that men are too preoccupied with material gain and have no time for it?Could it be that there are some brethren in congregations without elders who feel that if elders were appointed that they would "lose their voice?" Could it be that brethren are busy reading more into thequalifications than God put there in the first place? Orcould it just be that there is a general feeling among many that "we just don't need elders?" Such attitudes as this prove to be a sad commentary on those whoprofess New Testament Christianity. Please note thatthe Lord through the apostles appointed elders in everychurch (Acts 14:23; Tit. 1:5) and such is part of Hisplan for the organization of His church and we need torealize it. Furthermore, 1 Tim. 3:1 states that "if a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work" (A.S.V.) Herein lies the key. The office of a bishop issomething that is not acquired with little forethought butshould come after years of preparation. We need to instruct the young to begin now to prepare and ordertheir lives in such a way that one day they can serveas elders in God's kingdom.

A great church is NOT great because it has a large building, large crowd, large contribution, greatcampaigns, and all kinds of ministries. A great churchis great when it's full of great Christian people. And DearReader, let no one mislead you into thinking that the'modern" church needs something different than the church of New Testament times for the church justneeds today what it has always needed: Gospel Preaching, Gospel Listening, and Gospel Elders.

WORK IN VARIOUS PLACES

This time, we have reports from several differentplaces to include. The first is from Mel Rose, in Anaheim, California, and although that is hardly "overseas", it does concern work among Spanish-speaking people, and is well worth considering here.Various portions are quoted directly.

". . . another Spanish congregation was started inGarden Grove, meeting in the Fairview building. It wasmy pleasure to visit this new work earlier, and get acquainted with the brethren. Bro. Ed. Roman and some other good brethren are helping and encouraging this congregation, and I anticipate that things are goingto develop there in a fine way. Besides this new work, Iunderstand that bro. Frank Ventura and those working with him are planning to begin a Spanish speaking congregation in the Bellflower area, perhaps as early asDecember. This will make the third conservative, non-instrumental Spanish church in this part of the state.All will have been organized within the past two and-one-half years. We rejoice to see the Spanish causetake hold in Southern California. . . I reported that Ihad completed work on a Spanish tract exposing the errors of the 'Jehovah's Witnesses'. I have alreadyreceived four or five substantial orders for the new tract, which I proposed to "sell" for .10 cents each. One of theorders came from Mexico, along with a check for $10.00for 100 of the tracts. When I took them to the postoffice for shipment, I was shocked to find that it cost$3.36 to mail these tracts! And it only costs about adollar less to send a similar amount of tracts here in the US. . . Since there is a tremendous lack of Bible class material IN SPANISH, I put together a work book last year (ESTUDIOS BIBLICOS FUNDAMENTALES)which is now being used in different congregations. (I'llbe reprinting this book soon, because I'm out of them.) Now, I'm working on another series of lessons, coveringthe Old Testament. . . "Estudios en el AntiguoTestamento" . . . Friends, I have lost another $50.00 insupport! That makes $225.00 since June!. . . I am stillin need of $150.00 in additional support each month. I know I ask a lot, but I do not ask it for myself alone,but for the work's sake. Will you help me?. . . .'

A recent letter from a close friend and gospel preacherin the Philippines reads, in part: "Wally, as far as thework here is concerned, it is progressing slowly, but satisfactorily. As per record of our daily evangelism, it shows that the previous two months we have approached 160 homes and these have heard the message of saving power of the gospel from us. From the said number of homes, only one soul has responded to the

gospel call. He was baptized into Christ. . . Pray for us

that we will work harder for the cause of Christ in the

Philippines." My comment: 160 home Bible studies in

two months averages 2 and 2/3's per day. That says

nothing of the work involved in making the contacts

and setting up the studies in the first place. Nor does it

count the number of attempts where the request for a

Bible study was "no". And yet the man asks our

prayers that he work harder for Christ's cause. He has

mine.

Ray Votaw in South Africa writes: "On August 2,1954 a frightened and bewildered young couple and theirtwo baby daughters disembarked from the Pretoria Castle at East London, Cape Province, South Africa. Twenty-five years have now passed since that time. Thena and I didn't plan to be away from the U. S. A. (home) that long. The only way we have been able tocontinue was to simply take a few years at a time. Wedid this and here we are. . . it has been my privilege topreach the gospel not only in the Republic of South Africa but also in Rhodesia, Zambia, Swaziland, Lesotho, Transkei, Bophuthatswana and Kaw-Zulu. Mytravels have taken me to most of the countries of Africa, many in Asia and Europe and some in Southand Central America. We have reared our three daughters in this country and are now watching our six grandchildren grow up here also. . . we are still fit and expect several more years of productive work in these parts. . . Let me try to 'nutshell' my gospel ambitions for South Africa. I could talk about baptisms and establishing churches—and I have so reported manytimes. Yet my fervent prayer and heart's desire is to leave South Africa having 'replaced myself ' among the native blacks, Coloureds and European Whites. I'm talking about leaving men—native to the country—whowithout American prodding or dollars will effectivelycarry on gospel work among their own people. This is better than self replacement. Such men by the very factthat they will be working among their own people andmotivated by a love for the truth will be better for theKingdom of God in this country than I could ever be. . .This idea of local replacements, I feel. . . has been doneamong the native blacks and Coloureds with men like James Lekgeu, Hendrick Morris and others. Progresshas been made toward this end with European Whites. I plan to work harder at this among this group in the months ahead. I have believed for years that this kind of thing is real progress. My conviction becomes firmerwith each passing day as I witness the shatteringdisarray of churches which have been built around thepersonalities of Americans and propped up with American dollars. . . I'm thinking about the church in South Africa in the next generation—not just years. . . ."

Finally, there is a report from Piet Joubert, a nativepreacher in South Africa with some interesting observations. Read on.

"South Africa is a country of many nations and colours. This is a very big problem. Honest efforts arebeing made to the complex problem. The religiousdivisions are also many. Among the black people thereare more than two thousand different denominations.

"The truth has, therefore, a great deal of work to do here. Our biggest problem is having men with the knowledge of the truth, and the patience, to proclaim it.There are no short cuts to calling men with the truth,and developing them to become faithful men who teachother faithful men. The teacher, therefore, and the brethren supporting him, must recognize this need. Noteveryone baptized is going to become the truly faithfulteacher. They are few in number.

"Congregations that have been established, then leftby the teacher before the babes have been matured,have suffered the consequences. The few who tried tohold on withered under the pressure.

"Here in Durban, a congregation has been establishedamong the white people. The attendance is between seventy and eighty. More important is the fact thatsome of the men are beginning to develop into teachers.

"Among the Indian people a congregation has alsobeen established. The white brethren have been attending to the Indian work and teaching them. Sincethen brother Jim Lovell has arrived in South Africa, from the States, and is working full-time with them.Brother Cass arrived from Port Elizabeth, another partof South Africa, and another congregation has been started among the Indian brethren. A third congregation has been started since. Always with the thought in mind, find faithful men and help themdevelop into teachers. This does take time.

"Trying to teach people for only a few hours a week is not a great help. They must spend much time in studying themselves. Many of the members do some studying at home. But studying enough to be future teachers needs much more study. We have to keep searching for these people.

"I understand Gene Tope is returning to South Africa. He is coming to the Durban area as well. The stronger we can develop the work in this area the betterfor the future.

We appreciate your efforts in trying to encourage thebrethren by assisting the work overseas. The brethren here are very conscious of the efforts of the brethren inAmerica. They give much thanks to God for the assistance."

NOTE:—Read Mt. 9:37,38. Anyone interested in preaching the gospel elsewhere, or encouraging others todo so? What will WE do about the plenteous harvest?

(Following is the text of my lesson delivered in theCrescent Park lectureship at Odessa, Texas, November6, 1979. Quotations cited to substantiate argumentsthat have been made are from the "Smith — LoveladyDebate" (SLD) and the "Bamett — Cheatham Discussion" as published in the "Gospel Anchor" (BCD

— GA). At the request of brother Connie Adams, and inthe interest of truth, this material is submitted to readers of "Searching The Scriptures. "The concludingpart of this study will follow next month. —Robert A. Bolton).

At the invitation of this good church, and in the providence of Almighty God, I consider it a distinctprivilege to be permitted to stand before this intelligent audience to speak on the subject of "Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage — The Moyer Position." and after a great deal of thought, I deem it perhaps as much significant and appropriate, as it seems coincidental, tohave this presentation sandwiched between the two lectures on "Cultism!"

Regarding the "Moyer" position, I would like to make some pertinent observations. I regret that the name "Moyer" has been so generally attached to the position under consideration, although I suppose that historically, such could hardly be avoided in view of thepressing of this position among brethren by my late andbeloved friend, Lloyd Moyer, whom I heard preach onthis subject and with whom I discussed this matter privately upon more than one occasion, and who, incidentally, baptized by wife years ago.

Many others have espoused the same basic positioncompletely separate and apart from and totallyindependent of Bro. Moyer, although it seems thatperhaps some younger men today hold this position because of the tremendous influence of Bro. Moyer upon them. And so, with regard to the so-called "Moyer Position," I would prefer to refer to it as the "OneLoosed, Both Loosed" theory. This, I believe, will keeppersonalities out of the study and help prevent prejudice.

May I also point out that although I have reason tobelieve that some who hold this position are not honestand sincere, for the most part those who teach the "OneLoosed, Both Loosed" theory do so as an honest conviction that the scriptures so teach.

Although certain arguments are made by someteachers of this theory, which arguments are rejected byothers who hold the same basic views, in reality theyare all designed to defend the right of the guilty party in a divorce to remarry with God's approval.

Time will not permit a complete and thorough discussion of this matter, as it would take the wisdom of Solomon to answer all the arguments and questionsthat might be raised with regard to marriage, divorceand remarriage, and my name is not Solomon!

Very simply put, the position we examine is thatwhen there is a divorce because of fornication, not onlyis the innocent free to remarry, but the guiltyfornicator, having been divorced by the innocent, isalso free in the eyes of God to remarry. In its various aspects, the position is as follows:

There is a marriage bond between husband and wife,which if broken for one must be broken for both, so therefore, both are free to remarry. When a divorce hastaken place for the only cause permitted by the Lord,fornication, then both parties to the divorce are at thesame time without a mate and equally free to remarry.

Also, the position is that adultery, defined as "the sex act with the spouse of another," is the only prohibition to remarriage, so since in a divorce for fornication, one is no longer married, the other cannotbe married, and therefore, any sex act by definition foreither cannot be adultery since both are unmarried.

In addition, a necessary position advocated is thateven in a divorce obtained for "any cause," althoughneither is free to remarry without committing adultery,the first one to remarry commits adultery, thus freeingboth parties, after repentance, to remarry.

Thus, it will be readily seen that, in reality, there isabsolutely no prohibition to any remarriage of eitherparty after divorce for any reason. As one advocate ofthe "One Loosed, Both Loosed" theory recently affirmed in debate: "unscripturally divorced and remarried people may continue in the remarriage without further sin!"

Now, from this point on in this study, the procedure Iwill follow will be to state the specific argument made,cite one or more quotations from recent debates which set forth the argument, and make a very brief answer tothe best of my ability.

ARGUMENT: When Jesus said, in Matthew 19:9, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and he that marrieth her when she is put awaycommitteth adultery," the phrase "except for fornication" modifies both the "a" and "b" clauses of the passage.

QUOTATION: "Mt. 19:9b — 'Whosoever marries

her which is put away dothcommit adultery'..........Jesus didn't say, any put-away. He said ..........'Except for the cause of fornication.'" — (SLD — 174).

ANSWER: It is apparent from this argument thatthose who make it consider Matthew 19:9b as an elliptical statement, that is, that Jesus omitted words,in this case the exception clause of Matthew 19:9a fromMatthew 19:9b, which are necessary to understand whathe meant. Thus, Jesus is made to say that whosoevermarries a divorced person commits adultery, unless thedivorced one was put away for fornication. Therefore,one divorced without the cause of fornication is forbidden by the Lord to remarry, but the divorced fornicator may remarry with God's approval. Can anyoneseriously believe that Jesus withheld the privilege of remarriage from the innocent divorced one, while allowing the divorced guilty fornicator the right to remarry with God's approval, thus putting a premiumon sin? Surely not! But, as someone has said, "A littleadultery makes everything all right!" Believe it, who can?

ARGUMENT: The first word of Matthew 19:9b, theword "and", is from the Greek word "Kai" and means

"or," not "both." It is an "either — or" proposition, not

"this and that" but rather "this or that!" Thus, Jesus

is made to say: "Whosoever shall put away his wife,

except for fornication, and shall marry another,

committeth adultery; 'or' he that marrieth her when she

is put away committeth adultery." Therefore, where a

divorce has occurred without scriptural cause, whichever

one marries first commits adultery, thus freeing the

other partner to remarry.

QUOTATION: "If you put away your wife and you

marry another, dear friend, Jesus Christ said you are

going to commit adultery. Well, what if I put her away,

and I don't remarry; but she does? Then dear friend,

'Whosoever shall marry her that is put away commits

adultery.' It's one or the other ..........it is this little

word 'and' that is causing a lot of our problems." —

(SLD — 131).

ANSWER: The words "and" and "or" are not

synonymous terms in either Greek or English. Thayer

says, "Kai (and)...........marks something added to

what has already been said, or that of which something

already said holds good ..........also, likewise." — pg.

316. Furthermore, as one Greek Grammarian states, "Kai has only two significations: and also." For one to contend that he has just as much right to translate "Kai" as he pleases, either "and" or "or" is laughablestupidity and a manifestation of either gross ignoranceof Greek and English or a deliberate attempt at evasion of truth. Every translation I have checked, and I haveover 25 in my library, that translates "Kai" either in the body or margin in Matthew 19:9b, translates it"and." Not a single one of them reads "or!" Yet, we areboldly told by some who contend for the "One Loosed,Both Loosed" theory that "and" means "or." Such reminds me of the sectarian preacher who contends that"eis," translated "for" or "unto" in Acts 2:38 means "because of." Pshaw!

ARGUMENT: Matthew 19:9b is an interpolation andis not in the original text at all.

QUOTATIONS: "Matthew 19:9 likely has no 'b' part in the Greek New Testament. Only three Greek manuscripts prior to the 9th century include the latterpart, and the form of it is not the same among them.There is considerable evidence that Matthew 19:9b is an expansion of the text by copyists who accommodatedthis statement to the firm text of Matthew 5:32." "Matthew 19:9b does not teach anything. As I pointedout, it is an interpolation." — (SLD — 69-70 and 263).

ANSWER: Now can you imagine it? While arguingthat the first word of the "b" clause of Matthew 19:9, "and" means "or," and that the exception phrase in Matthew 19:9a must be understood as modifying the"b" clause, lo and behold, we are now treated to the claim that the entire "b" clause is an interpolation anddoesn't belong in the text at all! It would certainly beinteresting to hear one of these modern day textualcritics tell us exactly how something must be understood to belong to something that doesn't reallyexist at all! Sounds to me like they are prepared to preach it either "round or flat!" In order to justify the position, simply read the passage either way, and theywill teach it their way.

As to rejecting this part of the text as an interpolation added by copyists because recentlydiscovered manuscripts do not contain it, the words of John Burgon, in regard to the rejection of the last 12 verses of Mark for similar reasons, seem most appropriate. Burgon said: "I am utterly disinclined tobelieve — so grossly improbable does it seem — that atthe end of 1800 years 995 copies out of every thousand,suppose, will prove untrustworthy; and that the one,two, three, four or five which remain, whose contentswere till yesterday as good as unknown, will be found tohave retained the secret of what the Holy Spirit originallyinspired. I am utterly unable to believe, in short, that God's promise has so entirely failed, that at the end of1800 years much of the text of the Gospel had in pointof fact to be picked by a German critic out of a wastepaper basket in the convent of St. Catherine; andthat the entire text had to be remodeled after the pattern set by a couple of copies which had remained inneglect during fifteen centuries, and had probably owedtheir survival to that neglect; whilst hundreds of othershad been thumbed to pieces, and had bequeathed theirwitness to copies made from them." — 'The last twelveverses of Mark,' — Pg. 31.

Now, my friends, I am not a scholar nor textualcritic, and must reach my decisions on such mattersbased upon what such scholars and critics have said,but this one thing I know: I have never found one ofthese disputed texts, be it Mark 16 or Matthew 19, tobe contradictory of the truth taught elsewhere in theNew Testament. Such tactics as this, designed tobolster and prop up a false theory, are more in harmonywith the attitude of the Jehovah's Witnesses or Latter Day Saints toward the word of God than with faithfulbrethren who have a love and respect for truth. Do you really think for one minute that if these brethren couldestablish the truth of their theory that they would everhave resorted to such an argument? I leave it for you todetermine their reasons!

ARGUMENT: Being married to a person is the same as being bound to that person. Thus, marriage is equated with bond, so that where one exists the othermust necessarily exist also, and where one is broken, sois the other.

QUOTATIONS: "If you are still bound to your mate,you are still married to your mate ......... If they are stillbound, they are still married. If they are still married,they are still married in the eyes of God .... one whois not bound is one where there is no marriage. They arenot bound. If they are not bound, they would have to bebound if there is a marriage." — (SLD - 58, 73, 31).

ANSWER: It should be evident from these quotationsthat the position is that marriage and bond refer to thesame thing, so that what breaks one, breaks the other.If that is so, then where marriage exists the bond existsalso. Let us simply apply this idea to several examplesin the scriptures:

Mark 6:17-18....."For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison forthe sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife; for hehad married her. For John said unto Herod, it is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife." Now, good people, regardless whether it was simple adultery or incest as some contend, Herod and Herodias were married. The passage says they were. According to theargument, if they were married, they were bound toeach other, so it could not be unlawful. Yet, the text says it wasn't lawful. Therefore, Herodias was married

to Herod while bound to Philip. Marriage and bond are

not the same.

Romans 7:2-3....."For the woman that hath a

husband is bound by law to the husband while he liveth;

but if the husband die, she is discharged from the law of

the husband. So then if, while the husband liveth, she

be joined to another man, she shall be called an

adulteress: but if the husband die, she is free from the

law, so that she is no adulteress, though she be joined

to another man." Now, the woman in this text was

married to a second man while her husband lived, so

according to the argument, we would expect her to be

bound to him. And if married and bound to him, she

could not be an adulteress. Yet, the passage says she is

an adulteress, apparently because although married to

another man, she was still bound to her husband. Thus,

again we see that marriage and bond are not the same.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11...."But unto the married I givecharge, yea not I, but the Lord, that the wife depart notfrom her husband (but should she depart, let her remainunmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband); and that the husband leave not his wife." In this passage, Paul refers to the departed wife as "unmarried," the opposite of being "married." Thus, according to the argument, she is not bound to her husband. But, apparently she was still bound to him although notmarried to him. Therefore, again we see that marriageand bond are not equal. And so the argument will notstand.

ARGUMENT: The expression, "While the husband liveth," In Romans 7:3 refers to the time when the wifebecomes an adulteress, not how long she is one.

QUOTATIONS: "Whenever brethren read that passage, they get the idea that she is an adulteress untilher husband dies. That's not what it's saying. She's not an adulteress until her husband dies. If that is so, killhim. If that would save you from being an adulteress,kill him. . . .repentance is the time when she stopsbeing called an adulteress, rather than at the death ofher husband. It's not the death of her husband that's involved. She divorced her husband. She married another. . .that's when she became an adulteress. How long is she going to be one? Not until he dies. After shebecomes an adulteress, it makes no difference whether he lives or dies anymore. She is one until she repents .............'While he liveth' tells when, not how long."(SLD — 132-134).

ANSWER: Consider two passages of scripture with the same identical construction — Hebrews 9:17 and 1 Samuel 1:28, and try the assumption made on each. In Hebrews 9:17, Paul says, "For a testament is of force where there hath been death; for it doth never avail while he that made it liveth." Surely we can see that theexpression, "While he that made it liveth," must refer to "how long." Also, in 1 Samuel 1:28, Hanna said to theLord concerning her son Samuel, "As long as he liveth he is granted to Jehovah." Now, would anyone in hisright mind ever conclude that this expression doesn'tdeal with "how long?" and besides, every authority I have consulted says that 1 Corinthians 7:39 is a commentary on Romans 7:3 or vice versa. In other words, "While the husband liveth," of Romans 7:3,means the same thing as the expression, "as her husbandliveth," of 1 Corinthians 7:39, which passage reads, "Awife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth; but if the

husband be dead, she is free to be married to whom shewill; only in the Lord." And so, my friends, in spite ofthe fact that the passage does not say she is anadulteress as long as her husband doesn't remarry, or aslong as she fails to repent, but that she is an adulteressas long as her husband liveth and she be joined toanother man, we are treated to the IPSI DIXIT assumption that "while he liveth" tells when, not howlong! I leave it to your good sense of judgment todetermine why such an interpretation is made. Obvious,isn't it?! (CONCLUDED NEXTMONTH)

"The outrageous unconstitutional invasion and

captivity of the Church and Work of the Living God

continues."

"By court order . . . the state of California

had taken captive of the complete operation and

property, assets, and management of the Church

of the Living God. . ."

Quite alarming, isn't it? I mean, the very idea of

the state of California having, not only the audacity

and gall, but also the power to actually take captive

the church and work of Almightly God!

If you are familiar either with the recent turmoilwithin the so-called Worldwide Church of God, or theflamboyant writing style of its founder, Herbert W.Armstrong, you may have immediately recognizedthe origin of the statements quoted above. Those quotations and others throughout this article aretaken from a letter to "Brethren and Co-workers with Christ", written by Herbert W. Armstrong and datedFebruary 7, 1979.

Much more amazing and outrageous than the "invasion" and "captivity" of Mr. Armstrong's cult,are some of the claims which Herbert Armstrong hasmade through the years and continues to make.

1. THE CLAIM THAT HIS CHURCH IS THE "CHURCH OF GOD" — This claim is seen to be both utterly false and ridiculous by the very statements ofArmstrong which are quoted above. Armstrong saysthat the CHURCH AND WORK OF ALMIGHTY GOD has been invaded and captured (His letter, page1, paragraph 6). He did not say that one. congregation has been invaded and the people held prisoner. He did not say that some were merelymaking an attack on the church. He made a blanketstatement that THE work and THE church has been taken captive. Of course, what Armstrong means isthat the HEADQUARTERS of his church were taken over by the state. (That because of allegedmisconduct by church leaders.) This could not happento the TRUE church of God because God's true church has no earthly headquarters. Suppose a courtwanted to place the church of Christ in receivership as they have done to Armstrong's church — how could it be done? What offices would they take over?How

could the courts exercise any control over the churchof Christ? They might try to control one congregation, but that would in no way affect anyother congregation because churches of Christ are nottied together denominationally with earthly headquarters or official offices. The "headquarters" are in heaven. The founder, head, and "general overseer" is Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:22-23). Theonly scriptural earthly organization is the structure of each local congregation with its bishops and deacons(Acts 14:23; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-14).Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 that the "gates of hell"would never prevail against His church — but then I guess Jesus never had to reckon with the state of California!

2. THE CLAIM THAT HERBERT ARMSTRONG IS AN APOSTLE OF JESUS CHRIST — On page three, paragraph nine of hisletter to brethren and co-workers Armstrong speaksof Satan leading human political powers to "fight against Christ's ADVANCE-AMBASSADOR ANNOUNCING HIS SOON COMING!" (Emphasis his). He continues in the same paragraph to state that prophecies show why they object to "Christ sending His Apostle now to Kings,Emperors, Presidents and Prime Ministers around theworld." Of course, Armstrong is the one makingthese world-wide jaunts, thus, he, in his thinking isa modern apostle of Christ in fulfillment of Bible prophecy!

On page six of the letter, Armstrong asserts: "Andtoday I think there is no non-Jew as much loved andhonored in Israel at Jerusalem, from President, PrimeMinister, and on down, as Christ's chosen Apostle..." Naturally, Mr. Armstrong is speaking of himself.His humility is touching!

However, Armstrong cannot be an apostle ofChrist today because he is not a "witness" of Christ(Acts 1:22). He is not a WITNESS because he wasnot with Christ from the baptism of John until Hewas taken up (John 15:26-27; Acts 1:21-22).

3. THE CLAIM THAT HERBERT ARMSTRONG IS A MODERN "JOHN THE BAPTIST" — Not only does Herbert W. Armstrongclaim to be a modern John the Baptist, he actuallymakes the claim that the prophecies concerning aforerunner for Christ apply primarily to him andthat John the Baptist was merely a FORERUNNERto Armstrong and his work.

In his letter, page six, paragraph four, referring toIsaiah 40, Armstrong writes:

" ... verses 1-5 speak only of the second coming ofChrist! So God has raised up someone to prepare theway before Christ's Second Coming! As John theBaptist, crying out in the PHYSICAL wilderness ofthe Jordan River, prepared the way for the human-born Jesus to come to His MATERIAL temple. He would, as we now know more than 1900 years later establish the Kingdom of God. So John was the typeor forerunner of one TODAY crying out in the SPIRITUAL wilderness of RELIGIOUS CONFUSION, preparing the way for the spirituallyGLORIFIED CHRIST to come to His SpiritualTemple His church. . ." (all emphasis his).

Armstrong refers to Isaiah 40:10 (KJV) andmaking the comment that Christ is coming to rule

with a STRONG ARM, asks: "Could there be any significance in turning those two words around?" Here, he clearly implies that Isaiah 40:10 is a specificreference to him, because by turning the words STRONG ARM around you would have ARMSTRONG. Of course Isaiah 40:10 does not even use the words STRONG and ARM together. The Bible says STRONG HAND. The word "arm" is usedin another phrase and is the fourth word after "strong". Using Armstrong's logic, we should be looking for a prophet name HANDSTRONG insteadof one named

ARMSTRONG!

Herbert Armstrong gives no proof and not even agood excuse for his arrogant claim that he is a directfulfillment of Isaiah 40:1-10. He gives no real reasonwhy anyone should read Isaiah 40:10 and concludethat they should decipher the name "Armstrong"from it. He offers only his dogmatic assertions.

Many more examples could be given of Armstrong'samazing, but false, claims and assertions. The ones wehave noticed, however, should clearly suffice to exposeHerbert W. Armstrong as a false teacher, false apostle,and false prophet. His so-called Worldwide Church of God is a false religion.

Science cannot properly answer the question, "Where did the earth and its life come from?" because it is a philosophical question, not a scientific one. Science treats only observable data; its function is to make observations and predictions in regard to things already in existence. A scientist can rightly treat onlyobservable data and then is concerned with how that data functions; he is not, scientifically, concerned withwhere that data originated.

The question of how all began on this earth is not ascientific question; consequently, a scientist is no morequalified to answer than is anyone else. Science answersonly "how" things work, not "why." For example, itcan explain how rain appears in describing the rain cycleobserved in nature; it cannot, however, explain why itrains: the first time rain fell, why did it? Why had itnever fallen before? As no observable data exists to answer those questions, science cannot deal with them;they are seen to be philosophical questions.

Depending upon which philosophy a scientist assumesregarding the origin of all present matter, he will explain the universe and its elements accordingly—nolonger as a scientist, however, but as a philosopher.That is why equally qualified and reputable scientists are found supporting either side of the evolution-creation controversy.

In the final analysis we must determine which philosophy is the more reasonable: is it more logical tobelieve in the Bible's account of the beginning or tobelieve we are the product of an explosion of gases andmatter, molded into our present forms by evolutionarychance? As we pursue this question in future articles, letus be constantly aware that we are not pitting science against the Bible but, rather, philosophy againstphilosophy—creation against evolution—to see which isthe more reasonable.

PRISON WORK DAVID FRASER, P.O. Box 409, Gordon, Georgia 31031 — A few months ago we sent in a report of the work being done in the woman'spenitentiary in Milledgeville, Georgia. We are happy to report again that on September 4, 1979 there were four more women baptized intoChrist inside the walls of this institution. In this we rejoice and continue to give glory and praise to God for the power of His word and for the opportunity to be allowed to teach in this place.We do encounter problems (I will not go into such now) with someofficials of the institution which necessitates some affirmative action to get such rectified. However, brethren, we need your prayers forRay Coates and myself and for your New-born sisters in Christ,that they may remain faithful as they serve out their terms in a difficult atmosphere and that they may go on to be faithful andproductive servants in the kingdom of the Lord after their release.RALPH POX (for the elders) University Heights Church of Christ, 328 Clifton Ave., Lexington, KY 40508 — We are interested inobtaining the name and address of anyone now living in the Lexingtonarea to whom we may be of spiritual service. We realize that some

Page 18

come to this area to work or go to school and do not attend services orassociate with Christians. Sometimes this continues for long periods.Since such practices are fatal to spiritual growth, we wish to doeverything in our power to keep that from happening. If there are anyhere you would like for us to contact, whether members of the Lord's church or not, please send us their name, address, phone number andany other information you think we need. Also, if any come to the

A.B. Chandler Medical Center, V.A. Hospital or one of the othermedical facilities in this city we would like to know of it so we may beof service to them or those who attend them while here.

NEW WORK IN PINEHURST, TEXAS BARRY M. PENNINGTON, P.O. Box 726, Pinehurst, TX 77362 — Beginning the first Sunday in September, 1979, several families beganmeeting in the Pinehurst-Decker Prairie Community Center located inDecker Prairie between Tomball and Magnolia off Highway 149. There are liberal churches in both Magnolia and Tomball. Houston continues to expand and consequently many people are leaving the Big City to go to the northwest suburbs. That brings many people to the Pinehurst area.

Other faithful churches are located at least 30 miles away inKleinwood, Cypress-Fairbanks, Conroe and Humble. As far as we know, we are the second faithful work to exist in MontgomeryCounty. Being north of Houston and Harris County, Montgomery County is really growing. We expect steady growth. Of course, weKleinwood area is much closer to Houston and consequently they arereally growing! But we're quite a ways on out in the country and itshouldn't be long until Houston is at our doorstep also.

My father, W. I. Pennington, had intended to help begin this newwork, but he discovered a malignancy in his liver after thoroughcheck-ups in Pasadena. He is still at Pasadena and both he and mother need your prayers and continued support. So I plan to work inthe Pinehurst area. I am seeking $1200 per month support. So far Ihave $700 committed. Is anyone able to help? A commitment for six months would help us now.

The church at Pinehurst presently meets on Sundays for Bibleclasses at 8:00 A.M. and for worship at 8:45 A.M. and 6:30 P.M.Mid-week classes are conducted in the homes at present while we seeka permanent location. Please contact us at the above address or call 713-351-7721.

THREE FAITHFUL CHURCHES NEAR CLARK AIRBASE IN PHILIPPINES SSgt. D. JAMES NEDDO, PSC No. 2, Box 13168, APO S.F. 96367 — In June, 1979 two brethren from the Mid-Island church of Christ,Okinawa visited preachers in the Philippines which they support.During this visit it became apparent that if there were brethrenassigned to Clark Air Base they were not aware of the three faithfulcongregations near this military installation. Attendance by Christians located at Clark Air Base would not only be edifying for themselves,but would be a tremendous asset to the Filipino saints. If you knowanyone assigned or being assigned to Clark Air Base, or anywhere inthe Philippines, please contact either TSgt Bill Cox, PSC No. 2, Box12205, APO S.F. 96367; or Castorio F. Gamit, Mabini, Dau, Mabalacat, Pampanga 2024, Republic of the Philippines.In the recent report to the Mid-Island church from two of their brethren regarding the growth of the church in the Philippines it was very disappointing to find that so much of the basic necessities forspiritual growth and development were not available to them. This isdue to the economic conditions of the country. For example, one

congregation was unable to partake of the Lord's Supper for two weeks because they could not afford a bottle of grape juice. This particularproblem has been solved, but the following are a few examples of what is desperately needed by some congregations in the Philippines: (1)Bibles in the dialects (there are several different dialects); (2) Songbooks in the dialects and in English; (3) Tracts in English; (4) Communion trays and cups; (5) Concordances and commentaries. Also,numerous saints and their children are in need of any clothing you mayhave. For information contact the writer at the above address or Bill Cox whose address is also in this news item.

PREACHERS NEEDED MOBILE, ALABAMA — J.W. Evans has worked with us for the pastfive years. He will retire January 1, 1980. The Tillman’s Corner churchwill be glad to hear from any preachers who might be interested inworking with us as soon as can be affected in 1980. If interestedplease write a brief resume to L.A. Hymel, 3054 Kendale Dr., Mobile,AL 36606 or call him at 205-478-3488. CHIEFLAND, FLORIDA — The Chiefland church needs a full time preacher to come and work with us. Dwayne Derrick who now works with us will be moving to Alabama around the first of the year. Our attendance averages around 150. We will furnish full support Thoseinterested should contact Ray Smith in Chiefland, Florida 32626.Phone 493-4429 days, or 493-4665 nights.RICHMOND, VIRGINIA The German School Road congregation isin need of a full time gospel preacher. Attendance runs in the 40's.Between 1/2 and 2/3 of the financial support can be provided locally.Please write the church at 730 German School Road, Richmond, VA23225; or call either Steve Legat (804-275-5837) or George Saylor (804272-6988).

INVESTIGATE

SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES is glad to carry as news items(without charge) information concerning churches needing preachers orpreachers interested in moving. It is impossible for us to know theimmediate circumstances in every congregation which so advertises orthe suitability of every preacher who may announce that he isavailable to move. We are not a preacher-placement service. Bothcongregations and preachers should make their own investigations ofeach other. We consider such items as news and make no charge forthis space. — Editor.

WILLIAM S. IRVINE

With sadness we report the death of a faithful brother in Christ whohad spent 41 years preaching the gospel. William (Bud) Irvine passedaway on October 26, 1979 at the age of 57 years. He had beenpreaching since he was 16. A gall bladder operation revealed a terminal malignancy. A week later he suffered a heart attack and died.

While much of his preaching had been done in Texas, he wasworking with the Nelson Avenue church in Garden Grove, Californiaat the time of his death. Funeral services were conducted in that building by L.L. Stout with congregational singing led by FordCarpenter. He was buried at Forest Lawn cemetery in Cypress,California. We express our deepest sympathy to his wife, their threechildren and all the family.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH

BAPTISMS 156

RESTORATIONS 91

(Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)