WILL THIS GREAT NATION FALL?

The decline and fall of the Roman Empire has beenthe subject of books, papers, magazine articles andlectures. The internal conditions that brought aboutthe fall of this great empire have been compared tothe situations that presently exist in America. Theseproblems are not always reversible. However, if thepeople of this great nation are made aware of the consequences of the present course, and if theyrespond in such number and with such force as tobring about a change in the morals and attitudes ofthe people, this nation can be strong again. Be notdeceived, this nation is not as powerful and invincibleas some public officials would have us believe.

"Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord ..." (Psa. 33:12). Every reader of the history of Israel in theOld Testament is acquainted with the fall of thisnation when she left God, and the restoration to powerand strength again when her people repented andreturned to God and His will. This principle is true ofany nation because a nation is made of people, and Goddeals with people.

America has abounded in an almost infinite flow of natural resources and has had an unique prosperity forits entire existence of over two centuries. Of course,not every individual or every family has enjoyed thisabundance through the years. Neither has every generation known the times of plenty that have generally characterized this nation. The fact is,however, that the United States has been the richestnation on earth in resources and power. Nowsomething has happened. We no longer enjoy thisdistinct

position of wealth and power. What is wrong? Whocaused it? How did it happen? These are questionswith which we must come to grips.

At this writing it has been three weeks since theAmerican hostages were released from Iran. That one incident of a small nation forcefully taking theAmerican Embassy and holding 52 Americans for 444days while taunting and cursing this nation throughthe whole ordeal. Finally some form of ransom wasdemanded that they be released. Different terms havebeen used about how the release of the hostages wasaccomplished and what the sum of money paid wascalled, but the bottom line is that the United Stateswas humiliated before the whole world. My referenceat this point to the hostage issue is only to show thestanding of this nation in the world at present as compared to what it once was. My question now is:does this national problem have anything to do withour relationship to God and respect for His word? Isthere enough "salt" and "light" in this nation to saveit? (Matt. 5:13-16).

The political, economic, social and moral change wenow see has been developing for a long time. The realcause, like the swell of a giant tidal wave, could beobserved by a discerning eye for many years. Manyamong the populace and a few in high places have criedthe warning of approaching disaster, but no one wouldlisten. The seriousness of the situation is now realized by the majority and its potential danger acknowledgedby the authorities, but their approach to a solution isall wrong. The experts are bringing forth formulas forimproving the whole society and re-establishing anational place in the world, but none are touching thereal cause of the problem. In fairness to the presentadministration, the speeches, slogans and promisesindicate a return to acknowledging the existence andpower of God, and the necessity for a more moral andspiritual atmosphere in which to live as a nation.

The word of God says, "Righteousness exalteth anation: but sin is a reproach to any people" (Prov. 14:34). Whatever historians may record about thedecay and the possible fall of the United States as weknow it, one thing is certain: the real reason for thestate of affairs today and the possible fall of this oncegreat nation is exactly the same as in every other nation or empire that is no more. We will notice the reasons briefly.

Some of the outstanding reasons for the fall of theRoman Empire have been written in the histories covering that period in time. They are: 1) AbolishingGod from all functions of government, from teachingchildren, and trying to stifle the free practice ofreligious beliefs. The substitute of idols for the onetrue God. 2) Freedom of sexual indulgences in allforms, including homosexual and lesbian practice by people on all levels of society,prostitution and free, easy divorce and remarriage. 3)Excessive interest and participation in sports of allkinds. Entertainment with sexual and violent emphasis takes priority over everything that contributes to wholesome living. 4) High and rising taxes that vanish in many greedy andcriminal agencies that exist for that purpose. There are more, but space does not permit them to be discussed.

It is barbaric ungodliness, in all its ugliness onevery level of society. I mean that in the full sense of the word. By "barbaric" I mean that characteristic of"an unmannerly person;... a savage, cruel person;brute" (Webster). "Ungodly" simply means "not godlyor religious; impious. 2. sinful; wicked" (Webster). The original word for "ungodly" is asebeia. W. E. Vine says in a note following the definition of the nounform: "anomia is disregard for, or defiance of God's laws; asebeia is the same attitude toward God's person."

The most simple description of America's trouble that no legislative body, executive power, or courtdecision can change is that every level of society andevery part of the nation is filled with that insensitive,coarse, brutish attitude that holds disregard anddefiance for the Person of God and His laws. No nation can survive long with this attitude and philosophy.

Before you reply to me that America is about themost religious nation on earth, let me say that is nottrue. The heathen nations of the world have their gods,and they are very religious. Of course, they are very far from the true God, but their religious influence oftenkeeps them on their accepted civil course. America hasless than 42% of the people affiliated with some religious organization, and that counts ALL that areclassified as religious. That means over half of thepeople in the United States are classified as nonreligious, in the sense of not belonging to somereligious group. If we consider how many of thesereligious people in the United States are ignorant ofthe true God and His word, we have a very smallpercent. And if we consider how many who are Christians are unfaithful or have left the truth for the doctrines of men, we have a very few who really serveGod in spirit and truth.

But we are told that the United States is the most religious nation on the face of the earth. It has beencalled a "Christian Nation." Why have not the nonreligious, godless nations of communism fallen? Whydo the heathen and idol worshipping nations of theworld survive?

We are not talking of the mere existence of a people under some kind of dictator. The United States may

DANGERS WE FACE

Students of the New Testament are well aware that the early church had dangers and problems to face.Divine revelation addressed these forthrightly and in so doing provided not only the solution for their immediate problems but gave all the information needed to meet and overcome whatever contingencies the people of God might face throughall time to come. "The "faith once for all delivered to the saints" is all-sufficient and requires no appendages to satisfy modern needs (June 3).

Throughout the history of the Lord's people onemajor issue has scarcely been settled before anotherset of problems arises. For the last three decades theissues of church supported human enterprises,sponsoring churches and church financed recreationactivities have been studied, debated and lines have been drawn and solidified. The division is now deepand wide. Attitudes and practices are poles apart.The estrangement is especially sad to those of us whoremember when it was not this way. A youngergeneration has grown up since the division which hasnever known the time and circumstances before this tragedy unfolded.

Churches which withstood the spirit of digressionand those which have been formed in the aftermath of it are not immune to dangers. It is a sad fact that all too many have limited soundness in the faith to opposition to what has generally come to be known as"liberalism." The word "sound" in the New Testament has to do with what is wholesome, healthy, balancedand sane. The Devil is not a one-issue enemy. He directs his attacks at the most vulnerable places in our armor. As I travel among brethren and observe the passing scene, there are several dangerswhich are apparent and which must be addressed soon or else much ground will be lost. Consider thesedangers:

(1) There is a growing softness toward error. It is easy for churches which have gone through severe trials and heavy controversies to preserve purity of faith and practice to develop battle fatigue. Periods of peace and prosperity are certainly desirable. It is encouraging to see congregations with better buildings and larger budgets for scriptural work. But it is all too easy to settle into complacency, insist on not rocking the boat, cater to our own heroes, elevate ourown educated elite, and manifest all the attitudes of denominational status. Many have lost their militancyin opposition to denominational error as well as error among brethren. Brethren who have worked hard to equip themselves to meet advocates of error in publicdebate are perhaps the most scorned of all preachers.Brethren have sometimes unwittingly encouraged softness by saying "We don't need a strong pulpit man, just a good personal worker." Since when has it every been to the advantage of churches to have anything but strength in the pulpit? There is nothing wrong with preachers teaching from house to house, but the fact remains that God's assembled people need strong and ablepreaching on the fundamentals of the gospel and personal godliness; preaching which stirs the hearts of people to serve with diligence. Some of thepreaching today is little more than warmed over salesmotivational speeches, generously sprinkled with poetry and cute, catchy phrases. Some of it is a displayof human wisdom pitched on such an intellectual planethat it missed many of the common people. Brethren,we need to "preach the word; be instant in season, outof season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine" (2 Tim. 4:2).

(2) There is a problem of stampeding worldliness.This is evident among the people at large and increasingly apparent among elders, deacons, preachersand their families. What else could we expect fromchurch members when those who take public places ofresponsibility have been seduced by the lust of theflesh, the lust of the eyes, or the pride of life? The vicesof the unregenerate world have become the practices ofwould-be saints. Swearing, drinking, gambling, smoking, fornicating "saints" are found in all too many places. And in far too many instances, preachersand elders are not in a position to say anything aboutit that anyone would take seriously. If the Lord wereto come today, I wonder how many who wear hisname would be found without spot or wrinkle. (3) We face a serious danger from unqualified eldersand deacons. While every qualification given by theLord is important and none should be minimized, somebrethren have spent so much time arguing aboutwhether "children" includes one or more, that theyhave ignored other qualifications such as "apt toteach", able to "stop the mouths of gainsayers", "notsoon angry", "not covetous" and on we could go. Themost common yard stick has been to select a man withchildren who are all members of the church and who are successful in the business world. Over the last few years we have met and talked with men who serve aselders who have not the faintest notion what it means to shepherd a flock. The teaching program of manycongregations is a joke, and not a very funny one.What of the divine mandate to "feed the flock of God"? Do elders know what is being taught andwhether or not those who teach under their oversightare really qualified to teach? If all elders had been alertto their duties then some of the errors advocated from the pulpits would have been halted. Much of the friction and bickering that goes on in some congregationswould cease if elders would perform their God-givenduty and stop the mouths of gainsayers. Brethren, wemust do a better job in instructing people on this subject. We need to plant the desire early in young men to

so direct their lives that one day they may be able towisely oversee the flock of God.

(4) The danger of fragmenting into a multiplicity ofwrangling sects is very real. If division arises becausetruth has been insistently preached, then so be it. Weare not in favor of having peace at any price. Butneither are we in favor of elevating every matter ofprivate conviction into an issue of major proportion and establishing a human creed before which all menmust bow. I would not deny any faithful brother theright to state his conviction on any subject so long ashe does not begin to insert his opinion between thelines of scripture and insist that all be able to do thesame reading between the lines as he. Some of the mailwe receive, some of the conversations and questionswhich are heard at various places to say nothing of many of the battles which rage through some of thepapers at times make me wonder if some don't stayawake nights trying to think up something new or novel to dispute about. Everyone who has heard mepreach very much or read what I have written over thelast three decades knows good and well where I standwith regard to the church and human organizationsand the attendant issues which have surfaced in the wake of that confrontation. But frankly, I would notturn around for the difference between liberalism and crankism. They are opposite ends of the same basicproblem. Liberalism exalts human wisdom by ignoringwhat God authorized. Crankism exalts human wisdom by reading into the word of God more than he said. Itequates human opinion with the divine oracles. Liberalism ignores what is written on the line. Crankism insists on reading between the lines. Bothare wrong. Both are presumptuous. Both are haughtyand arrogant. Both are divisive. Liberalism has crystallized into a respectable denominational movement (respectable in the eyes of the world, thatis). Crankism opens the door to a thousand warringsects each contending for its own special tenet. There are many excellent preachers and many very finecongregations and I do not write this to discouragethem. But unless dangers and problems are recognizedand identified, they can never be resolved. This fourthdanger is very real and is becoming more wide-spreadwith each passing day.

The cure for all of this is a simple adherence to the"faith once for all delivered to the saints." Let us preach and practice only that for which we have a"thus saith the Lord." Everyone has private opinionsand scruples. But we must recognize the differencebetween divine and human wisdom. My private judgment is not scripture and neither is yours. What God says we must believe. What he commands we must do. We have the right to geteverything out of his word which he put into it butwe also have the responsibility to stop right there!

The Mormon Myth

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, known as the Mormons, has in recent years developedinto a major world-wide organization, and has beenconverting people to their sect in record numbers.Their Madison Avenue image is that of a clean cut,morally superior, industrious, and joyful people whocenter their lives upon the family. This image, however, is only a mask. Like the whitewashed appearance of the Pharisees (Matt. 23:27), the Mormon Church has created this facade to attract the naive. Whether in the television spots of the Mormonmother hugging her children, the Reader's Digest insert which sensationalizes their "Mr. Clean" doctrine, or the Donnie and Marie smiles of their young missionaries, the public is shown a mask. Seldom do we see the ungodliness and irreverentbeliefs behind the mask. We should be reminded that Jesus warned, "Beware of false prophets, which cometo you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits"(Matt. 7:15-16). Inasmuch as we have the responsibility to "try the spirits whether they are ofGod" (1 Jn. 4:1), we will examine the facts behindthe Mormon mask. There is no question that theMormon people are good people and good neighbors.But they are religiously mistaken and have been deceived and used by the Mormon Church to perpetuate the myths of their faith. Newsweek reportsin their September 1, 1980 issue that "Mormons today are known for their fierce devotion to monogamy, the family and free enterprise. But underneath their Reader's Digest image, the Mormons espouse a radical, anthropomorphicconception of God that sets them far apart from otherreligions." Brigham Young University historian,Marvin Hill, is quoted as saying, "The leadership istrying to present the church as a seamless society andall their energies are organized to perpetuate that myth." In this first article, we will look at the basicclaims of the righteousness, morality, and joyfulfamily life of the Mormons, remembering the wordsof Jesus, "Ye shall know them by their fruits."

Mormons are not the happiest people on earth, asthey claim. Mental depression is a great problemamong Mormons. The wife and mother is pressured tohave as many children as she can, to be a lovingmother, a submissive wife, and to still have time towork many hours each week for her church. When shefails to live up to the Mormon image of "super mom"she often suffers from depression. The single woman isgreatly pressured to marry, since Mormons view womanhood as producing offspring on this earth andin eternity. The Utah Bureau of Health Statistics reported that the suicide rate for females nearlydoubled from 1960 to 1970, and the rate of suicide forsingle women nearly tripled. During 1970 to 1979, Utah's suicide mortality rate was higher than the national rate in every year but one. An AP story, appearing in the Ogden Standard-Examiner November 3,1980 reported that depression among teen-agers is"particularly acute in Utah" and that "statistics showa 60 percent increase in teen suicides in the last 14years with an 80 percent hike among adolescent girlsin that period." And Utah Holiday's June, 1980 issue said that the national suicide rate has increased 15 percent over the last 10 years while Utah's rate has increased 27 percent. If Mormonism makes happier people, we should see less depression and suicide in Utah than in other communities.

Mormons are not the strict-moral led people theyclaim to be. In a Mormon tract entitled "What of the Mormons?" we read, "There is no principle on whichThe Latter-day Saints lay greater emphasis than thesacredness of the marriage covenant. Adultery is nextto murder in gravity in Mormon theology. Strict morality is taught, and the Church has used its meansand facilities to teach its youth the necessity for moralcleanliness and the blessings of happy marriage."Behind this mask, we find the exact opposite. Need weremind our Mormon friends that their early leaders were polygamous adulterers? Or should we even mention the fact that Mormonism still teaches that faithful men will be given more wives in the next life?Their facilities (church buildings) are used for singlesparties and disco dances, among other things. Are we to believe that these lascivious dances teach moral cleanliness to their youth? Mormons will claimthat Utah's rate of illegitimacy is lower than the national average. But that is explained by the factthat most pregnant girls in Utah marry before givingbirth. The Utah Bureau of Health Statistics reveals that 70 percent of all teenage first births in Utah arepremarital conceptions. In other words, of every 10 teenagers who have their first baby, only 3 were married when they conceived. Are we to conclude thatMormon teens are of higher morals than other teens?While they may be no worse, Mormon children arecertainly not morally superior to other children.

Concerning family life, Mormons have no better marriages than others in this country. Utah's divorce rate is equal to the national average. Mormon parents are not "super parents" and the lack of discipline of their children is evident in many cases.In 1979 the superintendent of Salt Lake City schoolsappealed to the religious leaders to help discipline the students. He stated that the teachers could not handle them, and that his appeal to their parents hadnot helped. Are we to believe that Mormon family life is superior to that of other families?

The "Mr. Clean" concept of Mormons is also a mask.Even faithful Mormons use profanities in commonspeech. And if the Mormon church is successful inkeeping their people from the use of alcohol and drugs,the Utah Bureau of Health Statistics does not know it. They report that alcoholism is the fourth leading cause of death in Utah. This Bureau estimates that Utah contains 60,000 alcoholics and problem drinkers. In a1980 study of teenagers between the ages of 12 and 18,

13.2 percent admitted using marijuana within the past30 days, and 20.7 percent had consumed alcoholicbeverage in the same period.

The point of this article is not to state that Mormonsare worse sinners than others in the world. We applaudtheir appeal for strict morals and a family-oriented life.But their appeal is only a mask, and does not describe their lives, in reality. Simply stated, if Mormonism is designed to make people happier, more godly and morally supreme, then Mormonism is not working! The fruits of their doctrine show a paper-thin mask and an hypocritical image. In our next article, we will examine the Mormon views of the Bible and of God.

THE BEATITUDES—No. 2

We continue our study of the Beatitudes. In this briefarticle we will deal with the third and fourth beatitudes in the order in which they appear in Matthew's account.

Blessed Are the Meek

"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth" (Mt. 5:5). We sometimes think of a meek person as timid, shy or fearful. But this cannot be themeaning Jesus had in mind. Jesus said of himself:"I am meek and lowly in heart" (Mt. 11:29). Was Jesus timid? Certainly not! "Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth" (Num. 12:3). Who is ready tosay that Moses was a weakling?

The Greek word for "meek" is praus. It describes a condition of the mind and heart. "It is that temper ofspirit in which we accept His (God, WEW) dealingswith us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting" (Wuest Word Studies). Lenski wrote: "The word refers to an inward virtue exercised toward persons. When they are wronged or abused they show no resentment and do not threaten or avenge themselves" (Commentary on Matthew).

Hence, meekness is an equanimity of spirit, a temperament that properly reflects itself toward Godand man under all circumstances. It is the opposite ofbitterness, vehemence and violence.

The "inheritance of the earth" is a proverbialexpression, suggesting bountiful blessings. It was used by the Jews to denote any great blessing. Itoriginally meant the land of Canaan, but later came tomean the sum of all blessings. The expression is found,or similar ones, several times in Psalms 37. It hasnothing to do with a future inheritance of this mundane earth. This earth will be burned up (2 Pet.3:10).

Jesus used the saying to mean that the meekwould be those in his kingdom who receive God'sblessings here, and the heavenly Canaan hereafter.

Blessed Are They Who Hunger / Thirst

"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst afterrighteousness: for they shall be filled" (Mt. 5:6).Paraphrased, this beatitude reads: "Blessed are theywho desire to be right with God for they shall obtainit." Righteousness is a state of justification because ofthe forgiveness of sins.

Sinners can only be righteous by God's forgiveness that is affected through the gospel. Paul wrote: "For Iam not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one thatbelieveth. . . For therein is the righteousness of Godrevealed from faith to faith" (Rom. 1:16-17). The"righteousness of God" in the text is not the characterof God but the righteousness imparted to man by forgiveness.

Paul further said: "But now the righteousness ofGod without the law is manifested. .. Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christunto all and upon all them that believe" (Rom. 3:2122). Righteousness is without the law because to beright with God by law requires perfect obedience to thelaw. But man transgressed law and thereby became asinner. (All men are lawbreakers and, therefore,sinners, Rom. 3:9-20, 23). He must depend on God'sforgiveness for righteousness. This is made possiblethrough obedience to the gospel of Christ. This doesnot mean we are without law, but it means we needGod's forgiveness when we violate law.

Hungering and thirsting after righteousness showsthat the gospel is not coercive but persuasive in character. God does not force people to come toHim. Man must want to come, and when he comes, heis filled. He receives the full measure of the promise.—to be continued

I guess you know all about preachers' kids, don'tyou? They are the ones who are always so bad, and theones who always get the precious members' kids in so much trouble. And, yes, they are often the ones who cause embarrassment to their parents and often hinder the cause of Christ, which their fathers have worked sohard to build up. While all of these things about preachers' kids are often true, let me tell you a littleabout what it means to be a preacher's kid. We hear an awful lot about the hardships of being in a preacher's family and how hard it is on the children, but weseldom hear about those families who are proud theyare doing the work they are doing. Let me try to showyou a different picture.

Many, who are children of preachers, somehow getthe idea that they must live up to the "legend" that brethren have created for and about them. It is admitted readily that the pressures of being a preacher's kid are great at times, but I believe thatthe good things far outweigh the bad. I am glad thatI am privileged to be a preacher's kid and I am thankful to God for this blessing. I am also upset, tremendously, by those who make being in a preacher's family seem like a "curse" from Satan.

I am a preacher's kid. I started off in this makingproblems for my parents. I made my father late for college when I was born in 1952. He gave up apromising job as a chemist after eight years in order togo to college and prepare himself to preach "full-time."It was no easy decision for him and my mother to "pullup and go," with two children and another on the way.But, it was a decision they made together and onewhich they have neither one regretted. I could relate anumber of stories about the sacrifices they made, butpaper would not hold them all. I will, however, relate afew instances.

You can really appreciate a man who does not complain about his state, however bad it is for him. Iremember that my father, while in college, had only onesuit (well-worn) and two white shirts, which he savedfor Sunday. The reason he did not have more wasbecause of the plenteous provisions he and Mom hadmade for their kids, at their expense. It seems, when itcame to a choice of whom to buy something for, it wasalways one of us kids. Mom and Dad were not selfish.Dad preached on Sundays, often driving 100 miles, andgetting paid with the change from the collection, ormaybe poultry. However, he never complained aboutthis and often turned this into a joke. He never becamewealthy from preaching. He would play music on Saturday night in order to have grocery money for hisfamily. He and Mom had it hard, but, you know, wekids never felt much of that hardship. It seems wealways had enough, although we often wondered howin the world they did it.

We moved a lot. I enjoyed it immensely, but mybrothers and sister hated it at times. We moved from one place because of physical danger to Dad and to us.I will admit that we kids often felt sorry for ourselvesbecause we had to leave friends behind. But, one thingour young hard heads never considered was that Momand Dad had friends also that they were leaving. We were unthinking when we complained and put themthrough the guilt of hurting their children. Lookingback, we are all glad we moved around as we did because of the many permanent friendships we made,which would never have come if we had not moved. The Lord was first at all times around our house. This we were taught from the beginning.

We had a happy home. It seemed as if Mom and Dadnever forgot what it was like to be young. We laughedtogether, wept together, and worked together. As wegrew older, we began to be more demanding. We alsostarted noticing the worried looks on our parent's faces. This was during a time when brethren thought apreacher was a subject of benevolence and that heshould be willing to live on the poverty level, in order for him to be recognized as devoted. We children got jobs selling cards and papers and earnedour own spending money in this manner. One precious memory was our "family night." This night was one in which everyone stayed home and enjoyed one another's company. We talked, laughed, played, andloved together. We had a glorious home relationship,but often felt as if we were suffering because weweren't like the other kids (whose homes were split and who were allowed to roam free).

Dad was always there when he was needed. He was gone on a few meetings each year, but he never let hisfamily suffer by his absence. He heeded the advice given to him by one of his teachers that "if you loseyour own, no matter how many others you convert,you have lost the world."

We enjoyed the company of other preachers andtheir families throughout the years. We have had theopportunity to become close friends with some of thefinest people God ever put on this earth. The gloriousopportunities afforded us of talking and visiting withmen who cared about God's Word and who lived it is a blessing, often unique to preachers' families.

Words could never express the joy to be had frombeing a preacher's kid. I have many friends (also preachers' kids) who will agree with me that if it hadnot been for the strength made dominate in their lives,because our fathers were preachers, most of us wouldhave probably not been as faithful to Christ as we now are. When you watch and listen to your parentsshedding tears over the conduct of some brethren,when you overhear prayers offered in private for thewell-being of those who are enemies of truth, until theycan come back to God, and when you hear parentsexpressing their love and hopes for you, when yousee Christianity in action, then is when you can reallyappreciate what true Christianity is all about. Thisis what helps mold you into wanting to be a Christian.

I can remember my father, sternly telling me my wrong-doings and punishing me for it, and telling meto always face my problems head-on, no matter how hard it seems. I remember him lovingly embracing me and shedding tears with me when I had lost one of the closest friends I had ever had. These attributes are not the traits of the average man. These things come from anabiding love for things which are right and throughgrowth spiritually, by devoting oneself to learningGod's Word. These attributes come by experience withmany different kinds of people.

I have heard much, of late, about mothers andfathers telling their children not to become preachers,or preachers' wives, because of all the hardships. Ithink this is a sorry day for the church when peoplehave descended to this attitude. If you only knew theglorious blessings you are missing!

Those of you reading this, who are preachers' kids: Think you have it tough? Instead of feeling sorry foryourself and seeing how much you can "get into to ruinyour folks," why don't you get down on your knees andthank God for the blessed opportunity you have beenafforded. And while you are at it, why don't you thankyour mother and father for all they have done for you.Count your blessings.

Being the child of a preacher is a blessing to becherished. It is past time for us to realize it. It is not acurse, brethren! I will grant that many a preacher hasmade an unholy mess out of things in his personal life,but I maintain that this is the abuse. I have tried to relate to how good and pleasant things can be, ifall work together. I was no angel, and I caused myshare of heartache to my godly parents, but I know for a fact that I am as strong as I am today becauseof their lasting, godly influence on my life. Forthose things which I have done which have beenwrong, I am sincerely sorry.

Let me offer some suggestions as I close this article.I believe that I can state, without reservation, thatbeing the child of a preacher can be the greatest lot inlife for a young person. But only when preachers careas much about their own as they do about others. Onlywhen preachers realize that they are to practice whatthey preach, only when preachers' wives support theirhusbands in the work being done for truth and quitnagging and complaining about the negative and onlywhen children appreciate the work that they and theirparents are doing. It is a special honor to be a "preacher's kid." Do not waste that honor by trying tolive up to the seamy picture some brethren havepainted and come to expect of you.

In closing, I quote a verse my father has oftenquoted and which has become a favorite of mine."CHOOSE YE THIS DAY WHOM YE SHALL SERVE, BUT AS FOR ME AND MY HOUSE,WE SHALL SERVE THE LORD" (Josh. 24:15).

REDEMPTION

(4) For Even Me

A study of the grand central theme of the Bible,Redemption, would be incomplete without personalapplication. We have chosen the title to pay compliment to this and devote this entire concluding lesson. We often express the fullness ofour hearts with the song "I'm Redeemed." The chorus goes, "I have been redeemed—Glory, glory, Christ ismine." One is able to sing these sentiments with anysense of appreciation contingent only upon having obeyed His will. The Gnostic philosophy, rampantin New Testament times advocated that salvation is intellectual, knowledge is salvation within itself. Colossians is the divine answer to this fallacy. Heresalvation is redemption and forgiveness of sin. "Inwhom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" (Col. 1:14). The availability of such redemption and forgiveness isto every man, "To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of thismystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you,the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect inChrist Jesus'" (Col. 1:27-28). Paul's aim, here noted, warn every man, teach every man, present every manperfect in Christ Jesus. "Perfect" has to do with attaining of full purpose, namely redemption. Thus,present every man redeemed.

Analysis of Col. 1:15-23 results in a beautiful pictureof Jesus Christ and His part in the scheme of redemption. His preeminence is shown in the relationship he sustains. His relationship to God isdepicted in verse 15, "the image of the invisible God." This comports with "who being the brightnessof his glory, and the express image of his person, andupholding all things by the word of his power, whenhe had by himself purged our sins, sat down on theright hand of the Majesty on high" (Heb. 1:1-4). Jesus is presented as the perfect manifestation of Godthe Father.

The word "image" is challenging when we allow it toremind us of creation. "And God said, Let us makeman in our image, after our likeness: and let him havedominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl ofthe air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, andover every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.So God created man in his own image, in the image ofGod created he him; male and female created he them" (Genesis 1:26-27). Man was made that he might be theimage of God. God's intent was interrupted by sin, thus man never achieved his destiny. Jesus showswhat God is and what man was meant to be. In Christ is manhood as God designed it. Jesus is nothing lessthan the personal characteristics, the distinguishingmarks of God. To see God one has but to look at Jesus Christ as he is presented in the purity of righteousness within the New Testament. Man attainsto what God intended when he becomes the image ofChrist, presenting himself in the purity of righteousness. "Seeing ye have purified your souls inobeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeignedlove of the brethren, see that ye love one another witha pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, By the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever" (1 Pet. 1:22-23).

In His relationship to creation, Christ is "firstborn"(Col. 1:15). "Firstborn" not in the sense of time buthonor. Such was commonly a title of honor as withIsrael, "firstborn of God" (Ex. 4:22), denoting favored,chosen, highly honored. Such is used as a title ofMessiah, "I will make him my firstborn, higher thanthe kings of the earth" (Psa. 89:27). Thus, the highesthonor creation holds belongs to the Son of God. Godthe Father has given him that place of honor,completely unique. The passage continues, all thingswere created by him and for him (Col. 1:16), visibleand invisible. He, Christ, is the word force in creation.Not only is he the agent in creation but he is also thegoal and the end of creation, "created unto him."The creation was to be his and was to glorify him (v.17). In Him all things consist, that is, cohere, holdtogether. The idea is, the one who is the beginning andgoal of creation is the one who is between, holding ittogether.

In his relationship to the church, Christ is the headof the body (Col. 1:18). The church as the body ofChrist over which He is head is the organism through which He acts. Jesus Christ is the guiding, directing,dominating spirit of the church. Every act and wordmust be governed by him. As man can neglect andabuse his body by prostituting its purity, so thechurch. "He is the beginning" in the sense of time, the originating power. He is the source ofits life, the director of her continuing activities. "Firstborn from the dead" punctuates the centerand heart in the consummation of God's plan for redemption. Jesus Christ is a living presence and nota dead hero or a past founder. The result is that hehas the supremacy in all. Resurrection demonstarted His conquest of every enemy and that triumphgives Him right to be Lord of all.

In his relation to sin and sinner (Col. 1:20). The veryobject of his coming was reconciliation, redemption.The chasm between man and God needed to be bridged. The initiative was with God, man needed to bereconciled, the need was with man. The medium ofreconciliation is the blood of Christ. "Spared not hisown Son, but delivered him up for us all" (Rom.8:32). "Much more then, being now justified by hisblood, we shall be saved from wrath through him"(Rom. 5:9). In the death of Jesus, God is saying: I love you like that; I love you enough to see my son suffer and die for you; enough to bear the cross on myheart if only it will win you. The cross is proof there isno length to which God will not go to win the humanheart. If the cross will not stir to love and wonder-then my friend, what?

The scope of reconciliation is "all things". All thingsthat need redemption, sinners. Those alienated by sin,through the blood of His cross, can be reconciled andrestored to holiness (v. 22). The gospel is the messageof reconciliation, the message of salvation, the basis ofhope for every man who will submit to its requirements (v. 23). Every soul thus redeemed is inthe church, the body of Christ (v.24). Redeemed,yes, even me. Even you. In Christ, "In whom we haveredemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins,according to the riches of his grace" (Eph. 1:7), whenfound and accepted by the obedience of faith. God bethanked.

During the last two weeks of February and the firsttwo weeks of March, 1981, I was involved in an extensive preaching and teaching tour on the island ofPalawan in the Philippines. I was accompanied bybrother John McCort, who preaches for the church inGreencastle, Indiana. The effort was financed by twochurches, the Mulvane church of Christ, in Mulvane,Kansas, where I labor; and the church in Greencastle.

The island of Palawan is sometimes called "the last frontier" in the Philippines. It is the western mostisland in the Philippine group; it is bordered to the eastby the Sulu Sea, and to the west by the South ChinaSea. Palawan is directly east of Viet Nam, about 800miles. Life on the island is very primitive. There is noelectricity except in three of the major cities; just a fewmiles of paved roads on the island, and many othersigns of primitive culture and lack of development. All of that is changing, though, due to the discovery of oiloff the coast of the island. Rapid industrialization anddevelopment is expected on Palawan over the next ten years.

The Lord's church was planted on the island about20 years ago, in the city of Narra. From there thegospel spread south, and then north, due largely to theefforts of brother Alfredo Agbisit. Over the past eightyears, there has been rapid growth on Palawan. Atpresent, there are a little over twentycongregations on the island. In some of the remotevillages, the church of Christ is the only established religion.

Our trip to the Philippines was limited to this onearea, the island of Palawan. We arrived on the islandFeb. 17 and stayed there until Mar. 16. Most of thetime, we stayed with the brethren in their primitivehuts; our accommodations were drastically different

from what we are adjusted to in this country, but their hospitality was more than generous. We were taken back into remote areas in the Philippine "jungle"where American preachers had not ventured before.

Results indicate that this approach was effective;138 SOULS WERE BAPTIZED DURING THIS 27 DAY TRIP! In addition, lectureships for church members were conducted and training sessions weregiven for gospel preachers. It was as successful as wehad prayed for, reminiscent of Acts 11:21, "... Andthe hand of the Lord was with them: and a greatnumber that believed turned unto the Lord."

The work on Palawan went through FOUR PHASES. First, the Salagon phase: we stayed in thevillage of Salagon in the home of brother TeddyBeltran. We conducted lectureships and gospelmeetings in Salagon and went out to some of the littlevillages in the area. We spent twelve days in Salagon.Next, the Brooke's Point phase: we stayed in the home of brother Platon Mabunga, who preaches forthe Seaside church of Christ. We conducted a two daylectureship on the work of the local church, and wewent out to Lada and Caramay. Third, the Narra phase: we stayed in Narra five days. A lectureship onChristian living was given at the Narra church building, and we went out to Tagda-o, Aramaywan,Plaridel and San-doval. Fourth, the Puerto Princessa City phase: we conducted a lectureship on Religious Error and had a meeting with the Palawan preachers.

Except for the routine difficulties, we remained ingood health throughout the journey. We arrived backhome on the 18th of March, thankful to God for Hisprotection and for the opportunity on Palawan.

Economics

We only visited the island of Palawan on this trip, so I cannot give a report about the economic situation in the Manila area or on Luzon. I can tell what we saw on Palawan.

We didn't see any rich preachers! We saw somepreachers who existed on a "hand-to-mouth" basis; wespent two weeks with a faithful preacher whose jeepney literally falls apart as he drives over the rough roads of Palawan; others have sick children withoutfunds to seek medical attention; and some have recently lost all their support. But we didn't seeany rich preachers.

How much support should Filipino preachers get?This has been the subject of controversy in recent months, and the figure of $150 per month has beensuggested. We saw evidence that in some cases $150per month isn't enough. Many of the preachers onPalawan need to travel around to visit various places,so the cost of transportation must be allowed for. Wechecked prices of basic commodities in the marketplaces, and some of them were about the same as pricelevels here. We saw daily inflation, and exorbitanteducational expenses for preachers with children inhigh school. Then, when we came back through Manilaon our return trip, we contacted the U.S. Embassy. Wediscussed the economic situation on Palawan with a Mr. Stone, assistant to the Labor Attache. We gave him this situation: A man with a wife and three children (one in high school), who must travel through southern Palawan to meet preaching appointments.Would a total of $200 be too much support for thisman? "Certainly not," he said. We gave him the figures which have been used to prove that the $150 level is adequate, and this was his response: "Thesefigures look about right, but you have to remembersomething. In the Philippines, the rule is EVERYBODY SUPPLEMENTS HIS INCOME!" So a jeepney driver who makes (net, after expenses) $100per month, probably does some farming to makeanother $50 and his wife probably works to bring inanother $60. Also, he explained that living expensesvaried considerably from place to place; so what mightbe a fair salary on Luzon could be inadequate on Palawan. Given these facts, it looks like each man's individual circumstance, work and location must betaken into account in setting the support level.

Our Approach

In the past, when American preachers have gone tothe Philippines, several different places have beenvisited within a few weeks. Perhaps a three or four daystay in one area would be the average. I'm certainlynot going to say that this isn't a good approach.Much good has been accomplished by men whohave used this approach. Our approach was different, and the results seem to suggest that it hasvalue.

We spent all of our time in one area, on one island.We arrived on the island of Palawan on Feb. 17 and we stayed there until our Mar. 16 departure day.This approach has some definite advantages:

First, it is very cost-effective. Less money is spent traveling from island to island. Second, it gives moretime to spend teaching and preaching. Third, it givesyou a better opportunity to get acquainted with thebrethren and learn about the preachers, the conditionsand the problems in a given area.

One more point concerning our approach. Wherepossible, we lived with the brethren. Of the 27 days wespent on Palawan, only five were spent in a hotel. Therest of the time we stayed with the brethren in theirprimitive huts; we ate with them and slept in some pretty uncivilized conditions. This gave us a real understanding of their way of life, and they reallyappreciated our "getting down to their level" if only fora few weeks. (We also saved a lot of money in hotelbills.)

Conclusion

I hope this information will be of some value to thoseinvolved in or interested in the Lord's cause in the Philippines, Palawan in particular. There are obstaclesthere, but much good is being done through the handsof faithful men.

Please Renew Promptly!

LET US RISE UP AND BUILDLeadership — Nehemiah's Serious CommitmentTo Teaching. Nehemiah 8.

Once the walls were rebuilt and the temple restored,Nehemiah saw the need to move from the tangibles tothe intangibles. While his feat of rebuilding the wallswas one of staggering proportions, he knew the jobwas not yet finished. He saw beyond the needs foundedon stone, mortar and muscle. He saw the needs of theheart and soul. Therefore, here lies the power of Nehemiah as a teacher and a leader for God's people. The real test of his leadership was in his ability to shiftfrom the tangible work of rebuilding the walls to therenewing of the minds and hearts of the peoplespiritually. The proof of the difficulty of this shift inemphasis is clearly seen in our world today. How manytimes have God's people done the impossible to meettheir physical needs, such as building a meetinghouse. They scraped, saved, gave, and worked beyondbelief, to be able to construct a meeting house. Peoplewould give of their time night after night in backbreaking work of painting, hanging dry wall or layingblocks. Brethren have borrowed money at the bank and given it to the work, and made monthly paymentsto the bank, so that we might have a house in whichthe church could assemble. All of this is wonderful and as it should be. Still, there is another step necessary tothe work in God's kingdom.

The next step is Nehemiah's commitment to spiritual renewal. How many times have we, after thisgreat sacrifice to build a building (equivalent tobuilding the walls), then simply sat down,congratulated ourselves, and forgotten about the spiritual work necessary to teach, study, and work tofill that building with souls who want to confess His name. After the physical work, Nehemiah demonstrated his all-out commitment to teaching. InChapter 8 Ezra stood on a wooden platform before theWater Gate (v. 3) "from early morning until midday,in the presence of men and women, those who could understand and ALL THE PEOPLE were attentive to the Book of the Law. Then in Verse 8, ' they readfrom the Book, from the LAW OF GOD, translatingto give the sense so that they understood the reading."

Nehemiah was seriously committed to teachingGod's Word. You see, teaching doesn't take place until learning is accomplished. Nehemiah knew that Israelhad to learn God's will if they were to survive in the city of Jerusalem. He knew and understood the need of teaching in order to complete the task of restoration. Itwas not enough just to build a building or restore thewalls! It was not until there was spiritual rebirth orrenewal that Israel could truly be the children of God.We must be the children of God. We must see the need today for spiritual renewal in the church. Of course wemust be doctrinally sound. However, one could be doctrinally sound and still miss the heart of my Lord. Therefore, the leaders today must be committed toteaching God's truth so that the people mightunderstand. As observations are made, we can't helpbut wonder. Do we just give lip service as our form of"commitment" to teaching? Are we really seriousabout teaching? There are evidences that seem to pointto the fact that maybe we are only "going through themotions."

Are We Serious?

Leaders, are we serious about teaching? The Scriptures let us know we must be serious. Matt. 28:18-20: "Go make disciples (teach them to become) and baptizing them . . . teaching them to observe all things.

Notice the emphasis placed on teaching in the GreatCommission. First, we must teach to make disciples.The Book of Acts is an historical account of how the New Testament church went about to do this teaching. It tells us what the divinely directed message was: theresurrection. It tells who the appointed messengerswere: the believers. And it also tells us how the message is to be presented. For example, in Acts 17:30,31 Paul shows the outline that ought to be used inteaching others: (1) You need to repent. (2) Why?Because of a universal judgment. (3) Prove it! BecauseGod resurrected His Son. Therefore, when the NewTestament instructs us to teach the unbeliever, itfurnishes the what, the who, and the HOW!

But notice again in this great commission passagethat once the unbeliever is baptized we are not finishedteaching. We are to start again, "teaching them toobserve all things." This emphasis on teaching by theLord is not a new development that on the spur of themoment He decided to introduce. This teachingmission of His kingdom is seen over and over again inthe Old Testament kingdom prophecies. For example,Micah 4:2 talks about going up to the mountain of theLord. . . that He may TEACH us about His ways.Also, in Isaiah 11:9 the prophecy is made that the"earth will be full of the knowledge of the LordAS THE WATERS COVER THE SEA." These are just two of many Old Testament scriptures whichspeak of the function of teaching in the New Testament. Then, because we find the Lord placingthis stamp of divine direction upon them, we know oftheir importance.

We all know how important teaching really is in thechurch. We all know that evangelism is reaching thelost and making disciples. We all know that edification is the maturation of the saints. The teaching of ALLthings was commanded after the disciples were baptized. So the real question is if we all KNOW IT,WHY AREN'T WE DOING IT? How can we as preachers, elders, and Bible class teachers live withourselves?

How can we look in the mirror and know that in so many cases we are failing on this point with no attempt to improve?

What About Where I Worship?

Do we think that church is a game that we play bychanging the rules over and over again to suit ourconveniences? A recent survey in CHRISTIAN BIBLE TEACHER quotes from a bulletin on teaching, published by Sweet Publication, which shows that "AS FEW AS FIVE PERCENT OF CHURCHES OF CHRIST make any SERIOUSEFFORT AT ONGOING TRAINING."

Stop with me for a moment and reflect on thisstatement. First of all, both publications mentioned are published by our "institutional" brethren, and thestatistics compiled are from institutional churches.However, what is significant concerning this is onepertinent fact. These institutional brethren in manycases have exceeded us in zeal and dedication to teaching. While we feel there are basic principles thatneed correction, few can question the dedication andfervor with which they have applied themselves to thetask. As a matter of fact, it has been the case toooften that it was this zeal to teach the lost that gavebirth to the "end justifies the means." Yet, if they see "only FIVE PERCENT growth in "ongoingteacher training", where do we appear?

Where are we in the area of personal evangelism?What about this area of making disciples in the firstplace? As a preacher or member, do you dare ask allpresent in the Lord's Day morning assembly to raise their hands if they have not been a member of the church for more than a year? How many new souls are we baptizing per year? As one brother said, "New souls? We can't even reach our own children." Can we look in the mirror and say to ourselves, • "YES, I AM serious about teaching the lost?" If we were reallyserious about it, as serious as the Lord is, we wouldhave seen the harvest long before now. Instead, wehave chosen to blame the times and the society. Butwho really believes that things are worse today thanin the cesspools of Ephesus and Corinth? It is time toquit blaming the sinner because he doesn't want to be saved. It is time to blame ourselves because we stopped wanting to find him.' Secondly, in the realm of teaching the disciples toobserve all things, are we really serious? "Well, weonce had a teacher training session on Friday nightand Saturday. Nobody came or showed much interest,so we haven't done it again." EXACTLY! However,most congregations have never even had one singleteacher training study. Many congregations have absolutely no plan at all as to what ought to betaught, who is to teach it, how it ought to be taught, and what results they want when it is taught. Howmany congregations have seen entire generations ofteenagers bolt for the door the minute they have thefreedom to break away from parental supervision?The church cannot replace the teaching in the home,but it can equip the home to do the job it ought to do.Our Bible classes can and should be a refreshing andup-lifting experience instead of an exercise in boredom! We can both live our own lives and teach in such a way as to prepare ouryoung minds for living in a crooked and perverseworld.

"Oh, we think teaching is important," is a feeble cryoften heard. Let us see how important it is. We,generally speaking, spend our money on what we consider most important. When the air-conditioning system in the auditorium breaks down, we will somehow turn up with $5,000 or $6,000 to get a new system put in. When the lawnmower breaks down, we will spend several hundred dollars to get the grass cut. Some brethreneven spend money to have a gospel meeting twice ayear. But, how much money, during the history of thechurch, has been spent on teacher training? Why don'twe get out the old check books and add it all up? Howmuch money has been spent on equipment and material necessary to teach? How manycongregations have a room set aside as a library orresearch center so the teachers can use the materials they need to prepare a class? How many classroomsare dull, drab, and filled in the corners with mops,brooms, or old mimeographed outlines of sermons that were left behind by some preacher in the past? Often times the teenage girls or new converts are put into the 3-year old class to "baby sit, because these little ones are too young to learn anything yet any way." As leaders of the flock, men find themselves as Spiritual Educators, and yet theymay not have the foggiest idea of what it takes to bea good first thru third grade Bible teacher!

Are we really serious? Needless to say, we can't know the heart of another, but the fruit we bear is adead give-away that in too many places we are justplaying church and making up the rules as we go. Withthis kind of attitude there will never be a true spiritualrenewal.

THREE MISUNDERSTOOD MEN

Some things seem to come in threes. Three in theGodhead; three on the mountain of transfiguration andsome have been led to believe three wise men visited the infant Jesus. I want to discuss three well known preachers who say they were misunderstood. There is astriking analogy between certain men of the secondand third apostasies. They have one thing in commonand that is they claim they were misunderstood. Thereal question is were these men really misunderstoodor did they acquiesce to error and then become tooobdurate to admit it? You will have to be the judge.

Man number one is that great preacher of a by-goneera, Alexander Campbell. According to history. JacobCreath Jr., the so-called "Iron Duke" of the restoration, was Campbell's friend and colleague. Itwas in April of 1828 that these two met on a roadbetween Wellsburg and Bethany, West Virginia.Campbell was hauling logs and Creath was riding hisfamous white horse. They became close friends and later went on a preaching tour which led them as far south as Nashville, Tennessee. It wasbut natural that they would discuss the work andorganization of the church. Campbell had denounced both the Missionary and Bible Societies in his paper, The Christian Baptist. Creath was firmly convinced by both the writings and conversations of Campbell that he would oppose any kind of society within the confines of the church.

However, he was in for the surprise of his life. In 1849 when the American Christian Missionary Societygot off the ground, Campbell threw his support behindthe society. What really happened? Did Creath andothers really misunderstand Campbell and the positionhe espoused or did he change? These are importantquestions which possibly only eternity will settle.When Creath and others asked Campbell why he hadchanged, he denied that he had changed but arguedthat he had only opposed the abuse of the societies.However, he failed to convince the "Iron Duke" andothers that he had never changed. It was the conviction of Creath and others that Campbell had surrounded himself with young, liberal preachers suchas Isaac Errett, F. S. Burnett, Robert Richardson and

W. K. Pendleton. They felt these men had a tremendous influence on Campbell in his latter years.Campbell died in 186b and Robert Richardson wasbusy writing his memoirs. Some have said that if that book had been written twenty years earlier that itwould

have been much different! Men change but Godremains the same. The liberal brethren who wrote the memoirs of Campbell snubbed Creath and hardlymentioned his name in the book. Creath was hurt bythis and wrote a letter to Richardson in 1871 askingfor an explanation. Richardson ignored his letter andCreath died January 9, 1886 exactly twenty yearsafter the death of Campbell. They both await theresurrection and the Lord who will settle the questionas to whether Campbell was really misunderstood.

Now let us drop down the stream of time about onehundred years. I moved to Ft. Smith, Arkansas in theearly fifties. About that time, Foy E. Wallace, Jr. usedhis potent pen to editorialize a fine little paper called Torch. Foy said, "It would fit the pocket or purse". I helped Foy get subscriptions for his paper because Ithought I understood what he stood for and believedhe was teaching the truth. He wrote me a note ofappreciation. As a lad, I had heard him defeat Dr.Webber in a debate in Oklahoma City. I listened tohim preach and like Creath, I felt he took a firmstand against the Orphan Homes, sponsoringchurches, and colleges dipping their hands into thechurch treasuries. As a matter of fact, as a young preacher, I learned much of what I now preach fromthe lips and life of Foy E. Wallace. For example, myconviction on the stand of brother Wallace was based on articles such as this one which appeared in theGospel Advocate in May 14, 1931, which reads:"For one church to help another church bear its ownburdens, therefore, has scriptural precedent. But for one church to solicit funds from other churches for general distribution in other fields or places thusbecoming the treasury of other churches, is quite adifferent question. Such procedure makes a sort ofsociety out of the elders of a local church, and forthere is no scriptural precedent or example.''

As gospel preachers by the dozens read such articles,they came to the conclusion that Foy E. Wallace wasopposed to these innovations. Well, we were in for thesurprise of our lives. In his latter years, brotherWallace came out strong denying that he ever opposedthese innovations. He, like Campbell, said, "he onlyopposed the ABUSE of them". You can imagine thedismay on the part of many of us when we read thisreport. Now for the big question—Were we as youngpreachers so crass that we did not understand whatthis man was saying? Or as many felt about Campbell,did he surround himself with men and circumstances which caused a change? It is not my purpose to speakdisparagingly of these men. Again, we await the judgment to settle this big question.

Man number three takes me back to the hills of Oklahoma. As a boy, I listened to Guy N. Woods as hepreached in my home town of Tuttle, Oklahoma. Ialways considered Guy as a good preacher. He was notdynamic, like Foy, but a good solid preacher. BrotherWoods did not come out as forcefully against theorphan asylums and sponsoring churches as brotherWallace but he did speak his peace. As a matter of fact,he spoke so firmly that I thought he would opposethese innovations if they ever raised their ugly heads in the church. Here again, I was in for the surprise ofmy life. For example, he made his famous (or should Isay infamous) speech at Abilene Christian Collegeinl946 when he said, "The ship of Zion has flounderedmore than once on the sandbar of institutionalism. The tendency to organize is a characteristic of the age. Onthe theory that the end justifies the means, brethrenhave not scrupled to form organizations in the churchto do the work the church itself was designed to do. Allsuch organizations usurp the work of the church, and are unnecessary and sinful."

Now, kind friend, if you had read the above as ayoung, fair-minded preacher, what conclusion would you have drawn? Well, scads of them believed brotherWoods would oppose any innovations in the church.Again, we were in for the surprise of our lives. Whenthe chips were down and the church was baptized withencroachments, brother Woods threw his supportbehind them. When asked about his former position, heopined that he intended to oppose only the abuse of theinstitutions and that he was misunderstood.

Kind neighbor, isn't it strange that here are threemen who all claim the same thing? Did theircolleagues really misunderstand them? Was theirwriting on these subjects so euphemistic that theaverage person could not understand? I cannot believethese men were nebulous when they wrote on these vital subjects. The big question is were these men really misunderstood? Judgment day will the real story!

In the January, 1981, edition of SEARCHING THESCRIPTURES, pp. 15, 16, bro. J. T. Smith wrote, "ASecond Putting Away." He dealt with the subject ofdivorce and remarriage, as it applies to those who weredivorced for a reason other than fornication, and onepartner remarries. Specifically he dealt with the question, "Do the Scriptures authorize the other partner to NOW "put away" the other and be in a position to remarry without committing sin? I agreewith much of what bro. Smith said. I feel, however, thathe did not go far enough. Let me say at the outset thatI do not claim to be an expert on the subject ofdivorce and remarriage. I do believe that the Bible iswritten in such a way that it can be understood by all.Therefore, if we can all rid ourselves of preconceivedopinions and emotions, and approach this subject ofdivorce and remarriage in a common-sense manner, we will all be able to understand it too. The purpose,then, of this article is to respond to his concluding question, "What do you say?" (It would be good for the reader to go back and re-read bro. Smith's article before continuing.)

Before we begin, let us lay some very simple groundwork. First, that the only marriage or divorce that Godwill sanction is one that is legal and scriptural in Hissight. Therefore the only persons God recognizes asbeing candidates for marriage are those who, 1. Fulfill the legal requirements of the civil government, AND 2.Fulfill the scriptural requirements, namely, one whohas never married, one whose mate has died, or onewho was the "innocent party" in an adulterated marriage and "put away" the mate for that cause. Onthe other hand, the only persons God recognizes asbeing candidates for divorce are those who, 1. Fulfillthe legal requirements of the civil government, AND 2.Fulfill the scriptural requirements, namely, being amember of an adulterated marriage.

Now let us look at this subject of a "second puttingaway". As the case was stated in the above mentionedarticle, husband #1 and wife #1 were married, "boundin the sight of God." This means, I take it, that theyhad fulfilled both the legal and scriptural requirementsof that union in God's sight. "They decide they areincompatible. . . by mutual consent or by one beingthe aggressor in the matter, a "putting away" resulting in a civil declaration of the same as the situation ends in a divorce."

We want to note here that a "putting away"did NOT take place in God's sight. The reason being that they did not fulfill the scriptural requirementas set forth in Mt. 5:32, and 19:9. They only full-filled the legal requirements of the "putting away". They are now neither married legally nordivorced scripturally. For civil government to recognize them as married they would have to fulfill the legal requirements of marriage. For Godto recognize them as divorced they would have tofulfill the scriptural requirements as stated above.

Bro. Smith's Article now shows that wife #1 marries husband #2. The condition of this last relationship isexpressed correctly, they are committing adultery.Why? Because she has not been divorced from herhusband, both legally and scripturally. If she had been,there would be no relationship left to adulterate orcorrupt.

He goes on to remark, "Now comes the difficult part. Do the Scriptures authorize husband #1 to NOW "putaway "his wife for adultery and be in a position toremarry without committing sin? He further statesthat many would "immediately" answer "Yes". On the other hand, we would have to note, many wouldimmediately answer "No". Neither group is correct inimmediately giving an unqualified answer.

If husband #1 was "innocent" in the case of the divorce in the civil courts (In other words, he was NOTthe aggressor, did NOT want the divorce, or, as can sooften happen, his spouse ran to Reno for a "quickie" divorce and beat him to it) and he can seeNO cause on his part for the divorce, wouldnot his wife's "remarriage" constitute adultery? Ifnot, why not? the "putting away" of his wife for adultery is not a "second" putting away, but rather a God-recognized "putting away".

If, as bro. Smith states, both parties desire thedivorce, are mutually pushing and working towardsit,

then 1 Cor. 7:10-11, is the correct scripture to beapplied.

The argument concerning the husband being a "ruthless, drunkard" stands here because he "caused"the divorce, and "caused" his wife to commit adultery,and therefore became an "accessory to the crime". Inno way could he now "put her away" and re-marry, claiming to be the "innocent party".

The Bible does not teach a "second putting away".It does, however, teach one God-recognized "puttingaway" and when the requirements of it are fulfilled itmay be done and the "innocent" party may marry again without committing sin.

"A SECOND PUTTING AWAY"

Found elsewhere in this issue of Searching the Scriptures is an article by brother Daniel P. Mayreviewing an article of mine in the January issue ofSearching The Scriptures on a "Second Putting Away." I am in perfect agreement with the majorityof what brother May says. However, as is the casemuch of the time, he, along with others, wants todepend on human reasoning rather than the Scriptures for their conclusions. Please read his article and compare what he has said with my reply.

It seems to me that the only difference we have iswhether or not God recognizes "a putting away" thatis not for fornication. I believe brother May's mistakeis with the fact that even though God does recognize the "putting away" where no fornication is involved,He does not authorize remarriage as a result of it.However, according to the last paragraph of brother May's article, he says that the "second putting away"is not a second putting away at all. Instead, brotherMay wants the last one to be right because the one nowdoing the putting away did not want the first "puttingaway" which he says God did not recognize.

I believe many are missing the point of what theBible says because they want to interject motives (thehusband or wife not wanting the divorce and begging the other not to go through with the divorce). However, I find nothing like that in the Scriptures. Tome this seems comparable to the case of the man on hisway to be baptized and a tree limb falls on him andkills him. Whatever the judge of all the earth wants todo about the situation is left up to Him. That is Hisbusiness, not mine. All I can do is tell the person who asks about this situation what Jesus said in His Word. Jesus said that one must be baptized before he can besaved. I can guess what the Lord may do because of the man's attitude and his desire to obey the truth.But when all is said and done, all I can do is tell the person what the Lord said in His Word about salvation and when one receives it.

The same thing is true with the divorce and remarriage situation. For it is not as if God has left uswith neither "chart nor compass" on this subject, for His Word is very clear.

Luke 16:18

"Whosoever putteth away his wife and marriethanother, committeth adultery:..,"

Let's stop just here and make a few observations.Jesus said the husband "put her away' thus Jesusrecognized the "putting away." Did the wife want or not want to be "put away"? I do not know, for Jesusdid not say. However, now that we can all agree,according to what Jesus said, that the husband iscommitting adultery, why didn't He tell us that the wife may now put the adulterous husband away, and that she could remarry without committing sin? Instead, note what He did say.

". . .and whosoever marrieth her which is putaway from her husband committeth adultery."

My friends, if you are going to have a situationwhere God does not recognize the first "putting away"but only after the remarriage recognizes the "puttingaway," then you will have to find another passage thatauthorizes such. And I do not know of such a passage.Otherwise, just stay with what the Scriptures say, andwhen you do that, you will say with the Lord. "Whosoever marrieth her which is put away from herhusband (even though Jesus said he had remarried andwas committing adultery) committeth adultery" — Period! And trying to change what Jesus said about itbecause of someone's motives does not change at allwhat Jesus actually said.

As we all know, we live in a time when the majorityof the religious world is caught up in the whirlwind ofPremillennialism. One particular aspect of thisteaching is currently getting a tremendous amount ofattention and that is that the return of Christ is imminent. Many of the more publicized preachers inthe world have adopted this idea and have made it anintegral part of their teaching. Men like Morris Cerullo, Billy Graham, Hal Lindsay, and many othershave had a vast influence upon the thinking of themasses. The cry is that the return of Christ is justaround the corner, that it is imminent, and for proofthese men point to what they call the "signs of thetimes". Their primary source for this teaching is the 24th chapter of the gospel according to Matthew.Here, we are told, are the signs of the times. Here,we are told, is the proof that the return of our Lord isimminent.

Matthew 24 is in many respects a most difficult passage to understand, but it contains a few statements that will make the matter much clearer when properly understood. In order tograsp the meaning of this passage, we need tonotice the circumstances surrounding the teachingof Jesus in this chapter. Verses 1 / 2 supplies that for us. That passage says, "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and hisdisciples came to him for to show him the buildingsof the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye notall these things? verily I say unto you, There shall notbe left here one stone upon another, that shall not bethrown down." Notice now, that the statement Jesusmade in verse 2 was in reference to the temple, and that statement prompted the questions of the apostlesrecorded in verse 3. Understanding verse 3 is essentialif we are to understand the remainder of the chapter.Verse 3 reads as follows, "And as he sat upon themount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately,saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and whatshall be sign of thy coming, and of the end of theworld?"

By reading the parallel passages in Mark 13:4 andLuke 21:7, we can see that the apostles wanted to knowessentially two things. They wanted to know when thethings spoken of by Jesus in verse 2 would take place and they wanted to know what signs would tell themthat it was coming. Obviously in the minds of the apostles the destruction of the temple of God would besuch a tremendous occurrence that it would be at the end of the world, that it would be part of the cessation of all things as they presently existed. Considering the emphasis placed upon the temple in Judaism theirreaction is quite understandable. In the remainder ofthe chapter, however, Jesus shows that the destruction of the temple and the end of the worldare not one and the same. Jesus answers their questions by speaking first of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, telling when it would occur and the signs that would accompany it.Secondly, Jesus spoke of the end of the world, Hisreturn, and He makes it clear that no one knowswhen that will happen and that no signs will be given as a warning. That leads us to the next of theverses essential to our understanding of this chapter,that is verse 34.

Verse 34 has been called by various writers the "timetext" and that is a fitting name for it clearly identifieswhen the events recorded in the first part of chapter 24were to occur. Jesus said in verse 34, "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all thesethings be fulfilled." What did Jesus mean by the word"generation"? According to Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words He meant, "------thewhole multitude of men living at the same time." Byusing the adjective, "this", to modify generation,Jesus showed that He meant the generation livingwhen He spoke those words. The events of Matthew24:5-34 were to occur before the present generation,the one living when Jesus spoke those words, passedaway. Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in 70

A.D. and the first part of Matthew 24 was fulfilledwith that destruction.

Verse 35 of Matthew 24 acts as an assurance that the things that Jesus said concerning the destructionof the temple and Jerusalem, as well as the signs thatwould accompany it, were a certainty. They wouldcome to pass.

Let's turn our attention now to verse 36, another ofthe essential verses to our understanding this chapter.This verse marks a change in the subject matter andJesus begins on the second part of His response to theapostles. Jesus has spoken concerning the destructionof the temple, He has told the apostles when it wouldhappen and what the signs would be leading up to it. Now the attention of our Lord is turned to somethingelse. Verse 36 says, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Fatheronly." The terms "that day and hour" are used numerous times in the New Testament to refer to the return of the Lord in final judgment. Consider Matt.

7:22 where we read, "Many will say to me in that day,Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? andin thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?" The reference here is obviously to the return of Jesus and final judgment.Consider John 5:28-29 which says, "Marvel not at this:for the hour is coming, in the which all that are inthe graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth;they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life;and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection ofdamnation." These are just two of many such usages inthe New Testament. Others are Matt. 11:22,1 Thess.5:2, 2 Thess. 1:10, 2 Tim. 1:18, and 2 Tim. 4:8.

It is interesting and important to note that thesepassages we have mentioned deal with the secondcoming and refer to it as "that day", or "the day", or"the hour". It is always singular, it is always the wordday or hour, just as it is used in verses 36-51 ofMatthew 24. It is not the word days, plural, as usedin Matt. 24:5-34. It is obvious that Jesus has turned His attention from the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple with the signs accompanying it, to Hisreturn in final judgment.

Perhaps it would be good to look at a few morepoints of contrast between the first section of chapter 24, the part that deals with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple

(v. 5-34), and the second section that deals withthe return of our Lord in final judgment (v. 3651). In the first section we find that definite signs were to precede the event, the time is identifiable. On the other hand the second section tells us "but of that day and hour knoweth no man,"the time of it's occurrence is unidentifiable. In the first section, the time preceding the destruction of Jerusalem would be filled with unusual events such as wars, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes. In thesecond section the return of our Lord would be heralded by no unusual events, times would be normalwith people marrying, eating and drinking just as they always do. Also in the first section there would be time for flight when the signs

were recognized. In the second section there would beno time for flight. These are just a few of the many contrasts between the two events discussed in Matthew 24.

In the next article we will discuss the specific signsspoken about by Jesus in the first section of Matthew

24.

Send all News Items to: Wilson Adams, 317 Trinkle Ave., N.E., Roanoke, VA 24012

SOUTHSIDE LECTURESHIP MT. PLEASANT, TX—The church located at 815 S. Jefferson in Mt. Pleasant is planning a lectureship June 14-18 on the theme of "Jesus, Savior." Homer Hailey, Leon Goff, Harry Pickup, Jr., andJames L. Sloan will be the speakers. Monday through Thursdaythere will be three lessons in the mornings. The evening servicebegins at 7:30 each night. R. J. Stevens will direct the song service.

Reconciliation

T. ALAN BENEDICT, 7054 Winnetka Ave., Canoga Park, CA91306. It is with gratitude and praise to God that we share with youthe following. On Sunday, March 28,1981 there was a joint meeting of the Winnetka Ave. church of Canoga Park and the Valley Circlecongregation of Woodland Hills. The meeting was conducted at theWinnetka Ave. building. Because of excellent attitudes on the partof both congregations and confession of wrong doing with forgiveness requested from God and one another, a plannedreconciliation became a reality. Both congregations realized theproblem had been too long a plague on the Lord's work in this area,and all expressed great joy when the burden was lifted. When inthe San Fernando Valley, worship with the three congregationsthat are standing for the Lord: Winnetka Ave., Valley Circle, and Lassen St.

New Congregations

WICHITA, KS—A new work has begun in Wichita. This congregation is made up mostly of young married Christians withattendance in the mid-forties. At the present we are renting theIOOF hall located in south Wichita at Hydraulic and Wassail.Anyone wishing to make contact with this new congregation cancall Gene Valdois at 524-3849, or Walt Schreiner at 945-9260. Or write to 2726 Crawford, Wichita, KS 67217. The times of servicesare 9:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays. If you know of anyone in this area please contact usthat we might meet and encourage them.

HOUSTON, TX—A new congregation began meeting January 27,1980 in the Spring Branch area west of Houston. We are meeting atthe Creative Care Children's School at 9709 Long Point. We welcome brethren traveling through Houston or moving to this areato meet with us. Our services are at 10 / 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. onSundays and 7:30 on Wednesdays. For directions or informationcall (713) 492-0566 or 465-1383. I have served as preacher for thisgroup since its beginning. Kent Ellis, 1346 Park Meadow Dr., Katy,TX 77450.

Preachers Needed OCEAN SPRINGS, MS—The church here is in need of a full-time preacher. The congregation is one year old; having started with 12members and now averaging 30 in attendance. We have a fine meeting place and are able to support a man $200 per week. We areinterested in a preacher who is interested in working. Conservativeworks are few in southern Mississippi but we aim to change that.Contact Leo Hastings, Hwy 90 E. Ocean Springs, MS 39564.

WESLACO, TX—The church here is in need of a gospel preacher. Ifinterested contact Bob Dodd at 310 S. Texas, Weslaco, TX 78596. Or phone (512) 968-9525 or (512) 565-1874.

TOM MOODY, P.O. Box 2, Jacksonville, AL 36265. Since JanuaryBro. Murphy Priestly has been working with us helping with some

Page 18

of our needs in preaching and teaching while gaining experience as agospel preacher. He is being supported by the 77th St. church inBirmingham, AL where he was a member prior to coming toJacksonville. Murphy is scheduled to be with us through August.At that time he would like to begin several more months on atraining basis with another congregation. He has been glad to receive instruction and has also been a hard worker, preaching frequently, teaching a regular class, doing door to door work, andsetting up and teaching in home studies. If you are looking for a young man to help develop as a preacher who can also be of help to you, contact Murphy Priestly, Rt. 4, Box 115, Trailer 9, Jacksonville, AL 36265. Phone (205) 435-3836.

The church at Jacksonville will be needing a full-time preacherwhen I move later this summer. The church is small, the work difficult; but Jacksonville is a growing community and I amconvinced much good can be done here. Full support is available.We have recently moved into a new building which provides plentyof room for growth. If interested write us at P.O. Box 2, Jacksonville, AL 36265. Orcall(205) 435-9479 or (205)820-9548.

CLARENCE F. HOUGHLAND, 2115 10th Ave., Safford, AZ 85546 I am writing to let you know of the work here in easternArizona. This work began in 1978 and is the only sound churchwithin an 80 mile radius. Having begun in my home we are now meeting in a rented school cafeteria for Sunday services. We do nothave a preacher. If interested in working with the church here inSafford please contact us. Attendance averages 8 to 10. There ismuch work to do and we encourage anyone visiting this area orplanning to move here, to worship with us at 1100 10th Ave.,Safford, AZ 85546. Or contact me at (602) 428-5396.

JIMMY TUTEN, 7911 Country Dr., Mobile, AL 36609. For several years three faithful members of the church living in Lucedale, MShave been driving 25 miles one way to Mobile for services. Othersfrom across the state line have visited with us from time to time. Three weeks ago two sisters from this same area identified with us.As a result plans are underway to begin a faithful church inLucedale. We have decided to first start a Thursday night class inthat area until there is sufficient evidence of strength to beginpermanently meeting on Sundays. Since our last report there havebeen several responses to the invitation. Fruit continues to come from personal work in Mobile. At present I am in need of some extra support.

FERNANDO VENEGAS, Casilla #122 C.C., 5500 Mendoza,Argentina, South America. I am certainly happy to be able to let youknow of our activities for the cause of Christ in this place. The workhere continues to prosper. On February 24 Bro. Carlos Capelliarrived here for two weeks to preach. During our gospel meetingwith Carlos we were greatly edified and a number of visitors attended each night. We rejoiced to see two men obey the gospelduring this effort. I continue to have Bible studies in different homes. Recently we had Bro. Nestor Sanchez from Chile to speakfor us on two occasions. We request your prayers.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMS 289 RESTORATIONS 104 (Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)